Category: Quick Analysis

Categories
Quick Analysis

Illegal immigrants voting: a campaign 2016 issue

A recent Rasmussen poll  indicates that a majority of Democrats believe illegal aliens should be allowed to vote. According to the poll, “one-out-of-three Likely U.S. Voters (35%) now believes that illegal immigrants should be allowed to vote if they can prove they live in this country and pay taxes. Sixty percent (60%) disagree, while five percent (5%) are undecided.  Fifty-three percent (53%) of Democrats think tax-paying illegal immigrants should have the right to vote. Twenty-one percent (21%) of Republicans and 30% of voters not affiliated with either major political party agree… Women are more supportive than men of letting tax-paying illegal immigrants vote, but the two are in general agreement that the size of voting districts should be determined by counting only the number of eligible voters.” (The Supreme Court will soon decide whether illegals should be counted in determining the size of districts.)

Earlier this year, state election officials testified before Congress that President Obama’s    temporary deportation amnesty plans would make it easier for illegals to vote, since the illegals would have access to social security cards and drivers licenses.

The issue has been introduced into the 2016 Presidential campaign by Hillary Clinton, who has made allegations of voter suppression supposedly at the hands of Republicans.  On May 31, according to the New York Times, Clinton “accused Republicans including her potential rivals Jeb Bush, Scott Walker and Rick Perry of ‘deliberately trying to stop’ young people and minorities — both vital Democratic constituencies — from exercising their right to vote. She called for automatic voter registration in every state when young people turn 18, criticized Republican-sponsored voting laws in North Carolina, Texas and Wisconsin, and urged Congress to take immediate action to reinstate an important provision of the Voting Rights Act that she said the Supreme Court had “eviscerated” in a 2013 ruling…In addition to areas she said needed to be addressed, like easier online registration, shorter lines at polling precincts and a minimum of 20 days for early voting before an election, Mrs. Clinton called for a nationwide law modeled on one recently passed in Oregon that automatically adds voters to the rolls when they turn 18, using driver’s license data. Residents would have to opt out to avoid being added to the voter rolls.”

Those tolerant of illegal immigrant voting often camouflage their arguments by stating that voter ID laws, meant to discourage unlawful voting of any sort, are being aimed at young people or minorities. There is no evidence to back up that assertion.  Indeed, Judicial Watch  has found that in a case study in North Carolina, minority voter turnout actually increased since the passage of North Carolina’s election integrity bill.

Fraudulent voting is not confined to illegal immigrants. In 2012, reports the Washington Examiner,  Wendy Rosen, The Democratic candidate for Maryland’s 1st Congressional District , was forced to end her candidacy  after it was discovered that she committed voter fraud by casting a ballot in both Maryland and Florida in multiple political contests. Her story is similar to an incident in Connecticut reported by the Washington Times. “State Rep. Christina Ayala of Connecticut, a Democrat from Bridgeport, was caught voting early and often. She has been charged with 19 felony counts. Her arrest forced Connecticut Democrats to adopt a new and revised message: Election fraud doesn’t occur — but when it does, we won’t tolerate it. ‘While everyone is entitled to their day in court,’ says Connecticut Secretary of State Denise W. Merrill, ‘voter fraud is a very serious crime, for which we have zero tolerance.”
With such effective methods of cialis cheapest treatments, there are several chiropractic Vistaclinics that have become the one stop solutions for patients to get relief from chronic body pain. Studies in cialis viagra australia the 1980s and 1990s found that women and men smoke for different reasons and at different periods of life in men can occur moments when the body breaks down and the erection process is not happening. Shilajit: A well-known ayurvedic aphrodisiac, Shilajit is a resin generic cialis online see this link now residue from the crevasses of rocks in the Himalayan mountains. Also, Marriage Counseling Jacksonville strongly suggests you make levitra pharmacy use of your communication time for something positive and avoid permitting your negativities and frustrations to come to light.
Authoritative studies previously reported by the New York Analysis of Policy & Government have provided evidence of extensive voter registration fraud, and a reluctance or inability on the part of officials to confront the issue.

Conservative commentator Phyllis Schlafly Believes that “Hillary Clinton …[has] apparently decided it won’t be enough to rely on the 66 million people who voted twice for Barack Obama…Who are the new voters to whom Hillary wants to give ‘access to the ballot box’? They include felons and non-citizens, along with anyone who can’t prove identity, citizenship, or residence within the voting precinct. She also plans to harvest millions of new votes by expanding the dangerous practices of same-day registration and early voting, which enable Democrats to badger, berate, bribe, or bamboozle reluctant, low-information voters to the polls. Democratic Party and union workers can identify reluctant voters and harass them until the party worker verifies that they have actually cast their ballot.

“Arizona, which is on the front lines of illegal immigration, has been trying to require proof of citizenship as part of voter registration ever since that simple requirement was approved by Arizona’s voters in 2004. The Obama administration refused to add the proof-of-citizenship requirement to the federal form that Arizona must use for motor-voter registrations. Hillary has assigned her top lawyer to sue Wisconsin to overturn its effective Voter I.D. law, one of the best in the nation. But that’s not all. The New York Times just reported that the left-wing Hungarian billionaire, George Soros, has agreed to pour $5 million into a national effort to protect and expand early voting.”

Preventing illegal immigrants from unlawfully voting is not an easy task. The Washington Times  reported that “secretaries of state from Ohio and Kansas said they won’t have the tools to sniff out illegal immigrants who register anyway, ignoring stiff penalties to fill out the registration forms that are easily available at shopping malls, motor vehicle bureaus and in curbside registration drives. Anyone registering to vote attests that he or she is a citizen, but Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted said mass registration drives often aren’t able to give due attention to that part, and so illegal immigrants will still get through. Kansas Secretary of State Kris W. Kobach said even some motor vehicle bureau workers automatically ask customers if they want to register to vote, which some noncitizens in the past have cited as their reason for breaking the law to register.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Will the Income Tax be replaced?

America may be moving closer to a dramatic overhaul of its tax system.

One of the most potentially far-reaching legislative items is currently before the House of Representatives’ Ways and Means Committee. It would affect every taxpayer throughout the U.S. Introduced earlier this year, the continuing budgetary crisis is giving the bill an additional boost.

The Pew Research Center  notes that “The public sees the nation’s tax system as deeply flawed: 59% say “there is so much wrong with the federal tax system that Congress should completely change it.” Just 38% think the system “works pretty well” and requires “only minor changes.” These opinions have changed little since 2011.”

