By John Semmens
January 10
German Government Flummoxed by Muslim New Year’s Eve Assaults
On New Year’s Eve, gangs of Muslims immigrants accosted, groped, assaulted, robbed, and raped women in Berlin, Cologne, Hamburg, Stuttgart, and Dusseldorf, Germany. Local police were unwilling or unable to come to the aid of victims, complaining that “there were too many offenders for us to contend with. They were throwing rocks and bottles at us. It was just too dangerous for us to get involved.”
Cologne Mayor Henriette Reker saw her city’s police’s inability to intervene as “a blessing in disguise. What we really have here is a clash of cultures. In the Muslim community only prostitutes and immoral women are out in public in the state of undress that we have become accustomed to tolerating in our society. Fondling such women, raping them, and robbing them is permitted or possibly even commanded by the Quran and other Islamic scriptures.”
“Rather than try to coerce these immigrants into abiding by our values it seems more prudent that we take the steps necessary to avoid these kinds of incidents in the future,” Reker advised. “At a minimum, German women could do a better job of covering themselves when out in public. Better still, women should never venture out without being accompanied by a male protector—a husband, father, or brother. If we simply take these few sensible precautions we can learn to live in peace with our new neighbors.”
Ralf Jaeger, German interior minister for North Rhine-Westphalia, decried German anger over the assaults as “incendiary rhetoric that can only magnify the cultural differences between ethnic Germans and recent immigrants.” Jaeger called on the media “to suppress the kind of hate speech that targets the beliefs and behaviors that are out-of-step with traditional German norms. As uncomfortable as it may be, we must learn to live in a world of diversity. Embracing and celebrating this diversity is the more progressive stance.”
In related news, the Ottawa, Canada Children’s Choir welcomed refugees by singing Islamic prayer Tala’ al-Badru ‘Alayna during a holiday concert. The song praises the slaughter of Jewish and Christian men and the raping of Jewish and Christian women by Muslims as “the path to paradise for true believers.” Choir director Robert Filion urged that “we look beyond the specific words, bad as they might be, and accept the choir’s performance as an effort to foster diversity and cultural inclusion.”
January 17
Obama Rejects Idea that Women Should Arm Themselves
When a rape victim queried President Obama at his recent town hall meeting to promote his latest set of executive actions impeding acquisition of firearms by law-abiding citizens he rejected her notion that having a gun for her own protection was her best option.
“I’m sorry you were raped,” the President told Kimberly Corban, “but fortunately you weren’t killed. Most rape victims are not killed. If we allow you to have a weapon, though, the risk of someone getting killed jumps up to an unacceptable level. You acknowledge that your assailant was unarmed. You both came away from the encounter alive and without life-threatening injuries. I call that a ‘win-win’ outcome compared to what might have happened if you had pulled a gun to try to prevent the rape.”
Corban, who has struggled with depression, PTSD and stress-related seizures since she was raped was neither persuaded nor mollified by the President’s response or his reasoning. “The restrictions President Obama is adding make it harder for me to own or carry a gun is actually just making my kids and I less safe,” she asserted. “His fear that I might accidentally shoot myself or, as he put it, ‘unjustly impose a death penalty on my attacker’ conveys a total lack of sympathy or understanding.”
In related news, MSNBC decided not to do an interview with Juanita Broaddrick, a woman who says Bill Clinton raped her in 1978, “because, as it turns out it’s just old news. The alleged rape took place nearly 40 years ago. The statute of limitations expired long ago,” said network spokesman Moe Lester. “Even though it is candidate Hillary Clinton’s position that ‘every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported,’ we do not believe the current campaign should be diverted from more pressing issues by listening to an aged rape victim’s accusations.”
January 31
Swedish Authorities Unsure of How to Deal with Refugee Violence
After a contingent of ten police officers were scared off from rescuing a ten-year-old rape victim from a refugee center, authorities professed themselves to be at a loss for what to do next.
“The ardor with which the Muslim mob attacked the police seeking to remove the boy from the center has caused us to reexamine our premises,” National Police Commissioner Dan Eliasson admitted. “To us, the idea of grown men sexually abusing this young boy is repugnant. But are we guilty of projecting our own values onto another culture?”
“I am told that keeping such boys on hand for the pleasure of Muslim men is a time worn tradition in Arab countries where polygamy has left many adult men without hope of finding a female mate,” Eliasson said. “The young age of the victim apparently fits through a ‘loophole’ in Islam’s proscription against homosexuality.”
The Commissioner also wondered “whether our tolerance of this practice among the immigrant community might offer a safety valve against these men raping Swedish women. Is the repeated raping of a handful of Muslim youths an acceptable price for us to pay in order to protect our women?”
In related news, a 17-year-old Danish girl who fought off a Muslim attacker using pepper spray is being charged with unlawful possession of the spray by local authorities. Police spokesman Knud Kirsten defended her arrest saying that “the law clearly states that pepper spray is illegal. Even though she was the victim of an unprovoked attack that doesn’t justify the breaking of this law. Two wrongs don’t make a right. As a victim she had the high moral ground. As a retaliator, though, she has sacrificed that high ground and made herself a criminal.”
