Forum: Has The Relationship Between Men And Women Changed For The Worse?

Joshuapundit   "Every week on Monday morning , the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: Has The Relationship Between Men And Women Changed For The Worse?" . . .

. . . "The left today includes both men and women putting men down. Women are seen beating up the bad guys while men are too often portrayed as weak or looking like Pajama Boy or walking around with orange hair and crashing into cars in Foster Child commercials. Aggressive sports are on the ropes and football players are portrayed as more violent than the other men though research proves it's not true." . . .

How many TV commercials and shows depict clueless men being put in their place by a wiser, condescending woman? How many companies and police units on TV are led by "no-nonsense" women who are more forceful and aware? 

Have you watched the portrayal of boys and girls on children's TV shows? The boys are nincompoops!  TD

Boom – RNC drops NBC from Super Tuesday debate after CNBC debacle

Legal Insurrection

"I suggested at the time GOP needs to make an example of NBC News:"

The GOP has a long history of subjecting its candidates to abuse by debate moderators.

From George Stephanopolous to Candy Crowley, debates are a time for network journalists to earn their battle badges by damaging Republicans.

And the GOP just sucks it up and takes it….

NBC News issued a statement saying it hoped to work with the RNC to resolve any differences.

Don’t let it.

The GOP has stumbled, almost blind, into a way to harness the anger of the Republican electorate while also resetting the relationship between the GOP and the hostile media.

Make an example of NBC News.

It’s a winning issue. No one likes journalists. The profession is not well respected and is viewed widely as biased. Who is going to come to the defense of NBC News?

. . . 

Turn the narrative around from the GOP needing the media to the media needing the GOP.

More at the link.  Here was his shining moment:

Iran’s Arrest of U.S. Sailors Reflects Obama’s Foreign-Policy Weakness

NRO  "Two thousand years ago, a Roman could wander the known world confident that he would be unmolested by local unruly elements, protected only by the statement “Civis romanus sum,” I am a Roman citizen. His confidence stemmed from a demonstrated assurance that any group that dared attack a Roman would trigger a response in the form of a Roman legion, which would deal swift and brutal justice. Juxtapose this image of a previous world-spanning hegemon with the image of ten American Sailors kneeling on the deck of their own vessel with their hands clasped together over their heads. It is an image of indignity and failure that is accompanied by the smell of rotting power.

Iran general scoffs: US sailors cried when we captured them

"Revolutionary Guards officer says servicemen briefly held this week were only released after ‘Americans humbly admitted our might and power’ ". . . 

"Salami said “the marines were crying when they were being captured, but they later felt better after the IRGC forces treated them with kindness.”
"The comments were reported by Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency." . . .

What the Ayres-Wright-Obama unholy trinity have always wanted: the humiliation of America.

Obama, Iran, and the Kidnapping of Realism  . . . "Don’t get me wrong; realism demands that we actively pursue diplomacy with Iran. Iran’s youthful population is an existential threat to the theocrats and a source of major internal political pressure. We must not alienate these future leaders with a leap to military action. Yet by our failure to deter Iran’s hard-liners, we only encourage them further. And in their empowerment, political moderation perishes. Foreign-policy realism demands that we sometimes deal with unpleasant people. But it also requires our commitment to honest policy."

Frost warning: "Hillary Seethes After Tapper Asks if the FBI’s Interviewed Her ‘Yet’ "

Update from smalldeadanimals.com

NRO   "Hillary Clinton could barely contain her contempt this morning when CNN’s Jake Tapper ended an interview by asking about the FBI investigation into her handling of classified material.
 “Just one last question for you,” he said. “In terms of the status of the FBI investigation into your private e-mail server, have you been interviewed by the FBI yet?” 

 “No,” came Clinton’s one-word reply. Tapper then wrapped the interview, wishing Clinton good luck in tonight’s debate and thanking her for coming on. Clinton visibly struggled to thank him in kind." 

Reverend Martin Luther King’s Media Makeover

http://terrellaftermath.com/

The Left, uncomfortable with God talk, ignores MLK’s deep devotion to Christ.  . . . "Listen carefully and you’ll hear endless mention of Doctor Martin Luther King — but little if any mention of the Reverend Martin Luther King. 

