Is it possible for her to lose?

There is no level of corruption that seems to matter. There is nothing she can do that will turn the media against her. Hillary Clinton makes history as first female presidential nominee – but is met with fury by Bernie Sanders supporters who walk out of Democratic convention.

Hillary Clinton became the first woman to earn a major party’s presidential nomination on Tuesday evening as Democratic delegates officially gave her the votes she needed to win the election.

‘History,’ was what she tweeted with a photo of herself on stage at a rally.

Bernie Sanders made a surprise appearance and moved to have Clinton named the nominee by acclimation after she had more than enough votes to win.

He joined his home state of Vermont, which passed the first time around in the roll call vote, for the history-making moment.

‘I move that all votes, all votes cast by delegates be reflected in the official record, and I move that Hillary Clinton be selected as the nominee of the Democratic Party for president of the United States,’ he said.

The gesture was to be a signal of unity and reconciliation during the fractured Democratic Convention.

His delegates, on the hand, were not so moved to accept the result of the vote. A group of them walked out in protest after Clinton officially won the nomination.

Not that it will stop this steamroller, but Julian Assange: ‘A lot more material’ coming on US elections. I wonder if he will include material on Trump this time.

Valerie Jarrett the denial

Do you want to understand the world in which you are living, read this article: Valerie Jarrett: How Much Control Does She Have Over Obama and Clinton?. It is said that Obama never makes a decision without consulting Jarrett first. The article is the first succinct political bio of Valerie Jarrett I have come across. Here is the nub:

There are a number of things about Valerie Jarrett that are worrisome. In 1977, while delivering a speech at Stanford University, she was quoted as calling herself an American citizen who seeks “to help change America to be a more Islamic country.” She went on to say, “My faith guides me and I feel like it is going well in the transition of using freedom of religion in America against itself.” This is an extremely alarming and even subversive comment, delivered right around the time that Islamic terrorism was beginning to set its roots in the Middle East.

There is more. She is known to have ties to the terrorist William Ayers. Her father in law, one Vernon Jarrett, is an official member of the Communist party who is also an associate of Frank Marshall Davis, himself a Communist activist who played mentor to Barack Obama during the future president’s childhood. We have here an Iranian Muslim who has stated her intention to transform America into an Islamic country, her desire to use the nation’s freedom of religion as a weapon against it, and who has highly questionable associates with terrorist and Communist connections. It is bad enough that this woman has our President’s ear; what is even worse is that it seems to go beyond that. Despite being an appointee who was never elected by the American people, Valerie Jarrett appears to have real influence in the White House.

An insider in the Obama administration has confirmed that Jarrett supported trading five detained terrorists in a prisoner swap for a single US Army Sergeant (Bowe Bergdahl) who had deserted his post. She was against tough treatment of the Islamic regime of Iran, and she is personally offended by the term “Islamic Terrorism”. Sure enough, our President to this day has refused to even utter the words, committed America to a disastrous “deal” with Iran that gives the rogue nation almost everything it wants, and went ahead with the lopsided prisoner exchange. Incidentally, the Obama administration swore that the terrorists released posed no threat – there is virtually no evidence that this is actually true.

Did you know any of this? Nothing about the Obama administration should be a surprise after you have read just this, and undoubtedly there is more. Compare the above with the sanitized version you find on Wikipedia. You can also find an article dedicated to showing that the article I have discussed above is wrong as the third item if you google her name. Here is “The Truth” as explained in the post:

Valerie Jarrett has never identified herself as a Muslim, and there’s no record of her saying that she wanted to help make America more like Islamic countries.

A social media post that went viral claimed that Valerie Jarrett uttered a comment making America more Islamic while she was attending school at Stanford University in 1977:

“I am a Iranian by birth and of my Islamic faith. I am also an American and I seek to help change America to be a more Islamic country. My faith guides me and I feel like it is going well in the transition of using freedom of religion in America against itself.”