February 7
DC to Pay Criminals to Refrain from Crime
Washington, DC Councilman Kenyan McDuffie proposed and the City Council unanimously adopted a measure that will pay criminals to refrain from committing crimes. Under the plan, residents with a sufficiently impressive rap-sheet will be paid up to $9,000 in cash per year for each year they aren’t convicted of a crime.
“This is not some lame-brained scheme that any smart aleck can game,” McDuffie boasted. “Only those who can document their criminal behavior will be eligible for the stipend. By paying the ‘worst-of-the-worst’ members of our community to cool it we will have a greater impact than if we put more cops on the street.”
The move met with an enthusiastic reception on the streets. A local community leader known only by his street moniker: “The Big Banger,” averred that “we are always looking for ways to expand our cash flow. I think most of my guys have the reps to qualify for the payouts. Those few that don’t could still crack a few heads or boost some merchandise if that’s what it takes to get in on this.”
Apprised of “Banger’s” comments, McDuffie said he was encouraged. “I’m confident that if we partner with the people who really control the streets we can transform the social structure of our City. We’ve already got feelers out to both the Clinton and Sanders’ campaigns to see if either will commit to this new way of restoring order to our society. It would be great to have a broader impact than just in DC.”
In related news, some DC welfare moms are unhappy with the free accommodations the City is providing. Due to a shortage of public housing 730 families are being housed in area hotels. The amenities include prepared meals, cable TV, internet WiFi access, and maid service. Tiera Williams complains that the two-room suite they gave her is “too small, there aren’t enough choices of food, the TV is only basic cable, and the maid wakes me up too early. The paying customers at the hotel get room service with a bigger menu and pay-per-view TV. Giving us less is discrimination. I thought Obama was supposed to transform America. Or do I have to wait for Sanders before everything is free for all.”
February 14
Mosque Weapon Seizure Called Discriminatory
Raids by French authorities have resulted in the confiscation of hundreds of war-grade weapons from numerous mosques throughout the country. The raids were inspired by the November 13th Islamic terrorist attack that killed 130 people in Paris.
The raids were denounced as discriminatory by Imam Aliki Kilyu. “We would never see the government raiding churches and confiscating crucifixes,” he complained. “By singling out the holy places of Muslims for their intrusions these kafirs have disrespected the beliefs of Islam.”
Kilyu rebuffed contentions that crucifixes and weapons cannot be compared. “Christians are the ones who believe in turning the other cheek. The crucifix is a symbol of their god sacrificing himself for this tenet of faith. Muslims are commanded by Allah to fight for Islam. Weapons are the instruments by which Muslims carry out this religious obligation. Government confiscation tramples on Muslims’ freedom to freely practice their faith.”
The Imam cited the revelation of seized recordings of chants glorifying martyrs who give their lives to slay unbelievers as “proof that the authorities knowingly violated one of the most sacred tenets of our faith. The West likes to hold itself up as a regime of tolerance for diversity, but when it comes to Islam their hypocrisy is on display for all to see.”
As if to reassure non-Muslims, Kilyu promised that “the path to peace is clearly spelled out in the Quran. Once the world is conquered for the faith of Allah everyone can live in peace under the laws laid down by the Prophet. Refusal of the infidels to submit compels we Muslim faithful to continue the fight. The blood is on their hands.”
In related news, Imam Oussama El-Saadi declared Denmark’s efforts to prevent Muslim men from acquiring child brides “an intolerable invasion of religious freedom. Older men choosing young girls to be their wives is part of our culture. The Prophet (may peace be upon him) was wed to his favorite wife when she was only six years old. That Muslim men would seek to emulate the behavior of the perfect man should not be impeded by sacrilegious infidel interference. What the West doesn’t understand is that it is better for a girl to be owned by one man than to be available for rape by many men, as is also the custom in our culture.”
February 21
Clinton Says She Tries to Tell the Truth
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was cornered in an interview on CBS this week when she was asked by Scott Pelley whether she could make a Jimmy Carter-like promise to never lie to the American people.
For her part, Hillary professed to be “working hard to try to tell the truth,” but admitted that “it hasn’t always been easy. There are times when the greater good requires that the truth be suppressed or that a fiction be concocted. Should we slavishly adhere to the truth at the cost of allowing political enemies to tear us down like Reagan did to President Carter? Wouldn’t the nation have been better off if Carter had been more flexible regarding the truth? If he had been, perhaps the nightmare years of the Reagan era could’ve been averted.”
“I think American voters are sophisticated enough to understand and appreciate the reasons why their president may need to lie to them for their own benefit,” she added. “They need a leader who will do whatever it takes to govern. If this means the president must cross ethical boundaries that would be considered sins or crimes in other circumstances we must hope that the person we elect is up to the task. Of those currently running I believe that I best embody the character and strength to undertake any dirty deeds that might be necessary.”