There are numerous views of why the system is flawed, ranging across the political spectrum, but there is widespread dissatisfaction with the current process.

One important concept has been introduced by Rep. Rob Woodal (R-Ga.) H.R. 25, , “the Fair Tax Act of 2015”  would replace the income tax with a national sales tax. ,

According to the Congressional Research Service, H.R. 25 would replace the current tax system with a national sales tax on the use or consumption in the United States of taxable property or services. This would be in lieu of the current income and corporate income tax, employment and self-employment taxes, and estate and gift taxes. The rate of the sales tax under the proposal would be 23% in 2017, with adjustments to the rate in subsequent years. There are exemptions from the tax for used and intangible property, for property or services purchased for business, export, or investment purposes, and for state government functions.

Under the bill, family members who are lawful U.S. residents receive a monthly sales tax rebate (Family Consumption Allowance) based upon criteria related to family size and poverty guidelines.

The states would have the responsibility for administering, collecting, and remitting the sales tax to the Treasury. The measure abolishes  the IRS by 2019. To insure that it doesn’t become an additional tax instead of a total substitute for the income tax, the legislation would self-terminate if the income tax authorization amendment to the U.S. Constitution (the 16th amendment) is not repealed within seven years of passage.
Negative “ethers,” psychic or spiritual influences, bad relationships, thought order free viagra patterns, and emotions can have toxic effects on the body. Effectiveness of Tablet This tablet is highly effective levitra 40 mg appalachianmagazine.com if you are suffering from impotency or erectile dysfunction. Most of the papers that were written and surveys undertaken dealt with -in some way or the other- male sexuality. cialis 40 mg This technique increases the secretion of nocturnal melatonin, viagra super active a chemical that aids and induces sleep.
According to fairtax.org,  which advocates for the concept,

“Under the FairTax, all Americans consume what they see as their necessities of life free of tax. While permitting no exemptions, the FairTax (HR25 / S155) provides a monthly, universal prebate to ensure that each family unit can consume tax-free up to the poverty level, with the overall effect of making the FairTax progressive in application. This is not an entitlement, but a rebate (in advance) of taxes paid – thus the term prebate. Everyone pays taxes at the cash register.”

Some have questioned whether the idea could work. Forbes Magazine the challenge:

“The rate is too high for it to work as a simple sales tax: there will just be too much dodging of it. It would certainly be possible to make a consumption tax work. It’s certainly possible to have a value added tax, or VAT, at that 25% or so rate. There are other ways of constructing consumption taxes as well: although they would require the filing of tax returns and that’s one of the things the Fair Tax is trying to do away with.

“The basic and simple problem is that trying to charge 25% or so in one single step at that point of final retail sale is too high a tax rate for it to be regularly achievable. You would almost immediately have a spate of long firm frauds. Plus a general move towards a grey, cash based, economy which simply ignored the existence of the tax. This is precisely why those countries which do have a high consumption tax rate do it as a VAT, not as a sales tax.”

(Investopedia defines a VAT as “A type of consumption tax that is placed on a product whenever value is added at a stage of production and at final sale… The amount of value-added tax that the user pays is the cost of the product, less any of the costs of materials used in in the product that have already been taxed.)

Both the Fair Tax and the VAT concepts are closer to the Constitutional model of the relationship between the federal government and private citizens than the current income tax system.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Dodging the Second Amendment

Repeatedly, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment provides individuals with the right to bear arms.

The only way the very vocal and insistent opposition to  can legally prevent U.S. citizens from owning weapons is through a repeal of this portion of the Bill of Rights—a move that would most assuredly fail. And so, questionable alternative means are utilized.

One of the key methods employed during the past several years has been an attempt to circumvent Second Amendment guarantees through international treaties.  There is no legal basis for any international agreement, however, to supersede a Constitutional provision.

The Tenth Amendment Center  notes “Treaties cannot override the first eight amendments in the Bill of Rights or the Constitution’s other specific exceptions to federal authority (such as the ban on taxing exports). Those provisions were adopted to deny the federal government authority it otherwise might have. A treaty cannot override those limits. For example, the First Amendment denies Congress authority to ban socialist literature from the postal system. The First Amendment would trump any treaty requiring Congress to do so. Likewise, the Second Amendment denies the federal government power to confiscate hand guns from law-abiding citizens. A treaty cannot take this protection away.”

That has not prevented Second Amendment opponents from trying to interpret international treaties in a manner which could affect domestic gun ownership. One avenue that has been attempted is using the recent United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.

The United Nations Arms Trade Treaty  (ATT) was adopted on April 2, 2013. “The minimum scope of arms covered by the Treaty [is] the seven categories covered by the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms and an eighth category on small arms and light weapons. The  Treaty requires States parties to regulate the export of ammunition/munitions fired, launched or delivered by the conventional arms [and] requires States parties to regulate the export of parts and components where the export is in a form that provides the capability to assemble conventional arms prior to authorising their export. [The treaty] explicitly prohibits…arms transfers that would be contrary to international legal obligations, or where the State knows the arms would be used in the commission of genocide, crimes against humanity and certain war crimes. This provision sets a clear benchmark to allow States parties to effectively and consistently implement these prohibitions.”

There is nothing in that language that can be reasonably be interpreted to restrict domestic gun ownership within the United States.

Newsmax describes describes U.N. efforts as including measures such as creating a national gun registry; mandating control of firearms and ammunition; regulating the manufacture of gun parts; and limiting stores’ ability to sell firearms.
In addition, applying a cialis without prescriptions mastercard djpaulkom.tv moisturizing penis creme can help to keep the package in top-notch condition. Kamagra increases energy and improves your sex drive. levitra uk The men who experience the ill effects of this sildenafil in india issue are varied. Consume 3 grams of Pushyamuga Churna and viagra levitra online 20 ml Ashokaaristha with milk regularly.
The National Rifle Association  is concerned that, under the guise of complying with international agreements,

“ the Obama State Department has been quietly moving ahead with a proposal that could censor online speech related to firearms. This latest regulatory assault, published in the June 3 issue of the Federal Register, is as much an affront to the First Amendment as it is to the Second…

“For the past several years, the Administration has been pursuing a large-scale overhaul of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), which implement the federal Arms Export Control Act (AECA). The Act regulates the movement of so-called “defense articles” and “defense services” in and out of the United States. These articles and services are enumerated in a multi-part “U.S. Munitions List,” which covers everything from firearms and ammunition (and related accessories) to strategic bombers. The transnational movement of any defense article or service on the Munitions List presumptively requires a license from the State Department. Producers of such articles and services, moreover, must register with the U.S. Government and pay a hefty fee for doing so. Also regulated under ITAR are so-called “technical data” about defense articles. These include, among other things, “detailed design, development, production or manufacturing information” about firearms or ammunition. Specific examples of technical data are blueprints, drawings, photographs, plans, instructions or documentation.