The quote’s sentence construction isn’t consistent with the way American students at high-level universities like Stanford talk. It appears to have been said by someone who isn’t very familiar with the English language. In 1977, Valerie Jarrett was a junior at Stanford and had been living in the U.S. since the age of 5. It’s unlikely she would say something like, “I am a Iranian by birth and of my Islamic faith.”

In truth, Valerie Jarrett was born in Iran — but to American parents. Her father was a geneticist and pathologist named Dr. James Bowman who was born in Washington, D.C. In 1955, he accepted a position in Iran to study favism, a glucose deficiency disease. Valerie Jarrett’s mother, Barbara Bowman, was born in Chicago and became a professor and expert in early childhood education.

Valerie Jarrett was born while her parents were in Shiraz, Iran, in 1956. The family lived in London from 1961-1962 while James Bowman studied genetics. Then, the family moved to Chicago, the Stanford Alumni reports.

“Jarrett grew up in Hyde Park, the racially diverse neighborhood that abuts the University of Chicago, where her father worked. She went to Massachusetts for prep school, and on to the Farm (Stanford). Her conviction to attend Stanford was so strong it didn’t even occur to her to visit beforehand.”

Valerie Jarrett earned a degree in psychology at Stanford and then earned a law degree from the University of Michigan. She entered politics in the 1980s, working for former Chicago Mayor Harold Washington. It was while traveling in Chicago’s social and political circles that Jarrett met Barack and Michelle Obama.

Valerie Jarrett has served as a senior advisor to President Obama since his inauguration — and it’s true that a number of former White House staffers like press secretary Robert Gibbs and chief of staff Rahm Emanual reportedly resigned or were fired after run-ins with Jarrett, as the eRumor claims.

The press has also had an uncomfortable relationship with Valerie Jarrett, with a number of news outlets reporting that it’s not clear exactly what she does in the White House. Politico reports:

“For starters, even today, nobody knows precisely what Jarrett does in the White House. What exactly do her titles—senior advisor to the president, assistant to the president in charge of the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, the Office of Public Engagement, the White House Council on Women and Girls—mean? More to the point, Jarrett has often used the aura of authority that these titles give her to stand in the way of talented White House staffers and a smoother-running administration, according to several books that have been written about the Obama presidency.”

So, Valerie Jarrett has had a number of well-documented run-ins with former White House staffers and has faced questions about what exactly her role in the Obama Administration is. But claims about Jarrett’s religious beliefs, or her intention to make America more like Islamic countries are false.

Well, that settles it.

Clinton Cash – the movie

Breitbart has released the movie so that anyone can now download. Fantastically corrupt and in the open as well. Meanwhile in Philadelphia, the Democrats are in chaos:

gReeTinGS froM pHillY
HIGH HEAT ALERT: DNC DAY 1…
LIVE…
BOOING DURING INVOCATION…
FLOOR BATTLE…
BERNIE TEXTS: PLEASE DON’T PROTEST IN ARENA!
Dems confiscating pro-Sanders signs…
Arrests and heat injuries…
Jeers for Pelosi at California Breakfast…
Wasserman booed off stage, escorted out by security…
LEFT EATS ITSELF…
4 brutal poll numbers greet Clinton at convention…

Yet the media and the American establishment will make her president if they can. You know all of the above only because it cannot be hidden from view. But to those who wish to see her president, none of it matters even the smallest amount. A week from now it will disappear from the news while they go on and on about Melania’s plagiarism.

Valerie Jarrett – who she is and what she believes

After 7-1/2 years you would think I ought to know all of this but I know almost none of it. Even the title is a little misleading: Valerie Jarrett: How Much Control Does She Have Over Obama and Clinton?. The article is the first succinct political bio of Valerie Jarrett I have come across. Here is the nub:

There are a number of things about Valerie Jarrett that are worrisome. In 1977, while delivering a speech at Stanford University, she was quoted as calling herself an American citizen who seeks “to help change America to be a more Islamic country.” She went on to say, “My faith guides me and I feel like it is going well in the transition of using freedom of religion in America against itself.” This is an extremely alarming and even subversive comment, delivered right around the time that Islamic terrorism was beginning to set its roots in the Middle East.