February 28
Clinton Contrasts Immigration Stance with Rivals
Eyeing the Latino vote, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton sought to distinguish herself from both fellow Democratic candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders and GOP front-runner Donald Trump by taking a pro-illegal immigrant stance.
“To those swayed by Trump’s plan to build a wall to keep Mexicans from coming to America I would like to know ‘who will clean our homes and mow our lawns?’” she asked. “These are the jobs that Trump and Sanders want to reserve for Americans. But do Americans really want these jobs, even at $15 an hour?”
Clinton professed to “understand the GOP’s racist desire to block these future Democratic voters, but what can Sanders be thinking? Is the short-run preservation of menial jobs for Americans who don’t want them worth delaying the day when Democrats, bolstered by the votes of millions more Latinos, can monopolize political power at the local, state, and national levels? Those of us who believe in progressive values need to take the long view, as President Obama has, and do everything we can to ensure the Party’s permanent ascendancy”
“As president, not only will I bar the construction of any more walls, but until those that exist are torn down I will build ladders and ship them to Mexico so migrants can more easily and safely enter the United States,” she announced. “This will enable us to complete the transformation of America that President Obama has initiated.”
In related news, Sanders brushed aside fears that socialism in America could lead down the same destructive path it has in Venezuela, where shortages of toilet paper now plague that nation. “Look, for most of human history people have gotten along without toilet paper, clean clothes, and adequate food,” he pointed out. “We are tough enough to survive without luxuries like toilet paper. Its absence from the sewage system will clear the pipes and lessen the burden on the environment. I’d call shortages of such unneeded luxuries more of a feature, than a flaw, of socialism.”
March 6
State Dept to Wait Until After Election to Evaluate Hillary’s Emails
The US State Department announced that it will be deferring further analysis of the security implications of former Secretary Clinton’s unauthorized and illegal transfer of classified documents onto her private, unsecured computer until after this November’s elections.
Department of State spokesman John Kirby explained that “the upcoming elections are contentious and confusing enough already. Adding additional complicated material at this time will overtax voters’ attention spans and divert them away from the themes candidates are trying to communicate. This could affect the outcome in ways that might be very detrimental to the greater good.”
Kirby also added an efficiency argument to the case for delay. “Conducting such an analysis would be a tedious undertaking,” he alleged. “It’s quite possible that the election outcome would render the effort unnecessary. I mean, if voters decide to put Mrs. Clinton in the White House we’re pretty confident that the analysis wouldn’t be wanted. So rather than spending taxpayer money on an investigation that could well be canceled, we feel it is more fiscally prudent to avoid a possibly unneeded expenditure.”
March 13
Dem Candidates Agree on Abortion
The two Democratic contenders for the Party’s 2016 presidential nomination fended off the possibility that states should have any leeway in limiting abortions carried out within their borders.
In a statement eerily similar to the Supreme Court’s 1857 Dred Scott decision, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton argued that “fetuses are creatures of an inferior order. They are not persons under the law or Constitution. Consequently, the imputation of their imaginary so-called right to life cannot displace the very real right of the mother to the liberty to not be encumbered with the burdens of pregnancy and child care that anti-choice fanatics would seek to impose on her.”
“The right established by the Court in its historic Roe vs. Wade decision would be meaningless if state legislatures are allowed to chip away at them,” Clinton added. “Mandatory ultrasounds, 72-hour waiting periods, and prohibition of late term abortions are all infringements on a woman’s fundamental right against being forced to bear a child.”
Sen. Bernie Sanders (S-Vt) concurred with Clinton’s stance and lamented that “the resurrection of the discredited claim that powers not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution are reserved to the states would be used for such a disgraceful objective. Minority women are disproportionate beneficiaries of the right to an abortion. How are attempts to limit these rights not seen as racist?”
Sanders vowed to “appoint Supreme Court Justices that will protect and broaden the rights granted by Roe vs. Wade beyond the artificial birth threshold. Merely surviving the journey down the birth canal is no great accomplishment. It must not be used as an argument for bestowing a whole roster of rights and privileges to the entity that emerges if the mother opposes the continued existence of this entity.”
In related news, Governor Earl Ray Tomblin (D-WV) vetoed a bill banning dismemberment abortions. “The Supreme Court has determined that every woman has a Constitutional right to an abortion,” Tomblin declared. “Opposition to a procedure that fulfills this right is an attempt to impose a restriction. The contention that the pain of being torn limb from limb somehow validates such a restriction usurps this fundamental right.”
March 20
Dem Denounces GOP as “Anti-Government”
Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky) held a press conference this week to denounce GOP opposition to increased government spending. “They want to starve the beast,” said the angry and incredulous congressman.
Yarmuth cited the “tragic” shooting of 17-year-old burglar Trevon Johnson in Miami by homeowner Gwendolyn Jenrette this week to bolster his argument that “if the government weren’t slacking off in its duty to provide for the needs of our people this wouldn’t have to happen. As Trevon’s family so aptly put it, ‘how he gonna get his money for school clothes if people can just shoot him for breaking into their homes?’”