“In their current form, the ITAR do not (as a rule) regulate technical data that are in what the regulations call the ‘public domain.’ Essentially, this means data ‘which is published and which is generally accessible or available to the public’ through a variety of specified means. These include ‘at libraries open to the public or from which the public can obtain documents.’ Many have read this provision to include material that is posted on publicly available websites, since most public libraries these days make Internet access available to their patrons.

“The ITAR, however, were originally promulgated in the days before the Internet. Some State Department officials now insist that anything published online in a generally-accessible location has essentially been “exported,” as it would be accessible to foreign nationals both in the U.S. and overseas.

“With the new proposal published on June 3, the State Department claims to be ‘clarifying’ the rules concerning ‘technical data’ posted online or otherwise ‘released into the public domain.’ To the contrary, however, the proposal would institute a massive new prior restraint on free speech. This is because all such releases would require the ‘authorization’ of the government before they occurred. The cumbersome and time-consuming process of obtaining such authorizations, moreover, would make online communication about certain technical aspects of firearms and ammunition essentially impossible. Penalties for violations are severe and for each violation could include up to 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $1 million. Civil penalties can also be assessed. Each unauthorized ‘export,’ including to subsequent countries or foreign nationals, is also treated as a separate violation.”

The proposal is being challenged.  It will not be the last attempt to do an end-run around the Bill of Rights.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Mixed news on U.S. Housing

Americans are persistently told that the U.S. economy is gaining strength, yet there are many indicators that appear to contradict that rosy analysis.

The housing market is an area of mixed indicators. Some prices are up, but other issues remain worrisome.

One such indicator concerns “HELOCS.”  According to a TD Bank description, a HELOC is “A home equity line of credit (often called HELOC and pronounced Hee-lock) is a loan in which the lender agrees to lend a maximum amount within an agreed period (called a term), where the collateral is the borrower’s equity in his/her house (akin to a second mortgage).

The Wall Street Journal reports that “A decade after homeowners used a soaring real-estate market to go on a borrowing binge against their own properties, many are now falling behind on payments, threatening to leave banks on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars…borrowers who signed up for HELOCS in 2004 were 30 or more days late on $1.8 billion worth of outstanding balances just four months after principal payments started kicking in”

Mortgage expert Chris Cabanillas notes that “It’s a real concern and something we have been warning about for a few years.”

There are also other factors hampering the housing market, as well. The Wall Street Journal also notes that “many families lack the incomes or savings needed to buy homes, creating a surge of renters and a shortage of affordable housing.”

Many of those who do own homes face an uncertain future. CNBC  reports that “Of the approximately 952,000 borrowers who are 90 or more days past due on their monthly payments, but not yet in foreclosure, 62 percent have already been through some form of home retention program,” so the chances of a successful outcome are not good.

Selling will not be a viable option for many, according to an Atlantic magazine analysis.  “Across America about 5.4 million homes are still upside-down on their mortgages…in some areas, negative equity is actually deepening.”
As there are many good physiotherapy clinics in West viagra australia price London, you may find it very difficult to choose sometimes. If we want targeted viagra sale mastercard therapy, we need to know more in this regard, read other informative articles on the web. Today! Many women are trying to get pregnant djpaulkom.tv buying viagra in spain naturally. We trust that straightforward arrangements are best. in stock on line cialis
While providing some optimism, (“Consumer attitudes about the housing market showed marked improvement last month, strengthening the case for a lift in housing activity this year”) the May Fannie Mae survey pointed out cause for concern.

“Those who think it would be easy to get a home mortgage decreased by 2 percentage points to 50 percent, while those who think it would be difficult remained at 46 percent.

” The share of respondents who say the economy is on the right track decreased by 4 percentage points to 38 percent, while those who say the economy is on the wrong track rose by 3 percentage points to 52 percent.

“The percentage of respondents who expect their personal financial situation to get worse over the next 12 months rose to 12 percent.”

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York has also surveyed the housing market. Similar to several other studies, it provided generally favorable indicators, but there were also negative trends regarding home prices and the value of their homes.

“Among homeowners, the expressed likelihood of investing in improvements to the home has declined somewhat relative to last year. Most renters report that they would rather own than rent if they had the necessary financial resources; as in last year’s survey, a majority of them believe that it would be difficult to obtain a mortgage, although responses suggest a slight easing in perceived credit access.

“Home Price Expectations Survey respondents were asked for the current value of a typical home in their zip code, and what they expected the value of that home to be in one year. and in five years. On average, respondents expected home prices to increase by 4.4 percent over the next twelve months—a rate 0.1 percentage point higher than the average rate in the 2014 survey and remarkably close to the mean forecast of 4.37 percent in a January 2015 survey of housing market experts conducted by Pulsenomics. The median expectation in the 2015 survey of 3.0 percent, however, was lower than the 2014 median of 3.3 percent. With regard to longer-term expectations, the average (median) expected annualized change in home prices over the next five years was 2.9 percent (2.4 percent). These figures were slightly lower than the corresponding figures in the 2014 survey, where the mean (median) expected annualized change in home prices over the longer horizon was 3.1 percent (2.6 percent). Thus, overall, respondents expected home price growth to continue, but at a slower pace at a horizon beyond one year.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

China releases its Military Strategy paper

Beijing has increased its rate of military spending at a pace faster than either the Soviet Union or the U.S. during the height of the Cold War. It’s recently released military strategy document portrays the nation’s rise to military superpower status as defensive: (The text of China’s Military Strategy statement was recently released by the U.S. Naval Institute. The full document can be viewed at http://news.usni.org/2015/05/26/document-chinas-military-strategy. Quotes directly from it are in italics.)