There is more. She is known to have ties to the terrorist William Ayers. Her father in law, one Vernon Jarrett, is an official member of the Communist party who is also an associate of Frank Marshall Davis, himself a Communist activist who played mentor to Barack Obama during the future president’s childhood. We have here an Iranian Muslim who has stated her intention to transform America into an Islamic country, her desire to use the nation’s freedom of religion as a weapon against it, and who has highly questionable associates with terrorist and Communist connections. It is bad enough that this woman has our President’s ear; what is even worse is that it seems to go beyond that. Despite being an appointee who was never elected by the American people, Valerie Jarrett appears to have real influence in the White House.

An insider in the Obama administration has confirmed that Jarrett supported trading five detained terrorists in a prisoner swap for a single US Army Sergeant (Bowe Bergdahl) who had deserted his post. She was against tough treatment of the Islamic regime of Iran, and she is personally offended by the term “Islamic Terrorism”. Sure enough, our President to this day has refused to even utter the words, committed America to a disastrous “deal” with Iran that gives the rogue nation almost everything it wants, and went ahead with the lopsided prisoner exchange. Incidentally, the Obama administration swore that the terrorists released posed no threat – there is virtually no evidence that this is actually true.

Did you know any of this? Nothing about the Obama administration should be a surprise after you have read just this, and undoubtedly there is much more.

What did socialists use before they had candles?

Electricity!

A joke I heard at a wonderful Freedomfest presentation on “The Intellectual Battle for South America”. Here, however, the central question was not about economics but about philosophy. The basis for the talk:

If the evidence of failure is so striking, why keep trying with different forms of socialism?

Their answer: because it’s not about economics but about philosophy and psychology. It’s a moral question, with the almost universal mantra in South America contrary to a market based economy. Two quotes of interest which help sum up the problem. First Eva Peron:

Where there is a need there is a right.

And then from a poster that does seem to help make sense of Venezuela:

If you think greed is bad, wait till you hear about capitalism.

The perfect way to remain very poor but also extremely resentful. I was more than primed for this by my airplane book which I picked up in an op shop just before I left.

Socialism and International Economic Order by Elizabeth Tamedly

I had never come across even its title before, nor the author, but I cannot recommend it highly enough. You see it in South America but unless we are all very careful, what she describes may be coming to a country very near to you very soon.

The new racism

From The New Reform Club: Reflections on the Revolution in the UK – Number 4. The first three can also be found at the link.

A fictionalized exchange on television between any Labour candidate for MP and an audience member during the 2015 general election …

Labour Candidate for Parliament: We hear your pain.

Audience Member: My neighbourhood is being transformed by mass migration. I don’t like many of these changes.

Labour Candidate for Parliament: I understand. New immigrants—frequently coming without skills that fit the modern U.K. economy—cause wage compression at the low end of the wage scale. We will make sure employers pay the minimum wage; we will ensure that your economic interests are protected.

Audience Member: No, that’s not my point (at least, that’s not my only point). I don’t like how our society is being changed by mass immigration. I don’t like polygamy. It is illegal, but no one gets prosecuted for it. I don’t like FGM. It too is illegal, but it is not actively prosecuted. I don’t like it when the immigrants’ customs are accommodated in these ways—I don’t want our criminal laws ignored by the immigrants or by the police and the prosecutors. It makes me feel unsafe—it makes me think the immigrants’ way of life is preferred over ours. The immigrants should be integrated into our communities, not the other way around.

Labour Candidate for Parliament: I understand. We will work to ensure that your wages are not compressed.

Audience Member: You’re not listening. That’s not what I said: I don’t like the direction your party’s immigration policies under Blair & Brown have taken our country. I don’t like where we are now as a result—not that Cameron has done anything to modify those policies.

