The Real Enemy

As Obama get’s his Agenda Scout Merit Badge for caving in to the communists in Cuba, the “JV team” ISIS continue to rape, pillage, and creatively kill anyone who isn’t them.

Good thing Global Warming is a bigger threat, don’t you know.

So the following is politically incorrect.

Thursday, The New York Times published a disturbing piece about the Islamic State having enshrined “a theology of rape,” specifically against women and girls who aren’t Muslim. In other words, if the female isn’t Muslim, it’s totally fine to assault her, sell her, and keep as property.

It’s amazing they would publish the piece in the first place. This is Al-Jazeera America, before the channel actually existed.

The opening paragraphs are harrowing, describing the rape of a 12-year-old girl:

In the moments before he raped the 12-year-old girl, the Islamic State fighter took the time to explain that what he was about to do was not a sin. Because the preteen girl practiced a religion other than Islam, the Quran not only gave him the right to rape her — it condoned and encouraged it, he insisted.He bound her hands and gagged her. Then he knelt beside the bed and prostrated himself in prayer before getting on top of her.

When it was over, he knelt to pray again, bookending the rape with acts of religious devotion.

Good thing he didn’t order a Pizza, then the Left might get their panties in a wad.

“I kept telling him it hurts — please stop,” said the girl, whose body is so small an adult could circle her waist with two hands. “He told me that according to Islam he is allowed to rape an unbeliever. He said that by raping me, he is drawing closer to God,” she said in an interview alongside her family in a refugee camp here, to which she escaped after 11 months of captivity.

The systematic rape of women and girls from the Yazidi religious minority has become deeply enmeshed in the organization and the radical theology of the Islamic State in the year since the group announced it was reviving slavery as an institution.

And here I thought the only slavery left was “white privilege”. 🙂

Interviews with 21 women and girls who recently escaped the Islamic State, as well as an examination of the group’s official communications, illuminate how the practice has been enshrined in the group’s core tenets.

The trade in Yazidi women and girls has created a persistent infrastructure, with a network of warehouses where the victims are held, viewing rooms where they are inspected and marketed, and a dedicated fleet of buses used to transport them.

A total of 5,270 Yazidis were abducted last year, and at least 3,144 are still being held, according to community leaders. To handle them, the Islamic State has developed a detailed bureaucracy of sex slavery, including sales contracts notarized by the ISIS-run Islamic courts. And the practice has become an established recruiting tool to lure men from deeply conservative Muslim societies, where casual sex is taboo and dating is forbidden.

Good thing Obama care about “human rights” like Gay Marriage and Abortion, he has his priorities straight. 🙂

The rest of the long form piece is riddled with equally barbaric and appalling details that revolve around the topic of sex slavery.

And you though just being against Planned Parenthood’s harvesting and selling of fetal baby parts was “a war on women”.

In August of 2014, thousands of Yazidis fled the forces of the Islamic State by heading to the Sinjar Mountains. The conditions were abysmal, with little shade, food, water, and other essential supplies. In all, 20-30,000 Yazidis remained trapped on top of the mountain. U.S., British and Iraqi aircraft had been dropping supplies at the time to aid the beleaguered group. The U.S. was considering air evacuations for the refugees. By December of 2014, the Kurds relieved the siege on Sinjar.

Yet, for CNN’s Chris Cuomo, the New York Times piece might promote stereotypes.

“Let’s finish this part of the discussion on a point that you feel often needs to be made,” Cuomo said to Muslim woman’s rights activist Qanta Ahmed. “This feeds the impression that these Muslims are animals, savages and their faith makes them that way.”

“And it feeds an impression of what Islam is,” he continued. “What is your response to that?”

Ahmed didn’t seem overly concerned about the point Cuomo raised, and instead strongly critiqued radical Islam. “This is Islamism at work,” she said. “We’ve talked a lot about this on this show. Islamism is totalitarianism… totalitarianism, that means absolute domination of the self.”

Oh, Obama and The Democrats, just without the violence, rape and murder.  No wonder the Leftist can’t comprehend it, so let’s replay that…

“This feeds the impression that these Muslims are animals, savages and their faith makes them that way,” he said.

Muslim women’s rights activist Qanta Ahmed aptly noted that the end goal for these Islamists is one thing: totalitarianism.

The same as the Democrat Party. How fascinating is that. Maybe that’s why they are for “human rights” only when it suits their agenda but are utterly incapable of getting the littlest bit annoyed about beheadings and rape. Not to mention what Arabs and Persians due to gays and don’t go there about Gay Marriage…

“This is Islamism at work …there Islamists are dominating to extinction girls and women; it’s very calculated,” she said.

