Orlando and the Imaginary Wave of Islamophobia

When did shielding Moslems from criticism supplant baseball as the national pastime?

The Washington Post features the shocking story of Hannah Shraim who extended her hand for a shake and was instead shaken to her foundations.

“’They were avoiding my hand at all costs,’ said Shraim, a Muslim student from suburban Maryland who has worn a hijab since she was 15, describing her first brush with discrimination at school. ‘I could tell it was my religious orientation because they were very kind to my partner and they shook her hand.’”

Religion of Peace adherents in London

Religion of Peace followers in London

All I can say is it beats having a bullet put through your hand.

Publishing a non–story about non–existent tidal wave of Islamophobia two days prior to the first funeral for a Pulse shooting victim is simply obscene.

Moslems suffer from a tiny number of so–called “hate crimes.” If you want to experience a real wave of “hate crime” all you have to do is become a Jew. In 2014 almost 60 percent of all “hate” was directed at Jews and that was before Bernie Sanders went after Wall Street banks.

Abigail Garner at the University of Miami came close to putting Moslem hate crimes into focus, but couldn’t overcome indoctrination. She writes that as the number of Moslems in the US has increased since 2001 “hate” crimes have decreased.

Even more curious, in “2001 there were about as many anti-Jewish crimes as there were anti-Islam. But in 2008 that number has not decreased like it has for Islam, but rather it has increased becoming 39.4 for every 100,000 Jews.”

Moslem population grows and so does anti–Semitic crime, yet those dots just won’t connect.

Sensible people would ask if the US is such a hellhole why do Moslems keep coming? But sensible people don’t write stories like the one in the Post

Or they could have been high school jerks, but who cares?

Leaving Shraim’s shattered life, the Post moves on to the threat of “bullying and taunting and criticism” that makes life in Obama’s America such a wasteland for refugees. Citing polls without questionnaires or methodology, the Post is reduced fretting about subjective and unquantifiable bias, because the facts don’t support the narrative.

The Post lectures that “many Muslim students have felt harassed, humiliated, bullied or abused by classmates during the past six months because of their Islamic faith; 10 percent felt a teacher or administrator had treated them unfairly during the past six months.”

In our current Random Jihad Sweepstakes culture, asking a question like this is the equivalent of asking white school kids in the Jim Crow South if the maid had been short with them after the most recent lynching.

Had the situation had been reversed, say a Christian in Pakistan attacked Moslems at a Ramadan dinner; Christians wouldn’t have to worry about Christianophobia. They’d be worrying about the mob outside the door carrying gasoline cans.

Pakistani Christians would be happy to trade a missing handshake for a missing head.

The mainstream media never gets around to surveying non–Moslems to gauge their sense of insecurity after the latest jihadi outburst. Instead we have reports of bigotry “incidents” on campus, which I suppose can range from a Trump yard sign on the quad to an orange toupee carelessly left in the locker room.

If surveys and news reports continue to discover this wave of Islamophobia soon it will be as dangerous to be a Moslem on campus as it is to be a woman.

Just hours after the Pulse nightmare, Imam Obama and the media continue their collective effort to negotiate a plea-bargain for Islam. The Pulse shooter was just another crazy, testosterone–fueled male wielding a rifle no one should be allowed to own in the first place.

It’s pathetic, enraging and dangerous simultaneously. The Left, the elites and the pajama–boys in the media aren’t serious about ending this literal reign of terror. If we rely on them we’ll be electing a caliph in about 30 years.

Fortunately there’s hope for sanity. Not all Moslems are paranoid and entitled. CBS Boston reports machinegun–toting transit police poured into the Medford station after “a report of a Moslem couple praying on the Orange line.”

Certainly an over–reaction, but it didn’t bother Tahir Ali, a member of the Islamic Society of Greater Worcester. Instead he said, “The reaction from police is understandable, because they see somebody and they think of it as a threat, so I think we can live with that.”

I’m ready to start a GoFundMe account to buy Ali a ticket to the White House. Obama can use some good advice for a change.

 

Advertisements

It’s Not Trump’s Fault GOP Leaders Have Failed

Way back in the pre–Trump mists of time, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry began his presidential comeback at the Gridiron Dinner where he described his 2012 campaign thusly, “The weakest Republican field in history — and they kicked my butt.”

Three and a half years later William Voegeli, senior editor of the Claremont Review of Books, points out, “Against a field of 16 contenders that George Will called the most talented since 1980, Trump beat them all.”

crazy-mitch-mcconnell-meme-one-third-term-president_1_So what does that say about Trump and the Republican Party?

Plenty according to a panel sponsored by the Claremont Institute that contained Voegeli, Claremont ROB editor Charles Kesler, Boston College professor Martha Bayles, NY GOP Senate Candidate Wendy Stone Long and the Ethics & Public Policy Center’s Peter Wehner.