"Listen carefully to all of the video and audio clips, and you’ll hear some of the greatest rhetoric and some of the most passionate speeches of the 20th century. The sound bites and clips will stir your soul. But you won’t hear the references to God that so often filled his speeches, nor will you hear references to the book that most inspired him: the Bible." . . .

Full article here:  King’s Media Makeover

Well, perhaps Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have erased the honor that came with the title "Reverend". TD

E-Rumor: "Charles Krauthammer: The Clinton Foundation is Organized Crime-Truth! & Fiction!"

Truth or Fiction  "An essay attributed to Charles Krauthammer calls the Clinton Foundation “organized crime at its finest.”

"The Truth:  Charles Krauthammer didn’t write this essay about the Clinton Foundation, but some of the essay’s claims are on point.

"The name of Charles Krauthammer, a syndicated columnist and FOX News contributor, was first attached to an essay that accused the Clinton Foundation of money laundering, tax evasion and organized crime in early November 2015. The essay was widely forwarded in emails and posted at online discussion forums under Krauthammer’s name.

"One of the earliest versions of the essay appeared on a blog site called True News U.S.A on October 28, 2015, under the headline “Charles Krauthammer on Hillary Clinton.” In that version, Charles Krauthammer’s name is briefly mentioned in the opening, but the article was not attributed to him:

Recently, Charles Krauthammer alluded that he had no doubt some of the 30k emails Hillary deleted from her private email server very likely had references to the Clinton Foundation, which would be illegal and a conflict of interest.

"The opening reference to Krauthammer refers to remarks that he made on FOX News in July 2015 about Hilary Clinton’s use of private email servers while secretary of state, and allegations that she erased some of them. Krauthammer said, “The real crime, so to speak — at least the political crime — is the fact that she unilaterally erased 30,000 of these (emails).”

"Charles Krauthammer didn’t make any reference to the Clinton Foundation or conflicts of interest, as the essay claims, but he did say that the most damaging emails had likely already been deleted.

"Krauthammer’s name may have been added to the byline to lend the essay credibility, he is a Pulitzer Prize winning columnist, after all. Or Krauthammer’s name may have been added by mistake, too. His name was in the original headline, and it’s not immediately clear where the essay transitions from Krauthammer’s views on the Clinton email scandal to the (unknown) author’s views on the Clinton Foundation.

"But regardless of how it happened, this essay on the Clinton Foundation has been incorrectly attributed to Charles Krauthammer.

"Still, because there’s been plenty of reader interest, we’ll take a look at the money laundering and “organized crime” allegations that the essay makes about the Clinton Foundation." . . .
Hat tip to Janet Sanford; Santa Maria, CA

Jerry Mander's Political Cartoons

Clinton Campaign Underestimated Sanders Strengths; Watch for the Big Leftward Shift

NY Times

. . . "According to Democrats close to the Clintons and involved with her campaign, Mrs. Clinton and the former president are also unnerved by the possibility that Mr. Sanders will foment a large wave of first­time voters and liberals that will derail her in Iowa, not unlike Barack Obama’s success in 2008, which consigned Mrs. Clinton to a third­place finish. They have asked her advisers about the strength of the campaign’s data modeling and turnout assumptions in Iowa, given that her 2008 campaign’s predictions were so inaccurate." . . .

QUESTION: Will We Really Have A New President In 2016?

. . . " In Obama’s mind, who would be best to carry on his legacy?  Barack Obama, of course.

"Think this can’t happen?  On March 16, 2012, Obama signed The National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order.  In times of national emergency, this order gives the president practically unlimited power over we the people and our property.  And the president essentially decides what constitutes a national emergency.

The White House stated that the purpose of the executive order is to delegate authority and address national defense resource policies and programs under the Defense Production Act of 1950.  Sounds reasonable enough, but there are very astute analysts that believe this gives the president unilateral authority to declare a national emergency, suspend elections, and seize control of every aspect of our society." . . .

Women in combat units: Iran’s Capture Of A Female American Sailor Reveals Feminism’s Foolish Double Standard…

Weasel Zippers

"Feminists avoid reality at all costs.