Labour Candidate for Parliament: No, that’s not right. My job is not to ensure your vision of the good society. I live in the real world, in the EU which determines U.K. immigration policy, not in your antiquated vision of Little England and William Blake’s Jerusalem. My job is to protect your objectively rooted economic interests. I will do that by monitoring and controlling the behaviour of employers via the minimum wage, unions, and collective bargaining. But once that is done, then we must take all newcomers on an equal basis, particularly those claiming asylum. We should not pick and choose immigrants based on their likelihood to integrate into the extant political community. Picking and choosing immigrants based on their values (or language, or willingness to learn our language) is unfair to immigrants. Of course, as a result, society may evolve in a direction you don’t like. That could happen. But we are morally obliged (as we are obliged under international law) to take that risk. Your trying to block such a development in favour of your parochial Little England values is morally objectionable. Your values are no better than my values and no better than the immigrants’ values. Your language (English) should not be favoured over the immigrants’ languages. Our diversity must respect these differences. In fact, your trying to determine your society’s demographic future—through immigration controls—is (white van man) racism.

Simply put, you don’t have a right to decide what sort of society this will be: you don’t have a right to hold such an opinion. Sorry—that was over broad. I suppose you may hold any opinion you want; you can even voice it in private and public. What I mean is that I—as your member of Parliament—will not and should not value your opinion. This country, i.e., this country’s future, is not yours. You and your family just happen to live here.

Audience Member: My grandparents voted for Bevan & Gaitskell, and my parents voted for Frank Field & Tony Benn. You have lost my support, and I guess I want my country back.

Vandals in Victoria

trees shrine

Here is the story I have just stumbled across from The Age: Hundreds of St Kilda Road trees to get the chop as part of Metro tunnel project. If they think Melbourne will remain as the World’s Most Liveable City after this, they are more out of it than it is possible to believe. They paid a billion to stop a road but now there is this:

They are one of Melbourne’s most distinctive sights but it will not be enough to save them. Hundreds of mature trees will be removed from St Kilda Road to make way for the Metro rail tunnel, fuelling concerns about the environmental impact of the project.

As the Andrews government starts awarding contracts for the $10.9 billion train line, documents have revealed a range of issues, including the loss of trees, traffic disruption and the possible relocation of residents put out by noise and vibration during construction.

According to the environmental effects statement, about 900 trees could be removed along the tunnel route – including up to 223 trees in the precinct surrounding the Shrine of Remembrance, where a new underground station will be built.

For more on a $10.9 billion project that will ruin Melbourne to create a rail connection between Carlton and South Melbourne, you can read it up here. If they are looking for a cheaper way to drive from the south of the city to the north, they might just remove the bicycle lane across Princes’s Bridge. In the meantime, they will sink billions into a project that will never bring a positive return on the money spent but has the potential to ruin the most beautiful part of Melbourne. But I am sure it will divert jobs and add to pseudo-GDP. You can see the supposed benefits here which come to nothing at all.

How can we save ourselves from such visionaries? And if you think that The Greens are somehow on the side of trees and parklands, this is what they’ve said:

MELBOURNE METRO RAIL TUNNEL

Turnbull can fund Melbourne Metro Rail

Turnbull can fund Melbourne Metro Rail
With a positive business case released for Melbourne Metro Rail, the Greens have said there is no excuse for the federal government to deny Victoria funding for the project.
“Metro Rail adds up and the Prime Minister must put his money where his train selfies are,” said the Australian Greens transport spokesperson Senator Janet Rice.

“A positive business case”! Beyond pathetic.

Anti-capitalism is a form of hate speech that has caused the deaths of hundreds of millions

I have been reading David Solway’s The Problem with Hate Speech which has brought this to mind. It is about how the left is doing what it can to make arguments contrary to its own beliefs illegal by transferring the normal expression of one’s own opinion into forms of hate speech, which is then made against the law. His article concludes:

If we do not speak our minds, or prefer to huddle under a canopy of pietistic complicity, as many do, we will awaken one day soon to find our freedom of expression even more severely compromised than it now is—or worse. Indeed, “microfascism” has a way of morphing into macrofascism. The upshot is that we will have reaped the bitter harvest of our cowardice, and an ironic form of justice will have been served.

