The Volokh ConspiracyOpinion When is it okay to scrub embarrassing statements from a news story after it’s been published on the Web?

Volokh Conspiracy  "Peter Baker and Gardiner Harris of the New York Times reported on a “private session” between President Obama and a group of reporters and columnists about his administration’s response to recent terror attacks in Paris and San Bernardino. As they explained:

The session with columnists was off the record, but the president’s remarks were recounted on Thursday by several people in the room after one of the writers, David Ignatius of The Washington Post, described some of the president’s thinking in a column without attributing it directly to Mr. Obama.

"As originally published, the article contained this passage:

In his meeting with the columnists, Mr. Obama indicated that he did not see enough cable television to fully appreciate the anxiety after the attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, and made clear that he plans to step up his public arguments. Republicans were telling Americans that he is not doing anything when he is doing a lot, he said.

"The Post’s Erik Wemple quoted this passage in a blog post last night, as didothers.

"Go to the article this morning, however, and the offending passage is gone, and there is no notation or other indication that the article is changed." . . .
Jonathan H. Adler teaches courses in constitutional, administrative, and environmental law at the Case Western University School of Law, where he is the inaugural Johan Verheij Memorial Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Business Law and Regulation.

Democrats scheduled debates on days when no one will watch

 Vox "The Democratic National Committee, which organizes the party's primary debates, has faced accusations of scheduling them on dates that will receive poor viewership in an attempt to protect frontrunner Hillary Clinton. DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz has denied these claims. There are other hints Clinton wanted less exposure, including reports that her campaign privately lobbied the DNC for fewer debates.

"But when you just look at the debate schedule, it's hard to deny its absurdity — especially when you take a look back at political debates of years past."

HRC hugs DWS

Anti-Muslim? Say goodbye to your constitutional rights

The Strident Conservative

"A pastor is facing a court trial this week on a government charge that his online sermon was grossly offensive to the point of being criminal, and the outcome of the case could determine whether Christian Pastors will be allowed to preach biblical doctrine in the United Kingdom in the future.

"Following the sermon where he described Islam as a “doctrine spawned in hell,” Pastor James McConnell, 78, is facing a three-day trial for charges stemming from alleged violations of the 2003 Communications Act. He faces charges for the improper used of a public electronic communications network and causing a “grossly offensive message” to be distributed.

"McConnell is enjoying the support of hundreds of followers, but McConnell is realistic about the true implications of his case:

“[The fight] is important for every minister of the gospel of every denomination; of freedom of speech; and freedom of worship. This is, I believe, a test case.” . .

 . . . "While this case is taking place in the U.K., it serves as a precursor to what we could see in America in the very near future. Don’t believe me? Check this out!

"A judge in Massachusetts has ordered a landlord who was involved in a dispute with a Muslim tenant to learn Islam as part of her punishment. It happened at the sentencing for Daisy Obi (the landlord) for a physical altercation in which the tenant was allegedly knocked down a flight of stairs, suffering some minor injuries." . . .

Trump Won The Debate? Only If You Ignore What He Said

Investors.com

. . . "Whatever their political viewpoint, open-minded viewers watching the debate could not help but come away impressed with the GOP field.

"For more than two hours, they engaged in serious, sober and lengthy discussions about how to deal with Syria, ISIS, Russia, Iran and domestic terrorism. Yes, there are clear differences of opinion among the candidates — particularly Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul — which is precisely what a healthy, broad-based party should have.

"For the most part, everyone showed a depth of knowledge on national security matters that the country desperately needs after seven years of President Obama's disasters. With one notable exception.

"While several pundits declared Trump the debate's winner, all he managed to demonstrate in the few times he spoke up was that, on foreign policy, he still hasn't progressed beyond bromides and bombast." . . .  Hat tip to Lucianne

Despite Obama photo-ops, terror shoots to top American concern

http://terrellaftermath.com/

Andrew Malcolm . . . "For most of Barack Obama's reign, the economy and jobs -- or lack thereof -- have dominated Americans' everyday concerns.

"But given terrorist attacks in San Bernardino and Paris, the rise of ISIS with murderous global tentacles and the administration's half-hearted, ineffective military response, terrorism has now become not only the top concern, but a major, volatile issue in the unfolding presidential election campaign.