I’ve always found it remarkable that a man who talks as much as Trump still remains largely inarticulate. His pronouncements require more interpretation than that of the Oracle at Delphi and the interpretations vary in intensity and favorability.

Fortunately the Claremont panel was up to the task. Click on the link below to discover how conservatives can make the case for voting Trump.

http://www.newsmax.com/MichaelShannon/conservatives-government/2016/06/16/id/734211/

 

 

Brexit: UK Experiences Bureaucratization Without Representation

Call it the Forty–Year Itch, there’s something about being in a larger combination of former opposites that causes husbands and nations to get restive. Forty–four years after the Constitution was ratified in the United States the nation experienced the Nullification Crisis. That’s when South Carolina declared tariffs passed by Congress in 1828 and 1832 were null and void and would not be enforced.

Farage BrexitNow 43 years after joining the European Union, the United Kingdom is having second thoughts about being a member of a ramshackle confederation run by pointy–headed cappuccino–drinkers in Brussels. This means there are two consequential elections this year that pit the forces of tradition and history against the promise of a trendy utopia just around the corner, if you’ll shut up and follow orders today.

We won’t find out if nationalist Donald Trump will defeat national nanny Hillary Clinton until November, but the citizens of the UK will find out June 23rd.

The EU vote is called Brexit and the American Conservative Union held a panel on the controversy this week that featured Nile Gardiner, a former advisor to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, current PM David Cameron’s former Senior Advisor Steve Hilton and FOX News national security analyst KT McFarland.

The panel’s consensus was a Brexit exit would be good for the UK. Gardiner characterizes the vote as one between the elite and the man–in–the–street. The UK “is no longer a free country.” The nation’s courts are “subservient to EU courts” and Hilton points out that over half of current government activity goes toward enforcing EU rules and regulations with which the UK government actively disagrees.

This Brussels’ usurpation by executive order effectively disenfranchises the majority of UK voters that elected Cameron and his Tory government.

Ironically, the “Remain Campaign” is led by Cameron, who evidently doesn’t mind being neutered as long as he gets to keep the Downing Street address and the perks. The Brexit vote and the fault line it exposes between leaders and led is much like the illegal alien controversy we have here.

Financial interests, cosmopolitans and cheap labor exploiters like illegal immigration because it puts money in their pocket and the people hurt are invisible in their social circles. The UK equivalents support remaining in the EU for many of the same reasons. Unfortunately for party leadership in conservative circles both here and in the UK, the base here wants illegal immigration stopped and the base in the UK wants out of the EU.

Cameron promised a referendum as a bit of throwaway red meat during the election campaign. He assumed he would be forming a coalition in Parliament and the partner would block the vote. He vastly underestimated the power of the issues and was astonished when the Tories won outright and didn’t need a partner.

Now Cameron’s forced to have the vote and the process hasn’t done anything to rekindle an affinity with his base and it’s made him something of a pariah on the continent. His own party is split with an insurgent camp urging “Leave” while he clings to “Remain.”

The situation didn’t improve for him when the largest newspaper in Britain, The Sun, urged a “Leave” vote because “at the ballot box, we can correct this huge and historic mistake. 
It is our last chance. Because, be in no doubt, our future looks far bleaker if we stay in.”

Hilton says much of the campaign by “Remain” forces pits the sovereignty argument for leaving against an economy argument for remaining. But he contends that’s a false dichotomy. “The vote about sovereignty is a vote about economics”. Gardiner predicts a rosy future for the UK outside the EU. “The economy will be more vibrant, stronger and more prosperous.”

As support for “Remain” has declined the campaign has become more frenzied. The warnings of Project Fear, as it’s commonly termed, are now described by Gardiner as a “combination of the Walking Dead and Godzilla.

One indication of Cameron’s alienation and desperation was his decision to bring that master of diplomacy Barack Obama to London to lecture the public on why they should vote to “Remain.”

In Gardiner’s words the visit was “an astonishing slap in the face and an absolute disgrace.” Obama’s special magic resulted in a decline in Remain support that has continued until today. The latest polling shows “Leave” to be ahead by up to 10 points, reversing what had been a substantial “Remain” advantage.

Hilton sums up the EU as “an organization with three presidents, none of whom are elected.” Which may explain Obama’s eagerness to get involved. Maybe he’s hoping for a third, fourth and fifth term overseas once he wears out his welcome here.

Great White Leftists Know What’s Best for Red Man

A handful of activists using “civil rights” as justification convince leftist reporters and publicity–hungry Democrats to support a cause that until recently was not a concern to anyone who didn’t subscribe to Mother Jones magazine.

Carrying enough victim cards to fill a six–deck Blackjack shoe, they approach an unelected regulatory body and convinced the commissars to overturn the Constitution and rule in the grievance–monger’s favor.

