Wednesday, March 10, 2021

It Has Come To A Mental Test Time! Will Cancel Culture Win In The End? Democracy In Decline. Pelosi So Drunk With Power She Is Actually Drunk.







 









+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

It has come to this:

The Biden’s are seated together at a nice restaurant and the waiter comes over to take their orders:

 

He says to Mrs. Biden, “Good evening Dr. Biden.  Have you decided on an entrée?”

 

“Yes,” she replies.  “I’ll have the New York strip, medium rare.”

 

“Very good,” says the waiter.  “And for the vegetable?”

 

She answers, “Oh!  He’ll have the same!””


And This:



And:

This from my friend and fellow memo reader, Jeff Crouere:



Countdown to Kamala?
In today's new article, I investigate the latest questions being asked about President Joe Biden. In his first 50 days, he has not conducted one press conference or given a State of the Union address. In his media appearances, he has been very unsteady and at times forgetful. For example, the other day he forgot the name of his new Secretary of Defense. He also forgot the name of Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, one of the most prominent members in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Is he mentally fit to serve in the most important position in the free world? If so, he should submit to a mental competency test to show Americans that he can perform the duties of the President of the United States. If he is unable to serve, Vice President Kamala Harris would assume the presidency. It seems likely she will be called on to serve before the end of the term. The question is when will the transition occur?

Do you share these concerns about the President?

Finally :

Nearly every day Biden does something that is irrational or appoints someone who is not competent.  The article above asks a valid question.  Should Biden be required to undergo a medical examination by a group of independent doctors who will certify his ability to execute his responsibilities or has he reached such a demented state he should not be allowed to function as president ?

Bad Judgment and Biden’s Pentagon

Colin Kahl is the wrong choice to be chief Defense strategist.

By


Colin Kahl appears before a Senate Committee on Armed Services hearing regarding his nomination to be Under Secretary of Defense for Policy on March 4.

Photo: Rod Lamkey - Cnp/Zuma Press

Another Biden nominee with a record of intemperate tweets is at risk of sinking in the Senate, and the press is comparing him to Neera Tanden, the President’s withdrawn first pick to lead the Office of Management and Budget. Yet whoever replaces Ms. Tanden is unlikely to change the trajectory of the Biden Administration’s progressive policies.


The Pentagon nomination of Colin Kahl, a dogmatic proponent of the Iran nuclear deal, is another story. A no vote in the Senate Armed Services Committee could push the Administration toward a Mideast approach that better serves America’s national interest.


President Biden has tapped Mr. Kahl for undersecretary of defense for policy, one of the most important non-cabinet jobs in the federal government. While the Secretary of Defense handles high-level defense politics, and the deputy secretary manages the department day-to-day, the undersecretary plays the leading role setting strategy—including representing the department at National Security Council deputies meetings.


Mr. Kahl’s strategic Mideast misjudgments have been pronounced. In 2015 as Mr. Biden’s national security adviser, Mr. Kahl argued for sanctions relief on Iran, declaring they “are not going to spend the vast majority of the money on guns, most of it will go to butter.” In the event, Tehran took advantage of the windfall to increase its financing for proxies in Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.


Out of government Mr. Kahl relentlessly assailed the Trump Administration’s reorientation of Iran policy, tweeting in 2019 that “hawks” in Congress “won’t be satisfied until they get the war they’ve pushed for decades.” Democrat Joe Manchin, the swing vote on Armed Services who opposed the Iran deal and applauded President Trump’s 2018 withdrawal, might be interested in whether Mr. Kahl thinks he is a warmonger as well.


Mr. Kahl seems unable to see the strategic benefits to U.S. interests in containing Iran. He sees only apocalyptic risks. After the U.S. strike that killed Iranian terror commander Qasem Soleimani, who had the blood of thousands of Americans on his hands, Mr. Kahl’s reaction on Twitter was that “Trump has started a war with Iran in Iraq.” War never came.