"That was revealed in this week's final 2015 Republican debate, where candidates tied leading Democrat candidate and ex-secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Obama. The president has seen a plunge to record low public approval of his job performance addressing terrorism and ISIS." . . .

RELATED:

• The Incredible Shrinking President
• The warped world of our delusional president
• Obama to Americans: Stay gullible, my friends
• News Flash for Obama: Terrorism isn't scaring Americans; You are

Star Wars: Revenge of the Social-Justice Warriors

National Review Online

Mediaite video

"With the long-anticipated Star Wars: The Force Awakens opening tomorrow, news outlets and social media have been abuzz with the expectations of a new generation of fans. But with The Force Awakens as the first of the films to be released in the age of social justice, the question must be asked: At a time when the slightest violation of PC orthodoxy can set off a deluge of listicles, cable-news segments, and general media outrage, can Star Wars survive such an onslaught launched from the Social Justice Media’s veritable Sarlacc Pit — more commonly referred to as Twitter?

"The filmmakers and cast would serve both our own galaxy and the galaxy far, far away well by telling the Vox-splaining concern trolls, who will doubtless be poring over every story arc and line of dialogue in search of microaggressions, that they’ll get no such social-justice pleasure from them, but alas, that is probably too much to ask." . . .

Darth Vader was not based on James Earl Jones, nor was the actor who wore his suit black. George Lucas rightfully decided that Englishman David Prowse’s heavily accented and somewhat silly-sounding voice was nowhere near as powerful or intimidating as the role demanded. So he had Vader’s dialogue dubbed over by Jones, and the rest is history. A black man did not cut off the hand of a white man (Luke Skywalker) as suggested by Perry, as the character of Anakin Skywalker, Luke’s father (spoiler!) was white. Harris-Perry’s argument boils down to being about the color of Darth Vader’s costume and nothing more. #SithLivesMatter

Michelle Obama Ticks Off Marine…So He RIPS Her to Shreds In Must Read Letter

Clash Daily  "This is what happens when Michelle Obama ticks off a Marine so much that he decides to respond.

"This letter is brutal and filled with hard truth…not to mention, it also echoes what so many of those who love our country feel about MO and BHO.

. . . "So many have thanked me for my service and I will always be grateful. I pray that one day you and your husband might cause me to be grateful for yours. You will never be remembered as the First Lady of Color but soon forgotten after you leave the White House. You nor your husband shall ever divide us. I wish you no harm, but pray you will take your troubles to a land you no longer hate. Hate shall come and go but His love shall last forever."

Harvard Brands Anyone Opposed To Bringing In Refugees From Syria “Islamophobic”…(Apology update)

UPDATE: Harvard apologizes for ‘Holiday Placemat for Social Justice’

. . . "Academic freedom is central to all that Harvard College stands for. To suggest that there is only one point of view on each of these issues runs counter to our educational goals. We appreciate the feedback that we have received about this initiative. Moving forward we will, with your continued input, support the growth and the development of independent minds."

Weasel Zippers

"Via Free Beacon:" (Quoting:)

Placemats recently distributed to students by an office at Harvard University appear to brand Americans worried about accepting thousands of refugees from Syria Islamophobic.

The “holiday placemats for social justice,” first reported by Campus Reform, were distributed by Harvard’s Office for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion, a university official confirmed to the publication, and were found in an undergraduate dining hall.

The placemats, produced in collaboration with the Freshman Dean’s Office, are meant to serve as a “guide” for students to discuss race and justice with their families over the holidays. They present students with four topics and accompanying statements that students might encounter at the dinner table and also offer appropriate responses to each statement.

One of the four topics displayed on the mat is “Islamaphobia/Refugees,” with the accompanying statement reading, “We shouldn’t let anyone in the U.S. from Syria. We can’t guarantee that terrorists won’t infiltrate the ranks of refugees. They’ve already done it in France.” The placemats incorrectly spell “Islamophobia.”

The placemat advises students to respond to loved ones exhibiting such “Islamophobic” concerns by encouraging the Syrian refugee program as a method of “racial justice.”

“The U.S. has been accepting refugees from the war-torn areas around the world for decades. Remember the wars in Central America?” the model response reads. “They were extremely violent, and the U.S. accepted refugees from all sides of the wars with very strict vetting and not one incident of violence. Racial justice includes welcoming Syrian refugees.”