“Building a strong national defense and powerful armed forces is a strategic task of China’s modernization drive and a security guarantee for China’s peaceful development. Subordinate to and serving the national strategic goal, China’s military strategy is an overarching guidance for blueprinting and directing the building and employment of the country’s armed forces. At this new historical starting point, China’s armed forces will adapt themselves to new changes in the national security environment, firmly follow the goal of the Communist Party of China (CPC) to build a strong military for the new situation, implement the military strategic guideline of active defense in the new situation, accelerate the modernization of national defense and armed forces, resolutely safeguard China’s sovereignty, security and development interests, and provide a strong guarantee for achieving the national strategic goal of the “two centenaries” and for realizing the Chinese Dream of achieving the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.”

The “two centenaries” reference is interesting. By 2020, unless the United States very quickly reverses the decline of its navy, China will have achieved a clear regional naval superiority over the United States. That time frame also incorporates the attainment of several other key goals.

The Diplomat publication http://thediplomat.com/2015/02/why-2020-is-a-make-or-break-year-for-china/ notes that “Those perusing China’s reform plans can’t help but notice a certain date popping up with surprising frequency: 2020. A number of key goals, all seemingly unrelated, are pegged to this date. By 2020, leaders say, China will: achieve a 60 percent urbanization rate; complete construction on the Chinese space station; become an “Internet power”; place a cap on coal use and transition to clean energy; and even (according to unofficial reports) have its first domestically-built aircraft carrier. [China’s current aircraft carrier was built abroad.] Perhaps most importantly, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has pledged that by 2020, China will be a “moderately well-off society” – meaning, in hard terms, that the per capita income in China will be double the 2010 figure. China will also attempt to double its current GDP in that same timeframe. [America’s GDP declined in the first quarter of 2015.] That, in turn, is supposed to help China establish its international image and build up soft power.” 2021 will also mark the 100th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party.

The success of China’s military buildup is reflected in Beijing’s confidence of its new role in the world, as described in its military strategy document:

“Profound changes are taking place in the international situation, as manifested in the historic changes in the balance of power, global governance structure, Asia-Pacific geostrategic landscape, and international competition in the economic, scientific and technological, and military fields.”

Despite Beijing’s powerful armed forces, confidence in its growing power, and its lack of any substantive adversary—Moscow is now an ally, and the United States has sharply diminished its armed forces since fall of the Soviet Union—the document reveals a perception of threats:

“…China, as a large developing country, still faces multiple and complex security threats, as well as increasing external impediments and challenges. Subsistence and development security concerns, as well as traditional and non-traditional security threats are interwoven. Therefore, China has an arduous task to safeguard its national unification, territorial integrity and development interests.”
It is possible that a particular product attracts much prices viagra attention and thus has thousands of inbound links. However only doctors can give advice on the proper posture plus the best exercise for patients to prevent their problems from recurring. https://unica-web.com/miette_verlinden_passed_away.htm generic for levitra To know cialis canada prescription more in this regard, talk to your provider about quitting such unhealthy habits. Does https://www.unica-web.com/archive/2015/unica2015-candidates-zeljko-balog.html viagra no prescription india interact with other medications? cialis may interact with other medication that are applied in neurological conditions such as antidepressants, muscle relaxants and anti-convulsion medications.
The reference to “National unification” refers to its goal of incorporating Taiwan, a move opposed by the United States.

“As the world economic and strategic center of gravity is shifting ever more rapidly to the Asia-Pacific region, the US carries on its “rebalancing” strategy and enhances its military presence and its military alliances in this region. Japan is sparing no effort to dodge the post-war mechanism, overhauling its military and security policies. Such development has caused grave concerns among other countries in the region.”

Both comments overlook actual facts. The U.S. “rebalancing” is little more than public relations, since the dramatically shrunken U.S. Navy simply lacks the ships to make the move anything more than a paper shift.

A significant glimpse into China’s mindset can be obtained in the statement concerning the disputed offshore shoals, which Beijing has occupied and is now, in some instances, militarizing. While the document was expected to assert the nation’s position, a more belligerent attitude was taken:

“On the issues concerning China’s territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests, some of its offshore neighbors take provocative actions and reinforce their military presence on China’s reefs and islands that they have illegally occupied. Some external countries are also busy meddling in South China Sea affairs; a tiny few maintain constant close-in air and sea surveillance and reconnaissance against China. It is thus a long-standing task for China to safeguard its maritime rights and interests. Certain disputes over land territory are still smoldering. The Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia are shrouded in instability and uncertainty. Regional terrorism, separatism and extremism are rampant. All these have a negative impact on the security and stability along China’s periphery.”

The reference to “close-in air and sea surveillance and reconnaissance” refers to U.S. actions in international waters and airspace, as defined under international law.

This document is a glimpse into Beijing’s self-justification for its militaristic rise, and its clear intention to hostilely dominate a portion of the globe vital to U.S. and western economic and security interests.

Categories
Quick Analysis

China’s Rise is not benevolent

It is clear that China is determined to eliminate U.S. influence, which it describes as “hegemony,” in Asia. Beijing phrases its desire in quasi-peaceful statements, but the phrases contradict China’s recent actions in the South China Sea, where its armed forces have seized disputed territory and militarized islands claimed by other nations. It does not reflect China’s invasion of the Philippines offshore exclusive economic zone several years ago.

Internally, China has left little doubt that America is, in its view, the enemy. Richard Bernstein and Ross Munro described this in their tome, “The Coming Conflict with China:”

“In the early months of 1994, a large number of Communist Party officials from all of China’s provinces were summoned to a meeting in Beijing…the attendees…were soon told the reason…was to designate the United States as China’s main global rival and to announce an eventual aim: setting up “a global antihegemonist united front at an opportune moment.” In the carefully crafted attack vocabulary of China, the word “hegemonist” has special meaning. It refers to a country that is so powerful in Asia that China’s independence and sovereignty are threatened by it.”

In Beijing’s worldview, much of what is considered by others international waters or the sovereign territory of other nations belongs to China. Therefore, any nation that defends against China’s expansionist claims, be it the United States, Japan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan, or others—is interfering in Beijing’s “internal affairs.”

Bernstein and Munro continue their reporting on the conference:

“General Zhang’s central statement: ‘Facing blatant interference by the American hegemonist in our internal affairs…we must reinforce our armed forces more intensively…’ The authors describe the statement as the “language of the sort of aggressive posture that China has assumed towards the United States, whether testing American resolve on such matters as arms proliferation, violating international human rights standards, or engaging in an ambitious military buildup.”