"Via NRO:

As cable news chewed over Iran’s capture of ten American sailors in the Persian Gulf just hours before President Obama’s final State of the Union address on Tuesday night, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews pointedly observed that one of the captured Americans was female.

Now, perhaps Matthews was just being comprehensive in his reporting. But the all but unmistakable implication of this detail was: The situation was all the more urgent.

Now why should that be so? Feminists declare that men and women are equal in all respects. They petulantly decry any atavistic male courtesy towards females as a relic of a still oppressive patriarchal culture. According to that absolutist equality principle, it should be of no greater concern if a female soldier falls into enemy hands, including those of Islamic terrorists, than if a male does.

As the Pentagon moves inexorably to put females into combat units, let’s hope for the sake of our military capabilities that this abstract ideology holds firm. But it almost surely won’t. The enemy capture of female soldiers during a hot war will in fact provoke even greater than usual political pressure to quickly rescue them, if necessary overriding sounder but more time-consuming strategies. The prospect of a female soldier being raped by her captors or, say, “merely” being beheaded will sideline all other military considerations. If two platoons are captured, the one with females in it will undoubtedly take precedence in any rescue effort, thus jeopardizing unit morale and cohesiveness.

The Obama Pentagon’s Disastrous Decision on Women in Combat

. . . "A public and political class largely insulated from the realities of ground combat has become ignorant of its excruciating and unforgiving physical demands. Prolonged infantry operations — including operations common in the War on Terror — place immense strains on the mind and body. Unit cohesion is critical, and physical breakdowns can be costly both to combat power and to unit morale." . . .

"Moreover, given how beholden the administration is to the Left, there is no reason to believe that it will hold firm on physical standards if few women prove capable of joining and — crucially — thriving in the infantry environment. Experience with less demanding jobs in law enforcement and firefighting shows that the legal and political pressure to lower standards will be immense. Under the best of circumstances, combat effectiveness will be degraded."

Kurdish fighter Rehanna

 Obama’s Military Ignores the Facts in Its Eagerness to Put Women in Combat   . . . "It appears that the Army may have fixed its Ranger school to guarantee that at least some women would succeed. Reporter Susan Keating spoke to a number of sources who recalled a general declaring, “A woman will graduate Ranger school.” This bald admission allegedly “shocked” his subordinates and created a “ripple effect” that led to women receiving multiple forms of assistance not available to men." . . .
This Kurdish woman soldier will not be returning home to her family.

The Terrorists Freed by Obama

"In a quest to burnish his record by fulfilling a campaign promise to close Guantanamo, President Obama is courting a dangerous legacy."

By STEPHEN F. HAYES and THOMAS JOSCELYN

Mr. Hayes is a senior writer for the Weekly Standard. Mr. Joscelyn is a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

"Ghana’s government portrayed the deal as an act of “humanitarian assistance,” likening the Yemeni men to nonthreatening refugees from Rwanda and Syria, noting that they “were detained in Guantanamo but have been cleared of any involvement in terrorist activities, and are being released.”

"That description isn’t true for either of the men. Mr. Atef, in particular, is a cause for concern. Long before his transfer, the intelligence analysts at Joint Task Force Guantanamo (JTF-GTMO) assessed him as a “high risk” and “likely to pose a threat to the US, its interests and allies.” . . .  It is easy to understand the analysts’ worry about Mr. Atef. He was, they said, “a fighter in Usama bin Laden’s former 55th Arab Brigade and is an admitted member of the Taliban.” He trained at al Farouq, the infamous al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan, “participated in hostilities against US and Coalition forces, and continues to demonstrate his support of UBL and extremism.”

"Most ominously, the report warns that he “has threatened to kill US citizens on multiple occasions including a specific threat to cut their throats upon release.' ” . . .

. . . • Guantanamo is not a “recruitment brochure” for jihadists.

"We reviewed more than 200 videos produced by Islamic State and al Qaeda since 2014 and failed to find a single one that focused on Guantanamo. " . . ."If anything, Inspire highlights the dangers of Mr. Obama’s policy. Guantanamo has held far more terrorists than it ever created." . . .