“I can’t imagine a more conclusive demonstration of the neglect and inadequacy of government programs than a young man being driven to crime in order to pursue his education,” Yarmuth contended. “Every time we fail to expand government to the magnitude necessary to fulfill everyone’s needs we will be setting more such tragedies in motion. The extermination of our best-and-brightest by gun-toting racist reactionaries is a price too high to pay.”
The congressman held out hope that “this year’s elections will crush anti-social elements and empower a Democratic president and congress to liberate our people from the burdens of existence. We will truly ensure that the best things in life, like education and health care, are free. We will end the struggle to obtain the necessities and free young people like the late Trevon Johnson to pursue their higher callings.”
March 27
Obama Minimizes Differences Between Communism & Capitalism
In a speech to Argentinian youths, President Obama characterized the long-running battle between capitalism and communism as “an interesting intellectual argument that should have no bearing on public policy. Rather than get hung up on the supposed moral differences between these rival ideas we should focus on what works.”
“Whether an unequally shared abundance is superior to a universally shared poverty is not a settled issue,” the President asserted. “The United States has historically opted for free enterprise and individual rights, but can we really say that it has made its people happy? I just visited Cuba, which chose a different path. The people there seemed pretty happy to me. I did not see the kind of anger and dissatisfaction that has given rise to the type of clamor for a change in government that is currently dominating the US 2016 presidential campaign.”
“Under Communism, the Cuban people have been spared the constant pressure of trying to get ahead,” Obama continued. “Just knowing that there is no ‘getting ahead’ has liberated people to relax and enjoy simpler lives—watching baseball games and tinkering on their cool 1950s cars. If I could push a button and exchange America’s greedy self-centered way of life for Cuba’s public-spirited collectivism I’d be sorely tempted to do it.”
The President acknowledged that “Cuba’s treatment of dissenters seems a bit harsh, but let’s not lose sight of the fact that only a tiny minority of the population has been negatively affected. Heck, we have more people in our prisons than they do in Cuba. So, maybe our system is more oppressive than theirs.”
In related news, the two lovely floral dresses worn by First Lady Michelle Obama on the First Family’s recent visit to Cuba cost 23 times the average annual salary for Cuban workers. The First Lady professed herself “unbothered by this statistic since no Cuban worker would be required to buy such expensive attire. Those of us who must bear the burdens of governing must also look the part. I’m confident that the Cuban people understand this. Their president lives in a palace while many workers live in shacks. Each member of society has a role to play and receives the perks to which he or she is entitled.”
April 3
DHS Secretary Says Illegal Aliens Are “in Effect” US Citizens
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson dismissed the possibility of deporting those entering the country illegally as “impractical. For all intents and purposes the 11 million already residing here are, in effect, US citizens.”
Johnson also expressed his distaste at deporting alien criminals on the grounds that “it would be both cruel and unusual. The home countries to which they would be deported are already suffering under crime rates far higher than we have here in the United States. Even if letting them stay here raises our crime rates it seems to me that this would provide for a more fairly balanced distribution of criminal elements around the globe.”
“Further, it would be highly unusual for us to unilaterally deport these people,” Johnson continued. “European governments aren’t deporting terrorists back to their Middle Eastern homelands. Just this week, Belgian officials acknowledged that terrorist cells are too big for the government to take action against. If Europeans can learn to live with foreign terrorists in their midst, surely we can learn to live with the lesser danger of abiding a few hundred foreign-born murderers living among us.”
As Johnson sees it, “the whole issue may be moot anyway. As these resident aliens register to vote they will be helping select the people who run the government. If respecting the will of the people is to have any meaning in our democracy we need to respect these new voices and try to integrate them into our society.”
In related news, Muslims living in the Detroit metro area lodged a protest against the Cherry Hill Presbyterian Church’s annual Easter egg hunt, calling it “an offense to our religious beliefs.” Parent Majed Moughni claimed his “children were discomfited by this intrusion. The invitation for all children, regardless of religious affiliation, to participate in this event exhibited an unconstitutional insensitivity to our religious beliefs.”
April 10
Bill Clinton Clashes with “Black Lives Matter”
After being mercilessly heckled by agitators from the group “Black Lives Matter,” former President Bill Clinton accused them of “defending murderers and drug dealers.” The BLM protesters objected to the former president’s support for 1994’s Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, which they contend disproportionately penalizes minorities.
Clinton’s argument that “this law puts blacks who prey upon other blacks, who kill other blacks behind bars and saves the lives of countless would-be black victims. Those attacking this law can’t really pose as advocates for black lives. They are advocates for criminals.”
Concerned that the former president has “drifted off message,” the Hillary for President campaign sought to distance itself from his remarks. “Bill signed that law more than 20 years ago,” campaign manager Robby Mook reminded. “It’s understandable that he feels some need to defend it. But that is not Hillary’s current position.”