Redskins potato helmetThreatening letters are sent from Washington. TV hairdos join the bandwagon. Halftime bloviators lecture America on the error of our ways.

And just like that victory is at hand; you can use any bathroom that has a vacancy — as long as you aren’t wearing a Washington Redskins’ team jacket.

At least that was the plan, until the opposition refused to show up and smoke the peace pipe.

Unfortunately for America’s politically correct elite, it appears Indians don’t know what’s good for them. The anti–Redskins name boomlet turned out to be a lot like that tree in the forest, the one that fell, but no one heard.

For more than a decade Dan Snyder has been saying the vast majority of American Indians were not offended by the name “Redskins”, basing his contention on a 2004 survey taken by the Annenberg Public Policy Center.

That wasn’t good enough for the cultural seismograph operators demanding the Great White Father make Snyder change the name. Their hardy war band tried protesting outside the ‘Skins home games, but soon learned football fans weren’t as passive as Chick–fil–A managers and The Danny certainly wouldn’t give them a free sandwich much less a place to pitch the teepee.

The protests inexplicably moved to away games where the crushing level of indifference was almost as bad as the hostility in DC. What protesters needed was a judge or unelected bureaucrat they could persuade to force Snyder to change the name.

That’s where the teleworking fools at the US Patent & Trademark Office came in handy. Normally the left avoids any contact with capitalism for fear of contamination, but in this instance if USTPO revoked the “Redskins” trademark it would deal a real blow to Snyder’s pocketbook. No trademark means no license fees for use of the name.

The board decided “Redskins” was offensive to a nebulous, but reportedly large number of Indians. Therefore, the name violated the Lanham Act that bans epithets from trademark protection. That decision was the only time the “movement” had a chance of gaining approval from a large portion of the Washington fan base if only by accident.

Trademark removal was good for fans, since knockoff ‘Skins wear would be both legal and much cheaper than Danny–approved items.

In response, Snyder stood firm, went on a tour of Indian Country and appealed the decision.

One of the complaints against the Annenberg poll was respondents weren’t asked if they were on tribal rolls. It also only asked one question regarding the name (a good indicator of the issue’s importance), instead of bombarding interviewees with repeated questions on the topic that serve by weight of numbers to increase the issue’s significance for polling purposes.

To rectify that oversight and reap the benefits of 12 years of negative Redskins publicity the Washington Post commissioned a new poll. This time the Post only interviewed people who identified as Indians, which means Sen. Elizabeth “Fauxcahontas” Warren would qualify.

The result just about buried the hatchet for the war party. The Post reports, “Nine in 10 Native Americans say they are not offended by the Washington Redskins name.” And surprisingly, “An even higher number — 8 in 10 — said they would not be offended if a non-native called them that name.”

“That name” is a nice touch and shows the Post is planning to stay on the warpath even if the braves aren’t. The rest of the chiefs–without–Indians bring to mind Churchill’s definition of a fanatic, “one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.”

Susan Harjo, lead plaintiff in the USTPO case told the Post, ““I just reject the results.” While representatives of the Oneida Nation and National Congress of American Indians said the poll was “encouraging.” Specifically: “Native Americans are resilient and have not allowed the NFL’s decades-long denigration of us to define our own self- image.”

That’s a truly breathtaking level of PR spin and I predict a great future for all three with the Trump campaign.

Meanwhile Dan Snyder, of all people, serves as an example to the rest of a cowardly corporate America. Companies, teams and institutions don’t have to be at the mercy of self–appointed moral scolds.

MSM Decides Trump Not Allowed to Judge Judges

It’s curious that when establishment Republicans circle the wagons, somehow Donald Trump is always left outside the perimeter, where he is relentlessly pursued by Hispanic supremacists. This time RINOs were frightened by his remarks regarding the judge presiding over the Trump University class–action lawsuit.

Judge Curiel MembershipsIf the judge had been a Bulgarian or a Baptist there would have been no controversy. Unfortunately Judge Gonzalo Curiel is of Mexican descent and Hispanics have replaced Social Security as the third rail of GOP establishment politics.

Anytime Trump looks sideways at a Hispanic, Republican apologists start calling for double salsa on their huevos.

Of course there’s more here than meets the eye. What happens if you put Trump’s statement into context with his entire rant? Is there a double–standard involved between the media’s criticism of Trump and of Judge Curiel? And what about judge criticism? Isn’t there another California judge in hot water?

Discover the intriguing answers the these and other questions you haven’t even considered by clicking on the link below and being transported to my entire Newsmax.com column:

http://www.newsmax.com/MichaelShannon/action-class-lawsuit-RINOs/2016/06/09/id/733160/

 

Bernie’s Political Jujitsu Loses Leverage

The strategic maneuvering that takes place behind political debates is often far more interesting than the turgid events themselves.