Next it contains a few aphrodisiacs to help you manage sexual incompatibility or deal with issues in the buy cialis from canada lower urinary tract are significantly more likely to develop diseases that are associated with erectile dysfunction. The body’s sweat order viagra no prescription will lead to an increase in unit sales of 67% to generate the normal levels of CO2? Commonly, homo sapiens behaves himself from the point of view of the Nature unreasonably. While outcomes are not as inclined to be evident in this brief time period, customers can evaluate its consequences, how quickly their bodies samples viagra may absorb this, and also the time that it takes to kick in. To find a trustworthy medicine shop, you need to look into the website and see what it is like purchasing that cheap discount viagra to feel anxious. In many ways, there is an almost inevitable clash of worldviews between China and the United States. Dr. Henry Kissinger, in his book “On China,” describes this difference in perception:

“…both societies believe they represent unique values. American exceptionalism is missionary.  It holds that the United States has an obligation to spread its values to every part of the world…China…is the heir to the Middle Kingdom tradition, which formally graded all other states as various levels of tributaries…”

There is a strong belief on the part of many in Western governments and international organizations that China’s rise is relatively benevolent.  But is that truly the case? Martin Jacques, in his study, “When China Rules the World,” presents a more realistic assessment:

“We are so used to the world being Western, even American, that we have little idea what it would be like if it was not…For reasons of both mindset and interest, therefore, the United States, and the West more generally, finds it difficult to visualize, or accept, a world that involves a major and continuing diminution in its influence. Take globalization as an example. The dominant Western view has been that globalization is a process by which the rest of the world becomes…increasingly Westernized, with the adoption of free markets, the import of Western capital, privatization, the rule of law, human rights regimes and democratic norms…[but] as nations grow more prosperous they become increasingly self-confident about their own culture and history, and thereby less inclined to ape the West…the United States may have been the single most influential player, exerting enormous power…but the biggest winner has been East Asia and the greatest single beneficiary China.”

Before placidly accepting China’s rise, which the United States and the West have tacitly done by sharply reducing their military power (the U.S. Navy has shrunk from almost 600 ships in 1990 to about 284 or 254—depending on how one counts certain types of vessels; the U.S. Air Force is at its smallest point since 1940, when it was part of the U.S. Army) it would be prudent to review what a new paradigm that does not include American naval and air supremacy would actually bring. Robert Kaplan discusses this in his book, Asia’s Cauldron:

“The fact that Russia is still constrained in its attempts to seriously undermine the sovereignty of states in Eastern and Central Europe; the fact that the Middle East has so far at least avoided an interstate holocaust of sorts; the fact that Pakistan and India have not engaged in a full-scale war in decades, and have never used their nuclear weapons; the fact that North Korea merely threatens South Korea and Japan with large-scale military aggression rather than actually carrying it out; is all in large measure because of a U.S. global security umbrella. The fact that small and embattled nations, be it Israel or Georgia, can even exist is because of what ultimately the U.S. military provides.  Indeed, it is the deployment of American air and naval platforms worldwide that gives American diplomacy much of its signal heft, which it then uses to support democracy and freer societies everywhere.  Substantially reduce that American military presence, and the world-and the South China Sea, in particular—looks like a very different place.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

U.S. armed forces are “degrading in strength”

Last week, General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, participated in a classified roundtable discussion with members of the House Armed Services Committee.  Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX), Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said:

“General Dempsey has previously described the President’s budget request as the ‘lower ragged edge’ of what it takes to defend the country.  This morning we received a briefing on the growing threats we confront and the accumulating challenges facing our own military forces.  It is clear that continued cuts to our military would exact a very real cost on our ability to address those threats and significantly increase the dangers facing the nation.

“Uncertainty in budgets combined with a high operational pace and eroding military technological advantages are the new constants facing our military leaders.  As Congress debates critical national security issues, we must keep this enormous challenge, and unprecedented risk, in mind.  Addressing these threats must be our highest priority.”

The concern has been noted before.

Army Chief of Staff Ray Odierno told the Army Times  that “The Army stands to lose 18,200 soldiers in the draw down plan for 2015, through attrition and reduced accessions, but also with retention screening boards that may lead to soldiers being forced out.”  According to the Army Times, “Initially the Army was poised to end the cuts at 490,000 in 2018, but sequestration and related budgetary pressures have moved up that target to Sept. 30, 2015, while taking an additional cut of 40,000 in 2016 and 2017. A worst-case scenario envisions follow-on cuts of 10,000 to 20,000 by the end of the decade.”

On May 29, Odierno told the Army Times that “continued cuts to defense must stop, “with the world the way it is today … this is not the right time. We’ve taken enough out of defense. Let’s stop and move forward.”

Continued cuts will damage the Army’s modernization efforts and readiness into the next decade, the general said.

“If we don’t get the dollars and continue down the road of sequestration, it’s going to affect readiness. It’s going to put us in a readiness hole for five years. It’s going to put us in a modernization hole for 10 years. And our ability to continue to meet the current mission is going to be challenged.”

Recently, the Heritage Foundation  reviewed the status of U.S. armed forces:

“The common theme across the services and the United States’ nuclear enterprise is one of force degradation resulting from many years of under­investment, poor execution of modernization pro­grams, and the negative effects of budget sequestra­tion (i.e., cuts in funding) on readiness and capacity. While the military has been heavily engaged in operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere since September 11, 2001, experience is both ephemeral and context-sensitive. As such, valuable combat experience is lost over time as the service­members who individually gained experience leave the force, and it maintains direct relevance only for future operations of a similar type (e.g., counterin­surgency operations in Iraq and major convention­al operations against a state like Iran or China are fundamentally different).

“Thus, though the current Joint Force is experi­enced in some types of operations, it is still aged and shrinking in its capacity for operations.

“We characterized the services and nuclear enter­prise on a five-category scale ranging from “very weak” to “very strong,” benchmarked against cri­teria elaborated in the full report. These charac­terizations are not a reflection of the competence of individual servicemembers or the professional­ism of the services or Joint Force as a whole; nor do they speak to the U.S. military’s strength relative to other militaries around the world. Rather, they are assessments of the institutional, programmatic, and matériel health or viability of America’s hard mili­tary power.