When the U.S. decided to move its Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, Mr. Kahl declared “Trump’s Jerusalem decision further isolates the US” and warned of a “third Intifada,” or Palestinian uprising. Yet the Embassy move strengthened America’s ties with its closest Middle Eastern ally. The Trump Administration’s wider Mideast rebalancing toward Israel and the Gulf states helped broker closer Arab-Israeli ties, culminating in the 2020 Abraham Accords.


Mr. Kahl described the accords in his hearing as the “culmination of a set of trends, frankly, that have been in the region for about a decade.” Yet he doesn’t recognize how U.S. courtship of Iran can destabilize the region. He doesn’t seem to have revised his thinking on the 2015 nuclear agreement at all, though even some proponents of the deal acknowledge that the Trump Administration’s sanctions on Iran packed more punch than they thought possible.


Senators last week also pressed Mr. Kahl on the idea of a “no-first use” nuclear policy, which would damage the credibility of American deterrence and which Joe Biden endorsed when Mr. Kahl was his adviser. Mr. Kahl didn’t give a clear position in a written answer to the committee, though at the hearing he said he opposed it. One 2017 tweet also seems to suggest skepticism of America’s planned Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent missile system.


Democratic administrations lean more on diplomacy and soft power than Republican administrations, and that’s clearly team Biden’s preference. But with the State Department stacked with liberal internationalists, and John Kerry as a cabinet-level climate envoy, it’s important for the Pentagon to provide a counter-perspective.


Mr. Kahl’s nomination is in jeopardy for bombastic tweets like his claim that “every Republican Senator” who supported arms sales to Saudi Arabia “shares ownership of the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.” But there are sound policy reasons for the Senate to exercise its advice and consent power to demand a more hard-headed strategic thinker for this crucial national-security post.

 
From my friend and fellow memo reade+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Can it also be saved from radical Democrats?

Can liberalism be saved from cancel culture?

A former community-relations exec wants to rescue the organized Jewish world from a woke cultural revolution that threatens its basic values.

(March 9, 2021 / JNS) David Bernstein is a self-described “man of the left.” He’s spent his adult life working in the institutions that embody the ethos of modern Jewish liberalism. That culminated in a five-year term as president and CEO of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, the umbrella group of Jewish community relations councils across the country. As such, no one was in a better position to be a spokesman for the politically liberal policies and credo of the organized Jewish world.

So when Bernstein, who recently left JCPA to start a consultancy and work with the British group Counterweight, says that American Jewish liberalism is being threatened by the growing power of woke cancel culture, he should be taken seriously.

According to Bernstein, in the last year since the death of George Floyd set off a summer of Black Lives Matter demonstrations, an already growing willingness among liberal Jews and their institutions to embrace critical race theory has gotten out of control. Instead of treating ideas about white supremacy and white privilege as dubious if debatable concepts, especially as they relate to Jews, they are being treated by many people on the left as an orthodoxy that must be accepted without debate, and those who disagree shamed and silenced. This is not just stifling discussions about race as the dead hand of cancel culture has taken control of the discussion in many Jewish forums. He thinks it’s also having a disturbing impact on the way anti-Semitism is being discussed, as well as undermining the basic ideas about civil liberties that are the foundation of a thriving American Jewish community.

If this trend isn’t halted, he says, “One day we’re going to wake up and realize that many of our most cherished ideas have been swept away.” Critical race theory, a concept that sees everything through the prism of racial identity, is itself “fundamentally illiberal.” That means the triumph of woke sensibilities is leading to a situation where “unless liberals are willing to speak out, our core institutions will be corrupted by ideologies that are at odds with liberalism.”

Part of it is what Bernstein calls “concept creep,” in which ideas such as “equity” now mean something very different than in the past. Whereas earlier, liberals sought equal opportunity for all, now the woke left has redefined it as a demand for unequal treatment.

At the heart of it is the idea of “systemic racism.”

While Bernstein believes that racism does exist and must be addressed, it is a very different thing to say that America is a systemically racist nation. That is where he draws the line, and that puts him on the other side from many in the organized Jewish world who appeared to have embraced the idea—epitomized by The New York Times’ fallacious take on American history, “The 1619 Project”—that America is an inherently racist country.