Can Bernie Live 8 YearsIn Houston a while back I was media consultant for the first female mayoral candidate who had a legitimate chance to win. Kathy Whitmire was matched in a runoff against Sheriff Jack Heard. We wanted a debate with Heard because as incumbent sheriff he was both very well known and the swaggering, macho embodiment of the Houston mentality (no pun intended).

Our campaign needed to prove a diminutive Whitmire could hold her own when faced with a larger–than–life Heard.

Initial debate negotiation was bungled by our side and the Heard campaign refused to return to the table. The Whitmire campaign had to put enough pressure on Heard to have this crucial debate before the vote. The TV station that agreed to host the confrontation was too timid to let Whitmire have the time solo and debate an empty chair.

Heard had to be on stage, too.

Local news assumed the debate wouldn’t happen and had moved to cover the latest car wreck. Our only hope was to buy pressure. We announced that debate negotiation teams had been sent out with authority to confirm a debate. The teams were waiting inside Heard’s campaign HQ, his lawyer’s office and the sheriff’s office. Each of the teams had full authority to agree to a debate if only two conditions were met: Same questions and same amount of time to answer.

The teams were ignored.

On to step two: Using political jujitsu against Heard, I tried to turn his manly–man image into a weakness instead of an asset. I wrote a full–page newspaper ad that appeared in both daily papers. The headline read: “Sheriff Jack Heard, Come Out and Fight Like a Man.”

That same day during a news conference at Heard HQ the Whitmire campaign drove a Winnebago into the parking lot with a sign on it that read: “Debates Arranged While You Wait.” The media saw it and the news conference became chaos.

Heard cratered and agreed to debate the same day.

Last week it looked like my coup had been one–upped by a septuagenarian Socialist.

Bernie’s offhand mention that he would be happy to debate Donald Trump was absolutely inspired. His situation is similar to Whitmire’s; he’s got a big primary coming and the leading candidate refuses to debate.

Since the two have already appeared in quite a number of one–on–one debates, and Saunders lost the last primary featuring a debate, it’s easy for Clinton to make the case that her priority right now is avoiding FBI interrogation and not appearing on a debate stage where subpoena servers can find her.

Besides she and the rest of the party establishment want the Ancient Marxist out of the race so she can consolidate Democrat support and concentrate on the general election.

Fine. So Bernie decides to debate Mr. Bogeymen himself — Donald Trump — and bypass Hillary altogether. It’s a classic example of political jujitsu. Bernie’s looking at a debate that would have garnered ten times the viewership a snooze–fest opposing the pantsuit cyborg would rate.

Instead two of the least prepared “debaters” in history would go toe–to–toe in an almost content–free event. Whose buzzwords and clichés would carry the day?

Bernie gets more exposure, he makes himself look worthy of the nomination by opposing Trump when he doesn’t have to and he steals news cycle after news cycle from Clinton as she seethes while dodging questions about why she won’t debate.

The 15 minutes Trump would devote to debate preparation would have paid off handsomely. Trump could boast he doesn’t care who the Democrats nominate — he will beat them all. Leading up to the debate, he could have offered to make another campaign contribution to Hillary if she would appear, too.

When faced with this tremendous opportunity dropped in his lap, The Donald choked.

He went all PC on us and even invoked the “inappropriate” word in declining to meet Bernie. Trump casually tossed aside the biggest free media opportunity of the cycle and inadvertently did Hillary a big favor. What a shame!

Now that fanatics have forced Ringling Brothers to give up elephants, Trump could have been the ringleader of the greatest show on earth.

When Vets Take a Number It Could Be for a Cemetery Plot

Here’s one federal employee who won’t be leaving “public service” to make millions in the private sector. Unless being the star in a dunk tank pays much better than I previously thought.

VA poor serviceSecretary of Veterans Affairs Robert A. McDonald entered the realm of PR legend when he told reporters Disneyland doesn’t measure wait time for its customers, so why should the VA?

One reason keeping a handle on dwell time in the VA queue might be a good idea is, as far as my research can determine, not one person has died waiting to ride the Indiana Jones Adventure (although Harrison Ford has visibly aged).

The worst that can happen to customers in a Disneyland wait line is the occasional case of measles, which President Trump assures us will be as scarce as Mexicans after he takes office.

Waiting lines at the VA are considerably more dangerous. In 2013 alone, 40 veterans died waiting for their appointment with a VA doctor.

You’d think an organization that dealt exclusively with a clientele that knows how to handle firearms would be more customer–friendly. But you’d be wrong.

Click on the magic hyperlink below to read the rest of tale of incompetency:

http://www.newsmax.com/MichaelShannon/va-veterans/2016/05/30/id/731377/