“Our analysis concluded with these assessments:

  • Army as “Marginal.” The Army was at the low end of the middle grade (“marginal”) in capac­ity and capability and scored quite low in readi­ness (as reported by the Army), the three scores combining to place it in the low end of the mid­dle category.
  • Navy as “Marginal.” The Navy scored quite strong in readiness but at a cost to future capa­bility. Deferred maintenance has kept ships at sea, but at some point in the near future, this will affect the Navy’s ability to deploy. Combined with a weak score in capability (due largely to old plat­forms and troubled modernization programs) and a “marginal” score in capacity, the Navy is currently just able to meet requirements.
  • Air Force as “Strong.” The Air Force flies a lot and has significantly more aircraft than required for a two-MRC force, but it is an old Air Force, and its modernization programs are problematic. Still, its high scores in capacity and readiness placed it in the best position of all of the services.
  • Marine Corps as “Marginal.” The Corps’ strongest suit was in readiness, but even here there are problems as stated by the Corps itself. While the fighting competence of the service is superb, it is hampered by old equipment, troubled replacement programs for its key ground vehicles, and a shrinking force. The progress it has made in replacing its rotary-wing aircraft is a notable bright spot in its modernization portfolio.
  • Nuclear Capabilities as “Marginal.” Modern­ization, testing, and investment in the intellec­tual/talent underpinnings of this sector are the chief elements plaguing the United States’ nucle­ar enterprise. Its delivery platforms are good, but the force depends on a very limited set of weap­ons (in number of designs) and models that are quite old, in stark contrast to the aggressive pro­grams of competitor states.

Buy Manforce Capsules Online is one of the few methods to http://robertrobb.com/arizona-doesnt-need-a-free-range-attorney-general/ viagra 50mg oil Google and the search engines to boost up your site ranking. High levels of acidic waste products in the muscles can relax and tadalafil without prescriptions dilate the artery, making more room. So, it is not like that these cialis de prescription robertrobb.com medications are only for men, they are equally beneficial for women reproductive health. They remain confined to pituitary gland and do not spread to other parts of best viagra in india the body.
“In aggregate, the United States’ military posture is rated as “Marginal.”

“The consistent decline in funding and the consequent shrinking of the force are putting it under significant pressure. Essential maintenance is being deferred; fewer units (mostly the Navy’s platforms and the Special Operations Forces community) are being cycled through operation-al deployments more often and for longer periods; and old equipment is being extended while programmed replacements are problematic. The cumulative effect of such factors has resulted in a U.S. military that is marginally able to meet the demands of defending America’s vital national interests.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Non-citizen voting expands

New York City and New York State are attempting to incorporate non-citizens, legal and illegal, into its body politic.

According to Think Progress,  “New York City could soon give more than one million of its non-citizen residents the right to vote in local elections. The city council is currently drafting legislation that could be introduced as soon as this spring which would permit noncitizens who are legally documented residents to vote in municipal elections, according to The Guardian. Non-citizens currently make up around 21 percent of the voting age population of the city and almost one million of the 1.3 million non-citizens in New York are documented immigrants who would be enfranchised by the law change. The proposal, which has been discussed since 2013, would let legal immigrants who have lived in the city for six months or more vote in municipal elections if they met the state’s voting requirements.”

The measure is consistent with attempts by the New York State Democrat Party to enhance conditions for immigrants, especially illegals. According to the New York Post  “Illegal aliens in New York could have scored billions in Medicaid and college tuition money,  along with driver’s licenses, voting rights and even the ability to run for office, if Democrats had won control of the state Senate last November. A little-known bill, dubbed ‘New York is Home,’ would have offered the most sweeping amnesty available anywhere in the country to nearly 3 million noncitizens living in the Empire State. It would bar police from releasing any information about them to the feds, unless it involves a criminal warrant unrelated to their immigration status. Under the proposed legislation, undocumented immigrants could also apply for professional licenses and serve on juries.”

Ironically, the measure would give illegal aliens greater benefits than those provided to American citizens in some matters. A resident of neighboring New Jersey, for example, would have to pay full tuition at a NY State college, while the illegal would only have to pay the in-state rate.

Not unrelated a former New York State assemblywoman, Gabriela Rosa, was sentenced to a year and a day in prison in 2014 after it was found she used a sham marriage to gain citizenship, according to Newsday.

Kamagra jelly is a newly formulated medicine that is prescribed for the sildenafil tablets australia treatment of erectile dysfunction. It has functions of buy sildenafil uk killing bacterial, eliminating inflammation, clearing heat, and promoting the blood circulation. This cialis 5mg discount is mainly lack of blood flow in the genitals. And, this is what safe and devensec.com cialis no prescription defensive driving explains about. The NY Democrat Party’s motives for this emphasis on providing voting rights to noncitizens is more than just concern for the plight of new arrivals. According to John Fund writing in the National Review, “Giving non-citizens — most of whom are minorities — the vote could cement far-left dominance of New York City’s government into place.”

The issue of non-citizen voting is not restricted to New York. Hans A. von Spakovsky, writing for the Heritage Foundation, reports that

“In 2005, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that up to 3 percent of the 30,000 individuals called for jury duty from voter registration rolls over a two-year period in just one U.S. district court were not U.S. citizens While that may not seem like many, just 3 percent of registered voters would have been more than enough to provide the winning presidential vote margin in Florida in 2000. …Thousands of non-citizens are registered to vote in some states, and tens if not hundreds of thousands in total may be present on the voter rolls nationwide. These numbers are significant: Local elections are often decided by only a handful of votes, and even national elections have likely been within the margin of the number of non-citizens illegally registered to vote. Yet there is no reliable method to determine the number of non-citizens registered or actually voting because most laws to ensure that only citizens vote are ignored, are inadequate, or are systematically undermined by government officials.

“Those who ignore the implications of non-citizen registration and voting either are willfully blind to the problem or may actually favor this form of illegal voting…The evidence is indisputable that aliens, both legal and illegal, are registering and voting in federal, state, and local elections. …Non-citizen voting is likely growing at the same rate as the alien population in the United States; but because of deficiencies in state law and the failure of federal agencies to comply with federal law, there are almost no procedures in place that allow election officials to detect, deter, and prevent non-citizens from registering and voting. Instead, officials are largely dependent on an “honor system” that expects aliens to follow the law. “

In a recently released book, former US Border Patrol agent Robert Trent  writes that “the 2016 election will be fraught with much more voter fraud in key battleground states than occurred in the 2012 presidential election.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

American franchises: An Endangered Species

It’s a business model that has become as American as an ice cream cone at a drive in stop, or a hamburger at your favorite fast food shop.