So is Obama. He just doesn’t do it with overt violence. 🙂

At the same time, ISIS is raping 12-year-olds and justifying it through religious means. They’re engaging in sex slavery. These aren’t stereotypes or brash over-generalizations; they’re actually happening. Saying that the members of the Islamic State are animals and savages not only fits the bill, one could argue that it’s overly generous given the utter evil they’re partaking in on a daily basis. I mean, is this even up for discussion?

But Obama and Co. can’t even conceptualize the idea of “radical Islam” because of their Thought Police filters that prevents such a thoughtcrime from passing their lips.

You would think that one would come to that conclusion after the various execution videos they’ve released; the beheadings of Americans James Foley and Steve Sotloff; or when they blew up a baby. (Townhall)

But not Obama and The Democrats. Nope. That Thoughtcrime has not been breached yet. They continue to stay strong in the face such pressure.

You can’t paint a religion as “radical” based on just a few nutters, not unless their Christians that is, then it’s not only acceptable, it’s the truth. 🙂

Good thing they didn’t blow up an Abortion Clinic then they’d be “right wing” religious extremists and then you might annoy them!

The Left is blinded by their ideology and will fight to every last drop of your blood to prove just how superior their vision is.

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail

A Stale Cuban

Soon after President Obama announced plans to normalize relations with Cuba, Sen. Marco Rubio called him the worst negotiator since Jimmy Carter. Cuban officials are now proving Rubio right.

As soon as Obama made his announcement, it became clear he’d pretty much given up the store and gotten nothing in return.

Cuba didn’t have to make any concessions on freedom of speech, democratic elections, a market economy. It didn’t have to turn over U.S. fugitives, including a convicted cop killer, whom it’s been protecting for years.

Indeed, as we noted in this space after Obama’s announcement, Raul Castro was soon bragging about how he’d struck a deal with Obama “without a single sacrifice of our principles.”

Castro apparently feels no need to do so in the future, either. After the opening round of talks, Cuban diplomat Josefina Vidal told the AP that “changes in Cuba aren’t negotiable.”

Now, to add insult to injury, Castro has started issuing his own set of demands.

In a speech at the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States summit in Costa Rica on Wednesday, he said there’d be no normalization of relations unless the U.S. ends the trade embargo, closes the naval base at Guantanamo Bay and takes Cuba off the list of state sponsors of terror.

Oh, and he also wants the U.S. to stop allowing Cubans to stay in this country just because they manage to set foot on American soil. That’s been causing a brain drain from the island, you see.

Castro has even told Obama what to do, saying in his speech the president should “use with resolve his broad executive powers to substantially change the scope of the blockade, even without the Congress’ decision.”

Why shouldn’t Castro be so brazen? Obama has already shown his hand. So Castro knows he can keep upping the bid, assuming — most likely correctly — that Obama will do anything to keep the normalization process from folding.

If this were the only time Obama has miserably failed at the bargaining table, it would be bad enough. But it’s just the latest in an continuing and ominous pattern — from his dealings with Iran, his prisoner exchange with the Taliban, his phony “red line” in Syria, his “reset” with Russia, etc.

Come to think of it, saying Obama is the worst negotiator since Jimmy Carter is actually an insult to Carter.

Carter also at least pretended to not be anti-Semitic. 🙂

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

The Law with Unintended Consequences

In a new report, the Congressional Research Service says the law may have significant unintended consequences for the “personal health insurance coverage” of senators, representatives and their staff members.

“It is unclear whether members of Congress and Congressional staff who are currently participating in F.E.H.B.P. may be able to retain this coverage,” the CRS wrote in a 8,100-word memorandum, the Times reports.

For example, it says, the law may “remove members of Congress and Congressional staff” from their current coverage, in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, before any alternatives are available. . . .

The law apparently bars members of Congress from the federal employees health program, on the assumption that lawmakers should join many of their constituents in getting coverage through new state-based markets known as insurance exchanges.

But the research service found that this provision was written in an imprecise, confusing way, so it is not clear when it takes effect.

The new exchanges do not have to be in operation until 2014. But because of a possible “drafting error,” the report says, Congress did not specify an effective date for the section excluding lawmakers from the existing program.

Under well-established canons of statutory interpretation, the report said, “a law takes effect on the date of its enactment” unless Congress clearly specifies otherwise. And Congress did not specify any other effective date for this part of the health care law. The law was enacted when President Obama signed it three weeks ago.

That means that congressmen and their staffers may be afoul of the law right now.

ObamaCare is proving to be even more of a shambles than critics had expected. Is this because the Democrats who currently run Congress are unusually incompetent? Tempting as it is to say yes, probably not. Put it down, instead, to hubris and haste. In their mad rush to outrun public opinion and impose “universal health care” on their unwilling constituents, Harry Pelosi, Nancy Reid & Co. simply didn’t bother paying attention to the details.