If ever there has been a belief system that has led to the death and misery of more people than the various forms of socialism that have been tried and are still being tried, I do not know what it is. Venezuela stands before us today as a living dying example of how rapidly a society can be devastated by socialist leaders, and even while the example has been there before us, something like a quarter of the voting population of the richest and freest country that has ever been have been following Bernie Sanders – their own Hugo Chavez – and sincerely wish to see him become president of the United States.

Socialism is not the welfare state. It is not trying to assist the disadvantaged and the poor. It is not trying to lift the fallen and comfort the afflicted. It is a desire to run an economy from the centre, to steal the property of the capitalists and make everyone better off by making the most economically illiterate people in a society its political leaders.

In which socialist experiment has this not followed as night follows day: Venezuelans Ransack Stores as Hunger Grips the Nation.

Venezuela is convulsing from hunger.

Hundreds of people here in the city of Cumaná, home to one of the region’s independence heroes, marched on a supermarket in recent days, screaming for food. They forced open a large metal gate and poured inside. They snatched water, flour, cornmeal, salt, sugar, potatoes, anything they could find, leaving behind only broken freezers and overturned shelves.

And they showed that even in a country with the largest oil reserves in the world, it is possible for people to riot because there is not enough food.

This is from The New York Times, and therefore you might think the evils of anti-capitalism are at least being exposed. Not a bit of it. The entire article is purely descriptive. There is not a sentence in it that lays blame on anyone for the catastrophes being described. It is not entirely certain that anyone among the reporters at The New York Times actually knows. This is the only part of the story that tries to explain a thing:

Economists say years of economic mismanagement — worsened by low prices for oil, the nation’s main source of revenue — have shattered the food supply.

Sugar fields in the country’s agricultural center lie fallow for lack of fertilizers. Unused machinery rots in shuttered state-owned factories. Staples like corn and rice, once exported, now must be imported and arrive in amounts that do not meet the need.

The reporter cannot even bring himself to name the particular form of “economic mismanagement”, not even so much as to describe it as the guaranteed fruits of an anti-capitalist, socialist government. And there is no doubting that this has added to the socialist death toll, as described by this story from a month ago in the same journal of record: Dying Infants and No Medicine: Inside Venezuela’s Failing Hospitals. And they are not dying, they are actually dead.

Doctors kept ailing infants alive by pumping air into their lungs by hand for hours. By nightfall, four more newborns had died.

“The death of a baby is our daily bread,” said Dr. Osleidy Camejo, a surgeon in the nation’s capital, Caracas, referring to the toll from Venezuela’s collapsing hospitals. . . .

“It is like something from the 19th century,” said Dr. Christian Pino, a surgeon at the hospital.

The figures are devastating. The rate of death among babies under a month old increased more than a hundredfold in public hospitals run by the Health Ministry, to just over 2 percent in 2015 from 0.02 percent in 2012, according to a government report provided by lawmakers.

The rate of death among new mothers in those hospitals increased by almost five times in the same period, according to the report.

And what does this reporter say about the causes of such horrors? Does he explain that this is the natural consequence of following a socialist policy?

“This is criminal that we can sit in a country with this much oil, and people are dying for lack of antibiotics,” says Oneida Guaipe, a lawmaker and former hospital union leader.

But Mr. Maduro, who succeeded Hugo Chávez, went on television and rejected the effort, describing the move as a bid to undermine him and privatize the hospital system.

“I doubt that anywhere in the world, except in Cuba, there exists a better health system than this one,” Mr. Maduro said.

Can we lock up anti-capitalists for their hate speech, their insanity, their ignorance, their murderous beliefs? No we can’t and, of course, we shouldn’t and there is no chance that we will. Nevertheless, anti-capitalist rhetoric remains at the centre of political discourse in the West. It is the most lethal belief system on earth and you can find it not just on street corners but in every legislative body across the world.