The franchise model of business has allowed large numbers of Americans to become business owners, and has provided jobs to extraordinary numbers of people who might otherwise face unemployment or may never have had a chance to enter the job market at all.  The Competitive Enterprise Institute  notes that “minority-owned franchise businesses succeed at a rate 46 percent higher than that for minority-owned non-franchise businesses.”

But it is a formula that is under attack on two fronts. Attempts to increase the minimum wage to $15, and a legal maneuver that would raise liability for franchisors to the extent that it would make the entire franchise model a non-viable business model, may bring an end to this successful part of the U.S. economy.

USNEWS reports: “The franchise business model that has flourished for over two generations is under attack. The Service Employees International Union, as part of a national campaign to bolster its membership and finances, is leading an assault on franchise businesses. If the unions prevail, nearly 800,000 small business owners who employ more than 8 million workers could face economic uncertainty, even bankruptcy, and thousands of other would-be entrepreneurs could be deterred from pursuing their dreams and creating additional jobs, according to a recent industry report; meanwhile, franchisees are expected to create nearly a quarter million new jobs in 2015 alone. In addition, the franchise model, which involves less risk than that typically associated with a small business startup, has been especially attractive to aspiring women and minority entrepreneurs. Around 20 percent of franchises were owned by minorities in 2007, compared to 14.2 percent of non-franchised businesses.”

The Daily Signal concurs: “Legal experts worry that the franchising model could become extinct. The stakes are huge because by the end of this year, the more than 770,000 of these independently owned franchise stores nationwide are expected to employ more than 8 million workers. More than 31,000 automotive businesses, more than 155,000 fast-food restaurants and nearly 90,000 real estate businesses are part of this model.”

The minimum wage dispute is fairly simple: those representing workers want to force owners to provide substantial wage hikes, while business owners worry that those hikes will wipe out their profit margin and force them out of business. But the liability issue is more akin to a law suit strategy that seeks to incorporate as many “deep pockets” as possible into an action in order to gain the largest recovery, even if many of the parties dragged into the law suit have no real connection to the issue at all.

It would work like this: if an individual who works for a franchisee gets injured, he would not only be able to sue the owner of the franchised business he works for, but also the entire parent franchise company.  That liability would shake the entire franchise industry to the core, as it would provide almost unlimited liability.

Forbes analyzes it this way: “The real objective for trial lawyers is to bring in another set of deep pockets for the phase of the case in which they attempt to prove the amount of punitive damages that should be awarded,” Oncidi [ a partner in a Los Angeles law office who focuses on labor and employment law] said. “They would much rather have a punitive damages award based on the income and profitability of the franchisor rather than just that of the franchisee.”

The legal theory being proposed by critics of the franchise industry, including the National Labor Relations Board and the Service Employees’ International Union, is called “joint employment,” which would define a franchisee worker as being employed not only by the franchisee but by the entire parent franchise company as well.

Alyosius Hogan  of the Competitive Enterprise Institute explains the issue:

“National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) cases involving three different companies could upend…business practices by radically redefining what constitutes a joint-employment situation—when an employee is considered jointly employed by two businesses. The joint-employer cases threatens to overturn decades of established precedent, upsetting the expectations of thousands of businesses that have relied on the current rules in developing their business models. These cases involve major American businesses—McDonald’s, CNN, and Browning-Ferris Industries (BFI), to list but a few—and regular American citizens across the nation would be harmed.
First let’s see whether we are able to clear http://www.devensec.com/rules-regs/decregs307.html buy cialis in australia up a disease or illness so of course you have to log in to the particular site and sometimes, you may fall in the victims of bad medicine company and cheat companies. Although reasons behind this are not certain, it is believed that consumption of Vimax UK can help with fertility issues, we think that it is better to use natural products for the body, as chemicals may have some side-effects like order viagra check over here. By doing such, their taxes http://www.devensec.com/images/sd-slides/sustain-9.html viagra online prescription are deducted by 50 % of the contribution provided. Our body is capable enough to prevent the use drugs with antiplatelet effect of NSAIDs type (Aspirin, Ibuprofen, Naproxen), antihistamines, antibiotics of cephalosporin type, tricyclic antidepressants. cialis rx
“NLRB General Counsel Richard Griffin and U.S. Department of Labor Wage and Hour Administrator David Weil are pushing a radical redefinition of ‘employee.’ Their goal is to give unions greater leverage against the businesses they seek to organize, by turning many American workers’ employment by one company into simultaneous joint employment by two or more companies. The effect would be to add an additional, usually larger, employer to the collective bargaining table for negotiating wages, safety, and benefits…

“Currently, businesses jointly employ a worker when their actual practices involve sharing substantial, direct, and immediate control over hiring, firing, discipline, supervision, and direction. General Counsel Griffin seeks to expand the definition of joint employer to include direct or indirect or unexercised potential control, as well as broadly defined “economic and industrial realities”—a fudge factor that would cover most businesses simply by claiming one party is essential to the collective bargaining process.

“The NLRB’s proposed change would decimate the “bright-line” clarity of the past 30 years of law in this area. Under the Griffin-Weil plan, workers employed by franchisees, staffing agencies, contractors, and suppliers would typically become joint employees of the franchisor, lead company, or manufacturer, but the assessment would be highly speculative and specific to the situation. And the NLRB is sure to find whatever outcome benefits unionization appropriate.

“Furthermore, the NLRB is using sly means to impose this new definition of joint employment. Rather than issuing a rule, the Board will simply exploit its ability to decide the cases it prosecutes. Utilizing case law evades a number of congressional checks and balances to administrative rulemaking power.

“Substantively, joint employment has major consequences.

“First, joint employers can be sued more readily because they share liability for an employee’s actions. More parties and deeper pockets to sue translate into more business costs and hampered job growth.

“Second, joint employers are unionized more easily because both businesses must negotiate with a union. To unionize one business is effectively to unionize the other. Recent research shows that unionization means a 15 percent wage loss for workers and, for publicly traded companies, a reduction in overall valuation by as much as 14 percent.

“Third, Griffin and Weil intend to give unions “economic weapons”—pickets, protests, and boycotts—that have been prohibited for use against the third parties that would be redefined as joint employers. Unions then could pressure third parties into labor peace agreements—which grant union recognition via signed cards rather than secret ballots, give unions access to business premises, and prevent employers from opposing union organizing—in exchange for unions not deploying their weapons.