Mook sought to establish that “it is Hillary’s position that the bigger problem is white cops killing blacks. This is the same position as that of the BLM movement. Blacks killing blacks results from imposing unfair white values on the black subculture. Blacks violently fighting over turf stems directly from our drug laws. It is Hillary’s position that the government ought to award designated areas to minority-run drug vendors, much like government has awarded gambling territories to Indian tribes. If this were done, black gangs could take turf interlopers to court rather than trying to enforce their rights through extra-legal means.”
In related news, the Obama Administration’s Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) threatened action against landlords who refuse to rent to convicted felons, calling it “racist. Blacks are three times as likely to have criminal convictions as whites. Barring lawbreakers from rentals illegally imposes standards favorable to whites on racial minorities.”
April 17
Study Shows Government Less Cyber Secure
A study released by Security Scorecard found that all levels of government had a worse record of cyber security than major business firms. In measures of vulnerability to malware and security breaches, federal, state, and local governments ranked at the bottom. Education, telecommunications and pharmaceutical industries were almost as bad. Information services, construction, food and technology were the best.
Of the 600 government entities tracked, NASA performed the worst. Other low-performing government organizations included the U.S. Department of State. This latter revelation was jumped on by the Hillary Clinton for President campaign as “a total vindication of Secretary Clinton’s decision to flout State Department rules and conduct her business on a private computer system housed in a bathroom closet in Colorado.”
“Rather than being hounded for going outside of the federal government’s procedures, Secretary Clinton should be hailed for heroically taking extralegal action to divert her communications to what research now shows was likely a more secure option,” said campaign manager Robbie Mook. “The question is, do voters want a president who will slavishly follow the law? Or do they want someone who is willing to go above and beyond the law when circumstances warrant it?”
May 1
Trump Foreign Policy Speech Alarms Allies
GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump’s emphasis that the guiding principle for foreign policy under his administration will be “America first” has made some of our European allies nervous.
Germany’s foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier characterized Trump’s stance as “arrogant and selfish. To put America first is offensive to my ears. He is denying our equality and our right to participate in determining what America must do to protect all of our mutual interests. If this kind of self-centered viewpoint had prevailed in an earlier era my country and perhaps all of western Europe would today be run by fascists or communists.”
Carl Bildt, a former Swedish prime minister and foreign minister concurred. “Trump is disrespecting democratic processes and democratic values,” Bildt charged. “He makes no provision for our vote. Becoming America’s president won’t make him king. He would not have the prerogative to shrug off the obligations the United States has assumed and on which the rest of the free world has depended for three-quarters of a century without our acquiescence.”
British Prime Minister David Cameron said “Trump’s demand that we be required to fund a minimum share of the cost of our defense is unprecedented. This is not how things have been done for more than seven decades. We haven’t budgeted for the kind of outlays this would entail. We can’t afford it.”
German Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel suggested that “our only viable option might be to call a President Trump’s bluff. If we look like we’ll be overrun by communists, fascists, or Islamists the United States would have to come to our rescue. Otherwise they’d be left alone to face an entire world hostile to their own survival.”
In related news, President Obama praised Germany’s “open door” policy on refugees from the Middle East, saying “it has set an example that others should follow. If the various different ethnic and religious peoples were more uniformly dispersed around the globe the incentives for nations to fight one another would be diminished.”
May 8
Medical Errors Third Leading Cause of Death in US
A study published in the prominent medical journal BMJ concluded that errors by doctors and hospitals kill more than 250,000 people a year in the US. Martin Makary, professor of surgery at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, led the research team and said “It boils down to people dying from the care that they receive rather than the disease for which they are seeking care.”
“In recent years a lot has been made of the issue of people living without health insurance and how the government must take heroic efforts to compel everyone to obtain insurance,” Makary observed. “The concern is that those without insurance won’t be able to afford treatment. This study indicates that not being treated isn’t always bad. Sometimes entering the medical world exposes patients to dangers worse than the ailments they had going in.”
“It’s one thing for people to be insured against catastrophic health emergencies like accidents or serious diseases,” he continued. “There the risk/reward profile for being treated is more balanced. But when comprehensive coverage entices a person to make entering the realm of medical treatment their first option they may be increasing their risk of falling victim to medical error without sufficient reason.”
“The human body has developed many self-healing abilities over millions of years of evolution,” Makary said. “In many instances relying on that may be a better bet than relying on the much newer and less evolved art of medicine. At the very least, the data don’t support a policy of forcing everyone into a government mandated health protocol like the Affordable Care Act seeks to do.”
In related news, hospitals in the United Kingdom are posting “do not resuscitate” orders—without the patients’ or families’ consent—for tens of thousands of National Health Care patients as a cost-saving measure. NHS spokesman Dr. Malcolm Kildare called the step “a necessary conservation of social resources. A patient of little value to society and his or her family is not the best judge of how our limited resources should be used. Rationalizing the system to ensure resources are available for higher value patients is essential.”
