. . . Marie Harf did not invent her rather strange theory of how to defeat Islamic terrorism. She learned it. All leftists since Marx have seen the world through a materialist lens. Thus it is perfectly sensible to ignore the perverted religious justifications from ISIS for burning infidels alive and cutting off their heads. The real motive . . . well, let her explain:
THE PRESIDENT'S annual budget reminds the Beltway tribes of what they do -- tax the country, distribute revenues to their allies, and euphemize it as a budget. With his 2015 budget, Barack Obama at least makes clear his presidency's reason for being: . . .
IT DESCRIBES the use of law as a weapon of war. But the word cannot also be applied to domestic politics, as the use of criminal charges to bring down adversaries who cannot be defeated at the ballot box. The chief advocate and practitioner of political lawfare is the left. In Texas, the franchise belongs to Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg and her hard-left predecessors in office.
Recent victims, nationally, include Alaska Senator Ted Stevens. He was convicted on corruption charges that were later thrown out. Another victim, closer to home, was Texas Representative Tom DeLay. After his career and finances were ruined, all charges were thrown out.
Think what you will of his politics or character, what was done to him in our name was far worse than whatever it is he was supposed to have done. It was an abuse of power. It was profoundly anti-democratic.
SOME OF THE MOST SWEEPING and spectacular rhetoric of the Left occurred in 18th-century France, where the very concept of the Left originated in the fact that people with certain views sat on the left side of the National Assembly.
The French Revolution was their chance to show what they could do when they got the power they sought. In contrast to what they promised -- "liberty, equality, fraternity" -- what they actual produced were . . .
"SOMETIMES IT FEELS like [read as if] our nation has forgotten more than we remember about [Dr. Martin Luther King's] crusade for justice," the Houston Chronicle says today.
Folks are fixating on Dr. King's call for a colorblind society, the Chronicle says, and forgetting the economic leftism in the last year of this great man's life: "meaningful jobs at a living wage," etc.
Fair enough. But on Dr. King's legacy as on so much else, the Chronicle bids fair to serve as our city's forgetter-in-chief.
. . . of revolutionaries or, as we have it, fundamental transformers:
Burke's fundamental objection to revolutions inspired by rationalistic ideals was their arrogance. As he wrote in Reflections, "We are afraid to put men to live and trade each on his own private stock of reason; because we suspect that this stock in each man is small, and that the individuals would do better to avail themselves of the general bank and capital of nations, and of ages." In Burke's view, knowledge is held not individually but . . .
In a remarkable breach of political correctness, the Houston Chronicle ran a three-column headline today that says, "1.6 million fill Paris streets to decry Islamic extremism." Even more remarkable . . .
. . . for what ails the Democrat Party. He's an adult. He has common sense. He likes America.
But his chance of getting through the primaries is less than a snowball's. His party is dominated as it is by government employees and their unions; by welfare recipients, guilty white liberals, and trial lawyers; by race hustlers, eco-hustlers, crony capitalists, and Goldman Sachs; by university professors, college sophomores, and the crazy wing of the feminist movement; and by Occupy sympathizers, grievance mongers of every stripe, and the greater fruitcake community.
Unfortunately, one sad fact will condemn his candidacy with most of the rest of us, at least in a contest against a reasonably sane and competent GOP candidate:
[This] double assassination [of Brooklyn police officers] is . . . a moment of clarity about how thin the line in any society is between ] and anarchy. America is full of [Ismaaiyl] Brinsleys who no longer abide the norms of civilized behavior, if they even know what those norms are. They need but the slightest excuse to take justice into their own hands and go on a rampage.
Especially in urban America, the police walk that line between civilization and mayhem every day. Yet since the Garner and Brown episodes, the progressive leaders in New York and Washington have talked and behaved as if the police are society’s main problem.
They have honored with joint public appearances and private meetings such racial agitators as Al Sharpton who want to stop the “broken windows” policing that has done so much to reduce crime in poor minority neighborhoods. Mr. Holder has sent federal agents to second-guess grand juries and “reform” local police as if he assumes these police chiefs and prosecutors are biased. The New York City Council staged a “die-in” as fallen victims of police.
And progressives have failed to denounce protestors who have disrupted civic life, rampaged through stores, and even assaulted police who tried to arrest law-breakers. All of this has contributed to a public climate of suspicion and hate against police in which a man like Ismaaiyl Brinsley can in his deranged mind think it is justified to stalk and execute two cops on the beat.
New York’s police certainly believe this, as they turned their backs on Mr. de Blasio in an astonishing show of contempt when the mayor visited the hospital where the slain officers were taken. This is what happens when a mayor who is responsible for public order treats Al Sharpton with more respect than he does his own police force. The progressive campaign against police must stop before it has even uglier consequences.
(Editorial, "Progressives and the Police," wsj.com, December 21, 2014)