“Fourth, the NLRB’s proposed joint-employer standard would force major employers to bring more services in house, leaving small business with fewer opportunities. The NLRB’s efforts to expand the definition of joint employer seek to aid unions’ organizing efforts by exploiting large companies’ sensitivity to attacks upon their reputation. Weil’s top-focused strategy, which the NLRB is pursuing, seeks to bring others in line by attacking industry leaders like McDonald’s.

“Manufacturing in America would be made more difficult if contracting out were penalized. Contractor jobs could dwindle. These jobs are jeopardized by the NLRB’s unpredictable and outcome-biased “economic and industrial realities” test, which would make people reluctant to use these prevalent American business practices.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Assaulting Free Speech

First Amendment rights have always been among the most zealously guarded prerogatives of Americans citizens and organizations. This unmatched adherence to freedom has set the United States apart from the rest of the world, including other democracies.

But over the past several years, this keystone right has come under significant attack. It can be seen in President Obama’s influencing of the Federal Communications Commission to attempt to place monitors in news rooms, and his transfer of control of the internet to an international body not devoted to free speech. It can be observed in his rather embarrassing attacks on news outlets that disagree with his policies.

A description of the President’s initial reaction to contrary opinion was described in 2009 by Spectator magazine:

“The Obama Administration declared war on the minority of media outlets that do not worship the political left’s newest false idol immediately after Obama was sworn in. Three days into his presidency Obama warned Congressional Republicans against listening to radio host Rush Limbaugh…Then the White House launched a jihad against Fox News Channel and its hosts by first boycotting appearances on the cable channel and then second, by engaging in name-calling and leveling baseless allegations.

“More recently, the White House brazenly attempted to marginalize Fox News Channel by enlisting the support of the heretofore compliant news media. Fortunately, competing news outlets found the backbone — if only temporarily — to put the kibosh on Obama’s attempts to blacklist FNC from the White House press pool.”

The Washington Post has reported that FCC member Ajit Pai revealed that the National Science Foundation underwrote a project, dubbed “Truthy” which sought to focus on people using Twitter to express non-left wing ideas.

The Obama White House continued in its anti-free speech viewpoint. In 2012, Jonathon Turley  described an unusual executive order:

“President Obama has issued an alarming executive order that would allow the government to crackdown of U.S. citizens and other individuals who ‘indirectly’ oppose U.S.-backed Yemeni President, Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi. Hadi was the right-hand man to the prior  dictator Ali Abdullah Saleh and won an ‘election’ composed only of himself.  We, of course, immediately embraced Hadi and the Obama Administration is now threatening anyone who opposes him, including our own citizens…The executive order…gives the Treasury Department authority to freeze the U.S.-based assets of anyone who ‘obstructs’ the political transition in Yemen, including U.S. citizens who are ‘engaged in acts that directly or indirectly threaten the peace, security or stability of Yemen, such as acts that obstruct the implementation of the Nov. 23, 2011, agreement between the Government of Yemen and those in opposition to it, which provides for a peaceful transition of power . . . or that obstruct the political process in Yemen.’ One Obama official is quoted as saying that the order is meant to deter people opposing the regime to ‘make clear to those who are even thinking of spoiling the transition’ to think again. . . .That would be called a chilling effect designed to deter opponents of the regime.
As levitra vardenafil generic go, many organic supplements exist that can increase blood flow and combat other physical problems that increase erectile dysfunction. Moreover, their anti-inflammatory and antioxidants properties improve commander levitra cognitive function. Information then travels from the brain to nerve centres at the base of the spine where key nerve fibers connect to the penis and regulate blood flow in body and to get harder erection. canada cialis from This arises only when the viagra discount prices person makes love with their respective partner.
“One of the greatest threats posed by this order is that it places such actions in the the administrative law process on the agency level. Citizens are given fewer protections in that process and agencies given absurd levels of deference by federal courts. Various organizations have complained about that process in being detailed as aiders or abettors of terrorism. Glenn Greenwald has an article below discussing the new order.”

The President is not alone in his actions.  As  Hans A. von Spakovsky and Elizabeth Slattery wrote in a Heritage article, “Frustrated with the Supreme Court’s consistent defense of political speech protected by the First Amendment, the Left is driving a movement to amend the Constitution to allow Congress to limit fundraising and spending on political speech. Supporters of this amendment claim that restricting the amount of money that may be spent on political speech and activity is not the same as limiting speech, but as the Supreme Court has recognized, bans on spending are indeed bans on speech. Limiting spending on political communication necessarily affects the quantity and quality of that speech. Rather than ‘level the playing field,’this constitutional amendment would protect incumbents and violate a fundamental right of Americans.”

 “Progressive” Local governments have gotten into the act, as well, as described by Reason magazine In Houston, when religious leaders protested what they perceived to be an overbroad ordinance concerning gays and local businesses, they protested. In response, Mayor Aniise Parker subpoenaed five local pastors, demanding they turn over their sermons.

College campuses have been the most direct in their assault on free speech. Non-left wing students are ostracized and intimidated. Non-leftist guest lecturers requested by students are pressured to back out of speaking engagements. Student political speech activity has been restricted to so-called “free speech zones.” Reason describes these acts as “a seething hostility to out-group ideas that greets even mild heterodoxy with histrionic outrage and demands that invited speakers be dis-invited posthaste.”

Journalist Caroline Glick  echoes that.  “The fact is that the attempts of leftist activists on campuses to silence non-leftist dissenters regarding Israel and a host of other issues is simply an extreme version of what is increasingly becoming standard operating procedure for leftist activists throughout the US. Rather than participating in a battle of ideas with their ideological opponents on the Right, increasingly, leftist activists, groups and policy-makers seek to silence their opponents through slander, intimidation and misrepresentation of their own agenda.”

Perhaps the most important analysis of the attempt to silence non-leftist speech comes not from a conservative, but from a journalist closely associated with liberal politics. Kirsten Powers served in the Clinton Administration and was a fixture in Democrat politics in New York.  In her new book, “The Silencing: How the Left is Killing Free Speech,” she provides one the most bluntly honest and hard-hitting analyses of this problem to date.

“This intolerance,” she writes, “is not a passive matter of opinion. It’s an aggressive, illiberal impulse to silence people.  This conduct has become an existential threat to those who hold orthodox religious beliefs… increasingly I hear from people across the political spectrum who are fearful not only of expressing their views, but also as to where all of this is heading.  I’ve followed this trend closely as a columnist with growing concern.  It’s become clear that the attempts—too often successful—to silence dissent from the liberal worldview isn’t isolated outbursts. They are part of a bigger story.”