May 15
Judge Blocks Restitution to Innocent Man
Guillermo Espinoza’s efforts to retrieve $19,894 seized by Arkansas State Police were brought to an abrupt halt by Judge Chris Williams. State prosecutors asked that the money be returned to Espinoza since no criminal charges were being pursued against him. Williams rejected this request on the grounds that Espinoza had missed the 10-day deadline for filing the papers to initiate restitution.
As Williams sees it, “the rules on civil forfeiture are clearly spelled out in statute. Whether or not Mr. Espinoza was or wasn’t engaged in any illegal activity is irrelevant. Arkansas law gives the government the right to seize assets it deems may have a connection to a crime. Even if that connection turns out to be illusory, the procedure for reclaiming the seized assets is specified. Mr. Espinoza failed to adhere to that procedure. Thus, the State cannot return the money to him.”
“The civil forfeiture statute is not inextricably tied to the fate of any criminal investigation or prosecution,” Williams pointed out. “Over the history of this statute it has transferred over $80 million into the state treasury. Acquiring revenues is also a legitimate function of government. For me to deviate from the civil forfeiture statute in pursuit of some notion of judicial fairness would abrogate this important revenue-raising function of the law. That is beyond my powers as a judge.”
As an aside, the Judge speculated that “it is by no means certain that the public good would be better served by according Mr. Espinoza a just resolution of his case. The private uses to which he might put the money might easily be eclipsed by the public good that can be done by having the State spend that money on purposes of broader social benefit to all Arkansans.”
May 22
ACLU Bemoans Court’s Pro-Choice Decision
This week Nevada District Judge Eric Johnson dismissed the ACLU’s case against the state’s school choice law. A change to Nevada statutes creating an education savings account (ESA) program that permits students and their parents to choose how to be educated was the source of the ACLU’s ire.
Author of the legislation, State Sen. Scott Hammond (R-Las Vegas) said his aim was “to enable families to completely customize their child’s educational experience, and ensure students can match education options and providers to their unique learning needs.” These accounts can be used to pay for private school tuition, online learning, special education services and therapies, textbooks, curricula, private tutors, and any other education-related service, product, or provider.
“Under this ill-conceived law state funds for education can be used in any manner seen fit by parents or their children,” complained ACLU spokesman Bertram Petty. “The legislature has heedlessly granted freedom to the uninformed. Neither parents nor students are qualified to decide such matters. Only the public school system has the expertise needed to guide each student toward the proper educational outcome.”
While the ACLU’s case was dismissed by one judge, another—Judge James Wilson of the First Judicial District Court of Nevada (Carson City)–issued an injunction preventing the funding of the more than 4,000 ESA’s requested and awarded under the statute. Petty praised Wilson’s action, calling it “a crucial bulwark against diverting state resources into unregulated private hands. The State has gone through an arduous process of extracting these funds from the private sector. We must not allow this money to be frittered away via the ignorant choices of parents and students.”
May 29
President Suggests Hillary’s Email “a Matter for Voters to Decide”
Irritated that the media would dare to pose a question about the legality of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s unsecured email communications, President Obama refused to comment, suggesting that “whether she did anything that was really wrong is a matter for voters to decide. And from what I’ve seen so far, she’s on her way to securing the Democratic nomination for president. I think that says the majority of Americans are okay with how she’s handled it.”
The media’s unwelcome inquiry was spurred by an 83-page State Department Inspector General’s report calling Clinton’s email operation an “inexcusable and willful disregard of the rules. Contrary to the Secretary’s public statements, her use of a private server was not ‘allowed’ as she has alleged. It was in direct violation of State Department regulations that the Secretary had previously cited in issuing punishments to lower-ranking violators. There is no record of her receiving a valid exemption from these regulations from any higher-ranking authority.”
A key piece of evidence in the IG’s report cited Secretary Clinton’s warning to all State Department personnel that “personal email accounts could be compromised and officials should avoid conducting official Department business from personal e-mail accounts.”
Among the classified information showing up in the Secretary’s unsecured email was long-time Clinton family confidant Sid Blumenthal’s message urging Hillary “to expedite the overthrow of Libya’s Mohamar Qadaffi before his scheme of establishing a 7-billion dollar fund of gold-backed dinars undercuts the US government’s ability to control the oil industry.” The overthrow was expedited. Qadaffi was murdered and the country thrown into a chaos that later resulted in the assassination of US Ambassador Christopher Stevens in 2012.
Clinton campaign manager Robbie Mook denounced the IG report, calling it “as gross an invasion of privacy that any public figure has had to endure. The staff that were under Secretary Clinton’s direction were instructed to never speak to anyone, ever, on the topic of her private email account. That some of these staffers have talked to the Inspector General is a betrayal of the first magnitude. Those undertaking the tasks of governing this country need to know that their orders are heeded and obeyed. Sad to say, the Secretary’s orders on this matter were neither heeded nor obeyed. We’re confident that voters will correct this injustice by electing Hillary president in November.”
June 12
Ninth Circuit Court Repeals Second Amendment
This week the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that government has a right to decide who will and won’t be permitted to carry a concealed firearm. The ruling came in the case of Edward Peruta v. County of San Diego. The County denied Peruta and his fellow plaintiffs concealed carry permits on the grounds that they did not prove a need for them.
Writing for the majority, Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain asserted that “under California law, police authorities are empowered to determine who shall be allowed to bear arms and for what reasons. The plaintiffs’ contention that personal self-defense was a sufficient reason for them to be armed was rejected by county law enforcement officials. Their argument that police cannot provide adequate protection emanates from an elevation of selfish individual concerns over the society’s welfare. The collective body of California citizens has seen fit to elect a government that made the decision to grant authority to local governments to allow or deny firearm privileges as they see fit.”
“The very fact that these plaintiffs contested local authorities lends support to the decision not to issue permits,” O’Scannlain continued. “One of the main duties of government is to protect itself from those who it construes as potentially dangerous to this objective. The plaintiffs’ assertion that police cannot be relied upon to provide sufficient protection raises a measure of doubt as to whether these individuals are reliable citizens.”
Dissenting Judge Barry Silverman contended that “the California law clearly violates the Constitution’s Second Amendment which affirms that ‘the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’ Having to ask permission of a government functionary to exercise this right eviscerates it. A state where the government has absolute control over who may or may not be armed is the very tyranny the Second Amendment was devised to prevent.”
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton hailed the Court’s decision as “an encouraging step toward the attainment of a ‘gun-free’ society. We can make allowances for those who want to hunt to check guns out of a government armory much like a person can check out a book from a public library. There is no need for anyone to own his own gun. Once I’m president we’re going to make that happen.”
June 19
Democrat Wants Taxpayers to Pass Drug Test to Qualify for Deductions
Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Wis) has introduced legislation that would require taxpayers to pass a drug test before being allowed to itemize deductions on their 1040 tax forms. The bill is in retaliation for state laws that require welfare recipients to pass drug tests in order to receive benefits.
“I am sick and tired of Republicans forcing poor people to jump through hoops to receive the money they are entitled to under the law,” Moore complained. “We enacted these programs to help the unfortunate. Few members of society are as unfortunate as drug addicts. They are slaves to chemicals that their bodies crave. Compelling them to choose between a welfare check and their substance abuse is unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment.”
“If the GOP is going to cut the money going to this deprived set of society’s victims then we should also cut the money going to taxpayers via the deductions allowed on their income taxes,” the Congresswoman asserted. “As the President has pointed out on numerous occasions, people with incomes, businesses, and jobs didn’t earn it. Somebody else made that happen. Letting them keep this money is a privilege that the government can revoke. Let’s see how they like it when government cuts the money they get to keep because they can’t pass a drug test.”
Wisconsin is one of 15 states that require welfare recipients to submit to drug testing in order to receive benefits. Gov. Scott Walker defended the requirement calling it “an additional incentive designed to help people escape a cycle of dependency. Consuming illegal drugs is an incapacitating behavior. Not only does it sap an individual’s motivation for becoming self-reliant it also undermines competency. Either of these effects will deter an employer from hiring the substance abuser.”
“Rep. Moore’s notion that income earned by working is the equivalent of income received from the government for not working is as wrong as it can be,” Walker added. “Getting oneself off the sofa and into the workforce makes a positive contribution to society. It is contributions like this that make it possible to provide benefits for those truly unable to support themselves. If we make it a practice to reward those who disable themselves from the possibility of working to continue to be supported by the government the resources to aid those who really need it will be needlessly depleted.”
June 26
Senators Demand to Know Where Companies Keep Their Cash
Concerned that some of the nation’s resources may be out of their reach, Sens. Al Franken (D-Minn) and Chris Coons (D-Del) are demanding that “all businesses fully disclose where all their money is.”
“As President Obama said when he was nominated for his second term, government is the only entity we all belong to,” Franken recalled. “It is every business’ and every individual’s duty to do the utmost to ensure the survival of this single unifying entity. At a minimum, this means making all of their financial resources known to the government so they may be appropriated if the need to do so arises.”
Franken professed to understand the need for privacy, but maintained that “it is one thing to insist on privacy from the prying eyes of business rivals. It is quite another to keep secrets from the government. Should we sit by and allow the government to default when we could save it by seizing the money businesses and individuals are hoarding? How could we justify letting the selfish interests of the private sector impede the collective obligation of all of us to support the government?”
July 17
Obama, Gingrich Grapple with Islamic Terror Issue
The Bastille Day attack that killed 80 and injured 200 in Nice, France sparked a passionate plea from former House Speaker Newt Gingrich for better security against Islamic terrorism.
Gingrich said he has “no problems with Muslims who respect the rights of others becoming American citizens and moving in next door, but followers of sharia who believe they have a right or duty to wage war on unbelievers have no place in our country. They ought to be deported.”
He also called for “greater scrutiny of what’s going on in Mosques in America. Many of them seem to serve as recruiting centers for would-be terrorists. Hateful doctrines are preached to incite attacks on innocent civilians like we have seen in France and in this country in Orlando and San Bernardino. On top of this, caches of weapons are frequently concealed on their premises.”