Keep reading….

End quote. Welcome to the world that created President Barack Hussein Obama.

Those "social justice" placemats

. . . "Ironically, the office’s website includes a button to “report bias.” Presumably, they do not mean political predispositions.

"The pictures were sent to us by a source at Harvard, who expressed concern at the rise of progressive dogmatism on campuses. “I think this is a good example of how the [United States’] premier academic institution is enforcing an environment of intolerance to conservatives.' ” . . . 

"Princeton is seriously considering rewriting its own history by renaming any buildings and institutions dedicated to alumni and former President Woodrow Wilson, whom campus crazies say is too racist to be remembered fondly. After having won the power to erase history, year-zero style, it’s little wonder that politically-biased groups on campus feel they can run rampant."

More on college "racial justice" indoctrination here

Ridding the Campus of the Social Justice Pox  . . . "The key point here is how ridding the campus of the SJW folk will improve higher education and do so without much upheaval. Undergraduates will now on average be smarter, work harder and will no longer substitute feelings for knowledge. As an added bonus, schools like Yale and Brown that have shamelessly surrendered to the SJW mob will regain some lost intellectual prestige. The reign of the Social Justice Warriors will be remembered just as many parents of the SJW’s fondly recall the anti-War protestors of the 1960’s.  

The Battle Within Islam and President Obama

 "Many American Muslims don't think CAIR represents them, and that the CAIR approach further alienates and divides Americans of all faiths. These are the "silent majority" among American Muslims."

Colonel (Ret.) Derek Harvey

"President Obama needs to accept that our current conflict is as much against the idea of radical jihadism as it is against the physical presence of ISIS. Furthermore, by failing to define the religious-political ideology underpinning the enemy, the president contributes to an environment where all Muslims are increasingly looked at with suspicion. And when President Obama says that we are not at war with Islam, he is implicitly acknowledging to the public that Islam does have something to with extremism, disorder, and violence.

"President Obama has also inadvertently cast a blanket of suspicion on the Muslim community through his rhetoric and framing of the challenge. Wouldn't it be better if instead the president and the Administration defined the real enemy – a narrow band of radical extremists? . . . 

"Many Muslim reformers in this country would like the Obama Administration's support in their efforts to frame the problem for what it is – radical Sunni extremism - so that they can face the issue of tolerance and reform within the faith. " . . .

Colonel (Ret.) Derek Harvey is a Middle East specialist, Islamic scholar, and terrorism expert. He served as an advisor to multiple U.S. Commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Stephen F. Hayes: GOP Debaters Left Obama's Awful Record on National Security Largely Untouched

Podcast here; This podcast can be downloaded here.

It's Time For The Other 13 Candidates To Drop Out

Tunnel Dweller does not endorse Ms. Coulter's main point here, but does agree that we must all come to terms with her logic expressed herein.

Ann Coulter

. . . "After the San Bernardino terrorist attack, committed by Muslim immigrants -- which followed the 1993 World Trade Center terrorist attack committed by Muslim immigrants; the 9/11 terrorist attacks committed by Muslim immigrants; the Fort Hood terrorist attack committed by a Muslim immigrant; the Boston Marathon terrorist attack committed by Muslim immigrants, and on and on -- Trump suggested a temporary pause on Muslim immigration. 

"The other candidates responded by attacking him viciously. Now, the eunuchs are duking it out over who has the most aggressive approach to ... fighting ISIS! 

"Asked why he called Trump's proposal "unhinged," Jeb! explained: "Well, first of all, we need to destroy ISIS in the caliphate."

"Marco Rubio said: "The problem is we had an attack in San Bernardino," adding that "what's important to do is we must deal frontally with this threat of radical Islamists, especially from ISIS." . . . 

Comments on the Dec 15th GOP Debate

From Bookworm Room  . . . "The article boils the foreign policy issue (which the Constitution gives to the president) down to two world views: The Wilson world view is that we have to intervene all over the world to make it a better place, and that it’s shameful to win wars; instead we have to make peace.  The Jackson view is that we shouldn’t fight a war that doesn’t directly benefit us, but when we fight, we fight to win. Wilsonians would say a safer world indirectly benefits us, making intervention wars worthwhile. Jacksonians would say that too many of our wars have not only failed to give us any benefit, they’ve been very bad for us, especially because — as Obama exemplifies — we shouldn’t win." . . .