“Embracing the term of ‘white supremacy’ to describe a country that is the most successful example of pluralism in human history is wrong,” says Bernstein. And in doing so, those who are ready to brand anyone who dissents as racist are “short-circuiting the conversation” that is essential to both democracy and a healthy environment in which Jewish communities can thrive. But saying that in public without fear of reprisal is becoming more difficult, especially within the Jewish organizational world.

Integral to this problem is the cult-like devotion to books about “anti-racism” such as Robin D’Angelo’s White Fragility, which not only badly distorts the discussion about race but is regarded by its adherents as something that cannot be questioned. Bernstein thinks the fact that many Jewish organizations are not only assigning such a book as part of anti-racism training, but treating it as if it were the Bible, has created a situation where dissent or even discussion becomes impossible. Under those circumstances, anyone who has the gall to speak up or raise questions about the validity of such exercises becomes the focus of opprobrium that smacks of the struggle sessions of China’s totalitarian cultural revolution. That’s the symptom of an idea that has crossed over from discourse to a religious movement that treats discussion as heresy.

Among the dangers this raises for Jews is the way it twists how some on the left talk about anti-Semitism.

Woke ideology treats Jews as part of white supremacy. In that context, the talk about “Jewish privilege” can act as what Bernstein calls “a permission structure for anti-Semitism” since Jews are then seen as oppressors who must be humbled and their achievements dismissed, as opposed to lauded and defended. Such claims of privilege—when expressed as part of either intersectional myths about the Palestinian war on Israel as being akin to the struggle for civil rights in the United States or as a way to silence the advocacy for Jewish rights—is “not all that different from anti-Semitic tropes.”

In that same way, wokeness has acted as a brake on the obligation of Jewish groups to speak up as loudly against left-wing anti-Semitism as they do when it comes from the right. Hence, the reluctance of many in the organized world to denounce BDS supporters who traffic in anti-Semitic tropes like Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) because as a Somali African immigrant, her place on the victimhood hierarchy silences criticism from the left.

Part of it is a generational shift. Many young Jews have been educated in an academic environment in which free discourse is regarded as not being as important as the ideological diktats as critical race theorists. Dripping with guilt about their “privilege,” they have become cancel-culture shock troops in a war on the civil libertarian principles that once were the foundation of the Jewish communal agenda.

It’s also a function of the hyperpartisan tenor of the times. The majority of Jews who are ardent Democrats naturally identify not just with the cause of social justice, but often with the notion that America is racist simply because conservatives and pro-Trump Republicans disagree. Many have been persuaded that their political opponents are not just wrong but racists who lack legitimacy or good motives. The same factors that have created an unbridgeable gap between the parties are operating in the same way to silence other discussions.

So where does that leave someone like Bernstein, who describes himself as a “liberal humanist” who cares about “social justice,” but who also believes the “free exchange of ideas is the foundation of a liberal society?”

Right now, it means he’s completely out of step with much of the organized Jewish world. Jewish institutions have become caught up in the moral panic set off by the talk of “white privilege” and, despite the misgivings of some veteran liberal thinkers, being hijacked by the woke left.

That has left him determined to fight back against this illiberal fever dream that’s overwhelming Jewish institutions and to offer those within these structures advice. He wants to help them to advocate for “viewpoint diversity,” as well as including those of different races and backgrounds. Acting with the Counterweight group, he wants to aid those who will enable Jewish groups to resist the influence of toxic ideologies and practices that snuff out debate. He also seeks to help those who have fallen afoul of cancel culture.

As he is at pains to point out, that doesn’t mean he’s joined the political right. It does mean that if liberalism is to be redeemed from wokeness, then he and other principled liberals must defend ideas about individualism and free debate not from conservatives but from former allies on the left.

Given the growing strength of the left and the intolerant spirit of the times it has bolstered, this will be an uphill struggle. But it is one that both liberals and conservatives should support.

Jonathan S. Tobin is editor in chief of JNS—Jewish News Syndicate. Follow him on Twitter at: @jonathans_tobin.


And:

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

So drunk with power she is actually drunk!



+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


CapsXSoftware

No comments: