Are You With Me?
My friends, we are way behind in our goal of raising $45,000 this week. Please let me know you are still in this fight!
Obama Responds
President Obama's reaction to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's address has left some scratching their heads. For example, Obama said Netanyahu offered nothing new and failed to offer a viable alternative.
But the president also said, "I think it is very important not to be distracted by the Iranian regime's ambitions when it comes to territory or terrorism. . ." That's a bizarre statement to make.
If the Islamic Republic of Iran weren't threatening to annihilate Israel, chanting "Death to America," undermining its Sunni Arab neighbors, using Syria as a puppet state or engaging in terrorism around the world, we would be far less concerned about its nuclear ambitions.
Terry Jeffrey of CNSNews put it another way: "Would Pope Francis build a secret uranium-enrichment facility? The question is absurd. But would Iran's Supreme Leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, build one? The answer: No, he has built at least two."
If, for whatever reason, Pope Francis decided that the Vatican needed nuclear power, it might raise a few eyebrows, but no one would lose sleep over it. We have no reason to distrust him. He has never called for the destruction of Israel or America. He has never encouraged Catholics to engage in terrorism.
As Prime Minister Netanyahu said yesterday, "If Iran wants to be treated like a normal country, let it act like a normal country." That was the basis of Prime Minister Netanyahu's alternative approach -- an approach grounded in reality.
Emailgate Continues
Perhaps the left isn't "Ready for Hillary" after all. For the second day in a row, the New York Times, the left's flagship paper of record, has run a story calling attention to the former secretary of state.
Today's report notes how Clinton's use of a personal rather than official government email account "shielded" her and "protected a significant amount of her correspondence from the eyes of investigators and the public."
The Times notes that when Congress requested documents in 2012 about the Benghazi attacks from the State Department, investigators did not get everything because "The State Department had not searched the email account of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton because she had maintained a private account. . . . It was only last month that [the House Benghazi Select Committee] was provided with about 300 of Mrs. Clinton's emails related to the attacks."
For the past two years, the Obama Administration and its left-wing allies have insisted that there was nothing new to learn about Benghanzi. Well, we just learned that Hillary was hiding all of her emails! Who knows what is in them? We are only now beginning to get to the source.
This administration promised to be the most transparent in history. But the fact that Hillary NEVER used an official account suggests this was a deliberate attempt to conceal information. The Associated Press said it had filed numerous Freedom of Information Act requests with the State Department, going back to March 2010, that were never answered because the department never had access to Hillary's emails.
Moreover, we are also learning today that State Department officials were warned by government technology experts that Clinton's use of private email accounts was highly problematic due to security concerns about hacking.
"We told people in her office that it wasn't a good idea," one State Department employee said. "They were so uninterested that I doubt the secretary was ever informed."
Rep. Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, is launching an investigation of whether Clinton violated disclosure laws. Stay tuned!
Obamacare Goes To Court
Obamacare was back before the Supreme Court today in a case challenging the legality of the federal government's subsidy scheme. The plain language of the law passed by Congress is clear that insurance subsidies could be offered only by state-run healthcare exchanges. But few states opted to create their own exchanges.
The Obama Administration contends that this is just a "drafting error" and nothing more. But the architect of Obamacare, Dr. Jonathan Gruber, has said repeatedly that the language was deliberate.
From today's oral arguments, it is not at all clear what direction the court is leaning. But an opinion upholding the rule of law would not necessarily get this monstrosity off the books.
It would be politically problematic. In fact, Justice Scalia even suggested as much, saying, "You really think Congress is just going to sit there while all of these disastrous consequences ensue?"
If the Supreme Court ruled against the administration, the Obama White House would immediately demand Congress fix the law. Who knows what else Obama might do unilaterally to prop up his signature initiative? Socialized health care, after all, is his legacy.
As we have seen time and again from big government, once people get a subsidy, it is almost impossible to take it away. There would be tremendous pressure from millions of Americans experiencing skyrocketing insurance premiums for Congress to act. Health care would once again dominate the political debate -- just in time for the 2016 presidential campaign.
Purim & Protocol
Jews throughout the world are celebrating Purim today. It is the story of Queen Esther who broke protocol and saved the Jewish people in Persia from a plot to annihilate them. Facing an existential threat from modern day Persia (Iran), Israel's leader addressed Congress yesterday amid much consternation about protocol.
So long as God gives me breath, I promise to fight the ancient evil of anti-Semitism and to stand with Israel, the apple of God's eye.