Lucianne is an excellent source for material such as these:

GOP December 2015 Debate: Another View  "The debate was much stronger for everyone -- except perhaps for Trump.
"The CNN moderators did not become the story, so that’s positive.
"The main story line is that they attacked each other appropriately, I believe, but they always brought the discussion back to Obama-Hillary. This circle back to the Dems was smart, very smart." . . .

Tuesday’s GOP debate was Jeb Bush’s last stand, and he failed   . . . "At this point then, barring an even unlikelier miracle in next month’s GOP debate, the last before the Iowa caucuses, Bush has no way of turning around his fortunes. Sure, one would think Bush could use his money advantage to move his numbers by flooding Iowa and New Hampshire airwaves with ads. But his campaign has already tried that, “racing through its massive war chest” with nothing to show for it." . . .

Consider the source on this: CNN: Was Marco Rubio Overrated All Along?  . . . "That was a rough debate for Marco Rubio. He finally got that long-awaited challenge on his previous support for the “Gang of Eight” immigration-law overhaul, which he handled well enough. But any way you look at it, this puts him to the left of the field on the major animating issue of the campaign. He continually took fire from a surging Ted Cruz and a feisty Rand Paul. He spent much of the night on the defensive." . . .

The Daily 202: Anger won and Rubio lost last night’s debate   “ 'Like all of you, I’m angry” is how Carly Fiorina began her opening statement. That sentence encapsulates not just last night’s two-hour debate in Las Vegas but also the entire Republican nominating contest thus far. Donald Trump himself was largely a non-factor in the candidates’ fifth and final showdown of 2015, but Trumpism was the dominant, animating force inside the Venetian Theatre." . . .

Fifth Debate Quietly Winnows The Field

. . . "Not surprisingly, Trump arguably made the biggest news of the night: Finally shutting down speculation that he might run as a third-party candidate should he not win the nomination in Cleveland, a rogue step that would basically doom Republican White House hopes." . . .

In Las Vegas Debate, a Rubio-Cruz Showdown Takes Center Stage   . . . "Tuesday may have foreshadowed a Rubio-Cruz battle for the nomination that more and more Republicans are now predicting, as Cruz continues to consolidate the support of conservative voters and Rubio emerges as the favorite of center-right, establishment-oriented voters. " . . .

A Serious Debate for a Country at a Moment of Serious Crisis   "First, as lengthy as tonight’s debate on CNN was, about two-thirds of the nine GOP candidates on stage turned in solid performances and demonstrated real knowledge and critical analysis of serious crises: how to monitor potential terrorist communications, how to handle Syrian refugees, what to do about Syria’s bloody civil war, when the U.S. should stand with dictators, how to handle Putin, and so on." . . .

The threat grew worse in part because the Obama administration didn’t want to see the threat, didn’t want to acknowledge the threat was growing, didn’t want to admit its policies weren’t working, and didn’t want to break its politically-correct worldview. 

Administration nixed probe into Southern California jihadists

http://terrellaftermath.com/

The Hill  . . . "In retaliation, DHS and the Department of Justice subjected me to a series of investigations and adverse actions, including one by that same Inspector General. None of them showed any wrongdoing; they seemed aimed at stopping me from blowing the whistle on this problem. Earlier this year, I was finally able to honorably retire from government and I’m now taking my story to the American people as a warning.

"My law enforcement colleagues and I must conduct our work while respecting the rights of those we monitor.  But what I witnessed suggests the Obama administration is more concerned with the rights of non-citizens in known Islamist groups than with the safety and security of the American people.

"That must change. "

By Philip Haney, a recently retired DHS employee. As can be said about the military officers in the later post.

U.S. has mapped ISIS hiding spots, but won’t launch strikes for fear of civilian deaths
. . . "Most of the locations are embedded in heavily residential areas in Syria, Iraq and Libya and are not being targeted by U.S. airstrikes because of Obama administration concerns about civilian casualties, according to sources who spoke to The Washington Times only on the condition of anonymity." . . .