 Special Report video with Bret Baier and Steve Hayes

LIES OF GUANTANAMO

"According to Obama, Guantanamo is a recruiting tool for terrorists. However, Obama is more of a recruiting tool than Guantanamo."

Paul Shanklin

Power Line

"In the Age of Obama, we are living by lies. Prevarication seems to be the operative principle. President Obama’s declared goal of emptying our detention facility at Guantanamo Bay is supported by many lies, including one he reiterated during his State of the Union remarks earlier this week. According to Obama, Guantanamo is a recruiting tool for terrorists. However, Obama is more of a recruiting tool than Guantanamo. Senator Tom Cotton refutes this and other Guantanamo related lies in this FOX News column.

"Today’s Wall Street Journal delivers the column of the day, by Steve Hayes and Tom Joscelyn: “The terrorists freed by Obama”* (accessible here via Google, I hope). Subhead: “The president has misled the American people about the detainees released from Guantanamo: Dozens are jihadists ready to kill.” The devil is in the details and the details are devastating."

*The Terrorists Freed by Obama

So who’s going to watch Sunday Dem Debate instead of NFL Playoffs?

Legal Insurrection
The Democrat pattern: 1. moderator question; 2. quick blow-off 3. three minutes of canned Democrat talking points. Repeat, repeat, repeat.  TD

"This tactic of hiding their debates is fooling no one.

"A new editorial from the Las Vegas Review-Journal addresses the issue:

Democrats hide presidential candidates in weekend debates

While the Republicans have debates scheduled for the Saturday nights before the New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries — when big audiences are expected — their six debates to this point (out of 12) have been held during viewer-friendly weeknight time slots.

The Democrats, on the other hand, have scheduled only four debates. While the first one in October was on a Tuesday, the last two have taken place on Saturday nights when far fewer people have been watching. The November debate drew roughly a third of the viewers of the first Republican debate, and the only December debate took place on December 19, smack-dab in the middle of holiday shopping season and (even worse) the opening weekend for the latest “Star Wars” film.

. . . 

Even left-leaning publications such as The Nation have pointed out that the DNC’s poor strategy has kept its candidates out of the limelight, and says the party “needs to schedule more debates on more nights when more Americans are watching.”

That won’t happen in time for the next Democratic debate, in Charleston, S.C., on Sunday night. That day features two NFL playoff games and is a full month before the South Carolina primaries.

"In their effort to shield Hillary Clinton from further public scrutiny, the Democratic Party is sending a loud message to the American people.

"They have something to hide."

Warren Buffet and Keystone: Friend or Foe?

Buffett and Shultz, allies of Obama and Steyer, endorse Keystone pipeline  . . . "Buffett, a close ally of President Obama said during a CNBC interview Monday he thought the controversial project was a "good idea for the country.' " . . .

Warren Buffett Profits Hugely from Obama Keystone Decision  . . . . . . "With the permit denied, the only option left to transport the oil is via railroad. One of the key railroads which will be running this oil is the Burlington Northern Santa Fe, a railroad which Buffett acquired in 2009. As Krista York-Wooley, a spokeswoman for BNSF, put it, if Keystone XL “doesn’t happen, we’re here to haul.' ”

Warren Buffett Is Still Bullish On Rail--And Keystone  MAR 3, 2014. . . "BNSF has ramped up its operations there dramatically, now moving 600,000 barrels of oil per day (once refined, that’s enough to fill the gas tanks of 1.35 million cars), more than ten times the amount moved in 2010.

"Rail has emerged as an alternative to pipelines, offering a faster means of shipping crude–though perhaps more risky, as a recent spate of oil car accidents has shown.

"Despite his stake in the railroad business, Buffett still expressed support for the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline." 

“ 'I think probably the Keystone Pipeline is a good idea from the country,” he posited. As to if and when it would be completed, his answer was less definitive: “I have no idea.”

"Buffett’s BNSF, along with rival Union Pacific and others, stand to profit either way. Even if plans for the pipeline go ahead, locomotives will be needed to lug out much of the raw material needed for its construction; Buffett says Keystone is “not that big a competitor.' ” . . .