The Israeli left is insane

Does anyone have an explanation for this? It is one thing if you think there are votes in it so you make it part of your platform. It’s insane, but if you thought voters would like it, then you do it. But how does this make any kind of sense as a secret deal? This is the full story at the link: Secret Deal Exposed Between Israeli Opposition Leader Yitzhak Herzog and Abbas.

Link to original story

Isaac Herzog, opposition leader in the Knesset and head of the Zionist Union, held secret meetings with a representative of Palestinian Authority President Abbas last year that yielded a shocking agreement that would have turned the Middle East upside down.

A paper of understanding that was exposed Sunday night by Channel 10 News shows that MK Isaac Herzog, chairman of the Zionist Camp, who conducted extensive meetings with Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas before the March 2015 elections, agreed to hand over all of Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem to a Palestinian State, and reached a deal on letting Arab refugees come back to live inside 1967 Israel. The negotiations with Abbas were conducted in secret between retired Brigadier General and former MK and Minister Ephraim Sneh and a senior PA official. It should be noted that during the weeks just before the March 17 elections, the polls showed the Zionist Camp edging out Prime Minister Netanyahu’s Likud party, and the plan back then was seen as the shape of things to come in the most realistic way.

On the issue of the borders between Israel and Palestine, Herzog agreed to giving up 100% of the post 1967 territories, with an allowance for a mere 4% of Israeli settlements staying put in exchange for comparable land in pre-1967 Israel to be handed to the Palestinians. Eastern Jerusalem was going to become the capital of Palestine, but the two halves of the city would share municipal responsibilities. Temple Mount would be turned over to an international monitoring force, but Israel would have retained its hold on the Western Wall.

The Arab refugees were going to be taken care of based on UN resolution 194, with some being allowed back into Israel and the rest receiving financial compensation for the lands they left behind.

Israel was going to maintain a symbolic presence in the Jordan Valley, including two armored bases, and terrorism would be handled by a combined force made up of Jordanians, Palestinians and Israelis.

In response to the revelation, MK Herzog’s office released a statement saying, “In my contacts with the Palestinian Authority Chairman in 2014 I made an effort to reach understandings that would have prevented the wave of terror which I predicted, just as I am working now to prevent a situation where the abandoning of a regional conference on the part of the extreme right-wing government won’t bring on us the next war. After the rounds of the almost annual wars and funerals of the past decade I am no longer prepared to listen to the mantra that says we can defeat every threat with only military force.”

The Western left is on a suicide mission and will take us all down with them if we let them. We are dealing with the insane. All of their dreams and beliefs have been shattered by reality and it seems to me they are looking for an Armageddon to end it all. And more bizarrely than anything, Herzog does not deny it:

In response to the revelation, MK Herzog’s office released a statement saying, “In my contacts with the Palestinian Authority Chairman in 2014 I made an effort to reach understandings that would have prevented the wave of terror which I predicted, just as I am working now to prevent a situation where the abandoning of a regional conference on the part of the extreme right-wing government won’t bring on us the next war. After the rounds of the almost annual wars and funerals of the past decade I am no longer prepared to listen to the mantra that says we can defeat every threat with only military force.”

These people are crazier than anyone I have ever come across in my life. He did it because this would get Obama to endorse the Israeli Labor Party at the election. He would thus have sold out his country for short-term political advantage. That Obama would be willing to sell Israel down the river is, of course, old news.

Do you really believe you live in a free society?

From Drudge today. First this:

LYNCH: Transcript Of Orlando 911 Calls Will Have References To ‘Islamic Terrorism’ Removed…
Heavily edited…

And then there’s this:

Gay Voters Say ‘Dangerous’ to Come Out for Trump…
Physical Violence…
FLASHBACK: Trump Defends Gays from Clintons in 2000…
APPLE won’t aid Republican convention…