President Obama characterized Gingrich’s comments as “repugnant. There is no place in our country for such hostility toward the religious beliefs of others. No Muslim should have to fear that his beliefs will expose him to any greater scrutiny than any other religion. The right to practice one’s religion free from interference by government is guaranteed by the First Amendment.”
Gingrich remained uncowed by the President’s criticism. “I’ll tell you what’s repugnant,” he replied, “the President’s repeated refusal to defend the people of this nation from attacks carried out by fanatical Islamists. Despite the evidence from their own mouths, Obama professes himself mystified as to the motives of these killers. This is willful blindness or worse.”
“No one in this country, not me, not Donald Trump, not the Republican Party, is making a case for preventing Muslims from praying or promulgating their beliefs in a peaceful manner,” Gingrich pointed out. “The President’s efforts to stigmatize opposition to murder as anti-Muslim prejudice is reprehensible. The right of every American to believe or not believe any religion is trampled by the violence carried out by Islamic terrorists. That is the First Amendment right that the government and the President have an obligation to defend. Thus far, Obama has fallen far short of fulfilling this duty.”
July 24
LA Times Op Ed Says Hillary Win Only Way to Avert Coup
Fear that Trump might be elected president prompted hysteria from leftist loon James Kirchick in an op ed he wrote in this week’s LA Times. “If voters don’t put Hillary in the White House our only option may be a military coup against a President Trump,” Kirchick warns.
Kirchick contends that such a first ever violent overthrow of an election outcome in this country “would be defensive in nature. Trump is outside the mainstream of the governing coalition that has run this country for the last 25 years. Even if he wins a majority of votes his ascension to office could be construed as a coup itself. Undoing his coup would restore the country to normalcy.”
“The foresight of President Obama in purging the military of disloyal elements over the last seven years has laid the groundwork for this fail-safe option should voters make the disastrous decision to hand power over to a madman like Trump,” Kirchick gloated. “Polls may show that the majority of the rank-and-file troops lean toward Trump, but the men who command them have been thoroughly vetted and can be counted on to rise to the occasion if events warrant it.”
“Naturally, such an overt deviation from precedent would have to be a last resort,” Kirchick wrote. “Barring a sufficient number of legitimate votes to ensure her election, a more discreet covert manipulation of the ballots would be preferred. Nevertheless, the outcome is too crucial for us to shy away from any remedy.”
July 31
Obama Hails Economic Progress During His Administration
In his speech at the Democratic Convention President Obama contended that “by so many measures, our country is stronger and more prosperous than it was when we started.” Unfortunately, a number of key statistics seem to contradict that assessment. There are 3 million more people in poverty. Household incomes for those in the bottom 20% declined. Nearly 9 million more individuals are receiving food stamps. And 14 million have left the workforce.
Press Secretary Josh Earnest insisted that “these statistics need to be properly interpreted. Before we leap to a hasty conclusion that the President’s policies have been ineffective let’s consider what has really taken place. A mere increase in the number of persons below the poverty line is not a clear indication that they suffering. In our country, people below the poverty line are provided with amenities—like air-conditioned apartments, cable TV, and cell phones—that even the so-called middle class in other countries lack.”
“Why should we worry about earned incomes declining when the benefits offered by government are so generous?” Earnest asked. “Isn’t the fact that people get to consume more important than whether they can afford to pay for it? Isn’t the fact that more Americans are overweight than ever a sign that the increase in food stamps is a success? And don’t get me started on the millions who have left the workforce. Surely being able to live without having a job is a step forward in human civilization. The gains in leisure have got to far outstrip any assumed loss of dignity from becoming dependent on others.”
August 7
Pope’s Contention that Islam Is Peaceful Takes Hit
Pope Francis’ belief that Islam is a religion of peace was expressly contradicted by Boko Haram leader Abu Masab Al-Barnawi this week in an interview published in Al-Naba Newspaper. The Islamic terrorist vowed “to kill every Christian and blow up every church until all are for Islam in Nigeria and the world.”
Al-Barnawi cited Christian charities as “the aggressors in this battle for men’s souls. They prey upon the victims of calamities, seducing them with food, shelter, and medical supplies. They insidiously tempt them with kindness and mercy to turn them away from Allah’s command to submit to Islam and fight against unbelievers.”
The ISIS magazine Dabiq also chimed in against the portrayal of its attacks as “senseless violence,” calling it a “smear by the enemies of Islam. We are not randomly killing people. We are targeting the unbelievers as the Quran bids us to do. The Pope can have his peace, but only after all Christians have submitted to Islam.”
One of the historical grievances gnawing at Dabiq’s editors was “the Christians’ efforts against slavery. The profit from selling slaves is one of the boons granted to Muslims by Allah. The West’s interference by suppressing this commerce unjustly deprived Muslims of rewards to which they are entitled.”
<span style="color:#000000;font-family:Times N