If CRS is right and congressmen and their staffers are now forbidden to be insured as federal employees, this may turn out to be ObamaCare’s fatal flaw. The Times observes that Congress “could try for a legislative fix,” and it quotes Sen. Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican, as urging just that: “After the committee completed its work, the coverage provision was redrafted by others, and that’s where mistakes were made. Congress can and should act to correct the mistakes.”

Good luck with that, guys. Are congressmen really going to pass legislation to rectify the harm ObamaCare did to them,Yuval Levin points out: “If you had your own research service to help you figure out what the law will do to your insurance, the answer would likely be just as confusing and discouraging.” The CRS’s findings are a powerful reminder that ObamaCare likely holds horrible surprises for everyone. while continuing to subject everyone else to this awful, hated law? Leaving the law in place isn’t a politically attractive option either, for the reason National Review’s Yuval Levin points out: “If you had your own research service to help you figure out what the law will do to your insurance, the answer would likely be just as confusing and discouraging.” The CRS’s findings are a powerful reminder that ObamaCare likely holds horrible surprises for everyone.

The logic of the situation inexorably points toward repeal–though we expect President Obama and this Congress will defy logic as firmly and for as long as they can. (WSJ)

While ObamaCare is an abomination that will hurt future generations it would be fitting if Congress was hoist on their own petard.

But I suspect that once they determine if they are screwed or not rather than revisit the bill in an overhaul and draw lots of unwanted attention they’ll just sneak it into a bill later on in the dead of night.

That would be the modis operandi of this Congress. Do it in secret, in a back room, without anyone knowing until it was too late to doanything about what you cooked up.

And if they do find out, Lie, Obfuscate, and attack.

I’m sure we have years and years of surprise and new horrors ahead of us.

This from the Toronto Star is just Curious:

Proof of medical coverage will become mandatory for all visitors to Cuba starting May 1.

The Cuba Tourist Bureau in Canada notified tour operators recently, and promises a general announcement with more details shortly.

So how long before ObamaCare follows suit, after all Cuba has a great medical system according to the Far Left who are in love with it. See “Sicko” by Michael “I by My own press” Moore.

At current exchange rates, Cubalinda will charge $2.70. a day for up to $7,558 of medical emergency insurance, plus assorted other types of coverage. It will charge about $3.24 a day for $27,000 of medical coverage and $7,558 for transportation of deceased, injured or sick persons.

That compares with as little as $1.81 a day or a minimum of $16 a week for a young Canadian to get $5 million of medical coverage from a Canadian insurer, says Aguirre. Meanwhile, a reasonably healthy senior, age 70 to 74, would pay $6.36 a day for a short trip to a non-U.S. destination, says Cappon.

Aguirre’s company’s president, Robin Ingle, concedes the skimpy Cuban policies would provide enough coverage for the vast majority of illnesses or injuries travelers might experience in Cuba.

“The Cubalinda.com website says ‘the insurer will not assume payment for treatment of pre-existing medical condition (sic), known or unknown to the insured person’.”

You could pay the modest premium and discover later you have no coverage when you need it.

So proceed with caution. Don’t leave home without adequate coverage.

Where’s Karl Malden when you need him??

And a Preview of Things to Come

A Massachusetts court Monday ruled against health insurance providers seeking to raise their premiums 8 to 32 percent in a closely watched case.

Massachusetts enacted a universal health care plan in 2006 that includes politically controversial measures such as the individual mandate requiring all adults to purchase insurance. With opponents of the national health care legislation passed weeks ago promising legal action, the Massachusetts case was seen a foretaste of what could lie ahead.

In this instance, the court affirmed that, for now at least, the state has the authority to oversee the industry.

The challenge arose from a bid by health insurance providers in Massachusetts several weeks ago to raise their premiums. Massachusetts Insurance commissioner Joseph Murphy called the increases “excessive,” noting that the medical consumer price index – an indicator of how much medical goods and services cost – projected a necessary increase of only 5 percent. Mr. Murphy rejected 235 of 274 proposed rate hikes.

Six insurance companies sued, arguing the state does not have the regulatory authority to cap premiums. They said they would lose $100 million without the premium increase, plus even more in the administrative costs of having to redesign their plans.

In addition to the suit, the insurance companies filed a preliminary injunction to prevent the state from regulating their premium increases until the case is decided. They also asked for an expedited trial.

Suffolk Superior Court Judge Stephen Neel denied the request to expedite the trial and the injunction. He said that until the health insurance companies exhausted all available administrative remedies within the state Department of Insurance, the court had no jurisdiction. Only then could the insurance companies move through the normal legal process, he said.

He added that he wanted to avoid “stepping in the [insurance] commissioner’s shoes” and revising the regulations temporarily until the later court date.

Furthermore, the regulations did not cause “irreparable harm” because lost profits could later be recouped, Judge Neel said.

Recouped how?

Don’t worry, the Government is here to save you from evil capitalists! 😦