Presidential prediction

I'm going out on a limb at this early date and predicting that our next president will be Martin O'Malley.  

Recusal?

Canon 3A(6) of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges states: “A judge should not make public comment on the merits of a matter pending or impending in any court.” 28 U.S.C. sec 455(a) mandates that a justice “shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”

On these grounds, should not Justices Kagan and Ginsburg recuse themselves from the same-sex marriage case presently before the Supreme Court? Both have performed same-sex marriages and both have spoken out in favor of it.

Happy Christmas, War is Over...

In case anyone missed it, the president announced in his Memorial Day address that the 14-year war in Afghanistan is over. The response of his audience at Arlington National Cemetery was underwhelming -- silence. The response across the country was similar: there were no cheers, there was no rejoicing, there was no dancing in the streets. The longest war in our history ended and there was no fanfare, no parades, no fireworks. Why? Because there was no victory.

Motives are now pure...

Barack Obama speaking at Nike headquarters on May 8...  “I’ve run my last election, and the only reason I do something is because I think it’s good for American workers and the American people and the American economy.” 

Does this mean that before his last election, he did things to get re-elected even though they were not good for America? Before the election his motives were suspect, but now they are pure? Is this what he wants us to believe?

Justice in Baltimore

OK, the Baltimore protesters (aka rioters/thugs) can still cry out against police oppression in the black community, but they can no longer claim it's a racial issue -- unless they're prepared to say that the police officer charged with murder was a racist against his own race. I admit, I was flabbergasted when I saw that 3 of the 6 police officers were African Americans. How on earth could this be? I have not heard a lot of news today, but what I have heard (on CNN) has not even mentioned the black on black character of this incident. What is the explanation for this? This is no "white cop kills innocent black guy" story. This is much more like the recent shooting in New Jersey where a black cop shot a black guy and was assisted by his white partner. I can't help but wonder, had the protesters known a week ago that half of the offending officers where black, would we have had the same level of anger and riot? And amidst all the demands for justice for Freddie Gray, will there be commensurate demands for justice for CVS and all the other business owners and home owners whose property was destroyed? We'll see.

The War on Poverty

Americans below the poverty line in 1967: 14%

+

47 years and 22 trillion dollars

=

Americans below the poverty line 2014: 14%

The War on Poverty reminds me of the trench warfare of WWI. Both sides spent a lot of money and sacrificed a lot of lives, yet the lines never moved very far in one direction or the other. Maybe there is a better way to fight poverty.

Victory

Winston Churchill speaking on the necessity of defeating Germany and the tyranny of naziism: 

“We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many, many long months of struggle and of suffering. You ask, what is our policy? I can say: It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us; to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: It is victory, victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory, however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival.” 

If we only had the same determination to defeat the Islamic State and jihadism.

The Treaty of Hudaibiyah

To understand the recent nuclear arms agreement with Iran, we must understand that the Iranian mullahs follow rules based on the life and example of Muhammad. And one of the most important tactical victories in Muhammad’s career is what is known as the Treaty of Hudaibiyah.

Muhammad made this treaty with the pagan Quraysh tribe of Mecca, which was the most powerful tribe in the region at the time. The Qurayshis entered into a 10-year peace pact with Muhammad and lived to regret it. It appeared at first to be a lopsided treaty in favor of the Qurayshis, but once free from any military threat from the most powerful tribe in the region, Muhammad suddenly “received a revelation” from Allah, which can be found in Surah 48 of the Quran. It begins, “Surely We (Allah) have given to you a clear victory.”

With the Quravshis sidelined, Muhammad began attacking several large Jewish tribes in Arabia. Any men who joined the Muslims in war would receive a significant share of the plunder, booty, slaves, and female prisoners. Within two years the wealth of the Jews became that of the Muslims, who went from about 1,200 men to more than 10,000. Muhammad then launched a surprise attack on the Qurayshis and defeated them, leaving the Muslims standing alone as the most powerful group on the Arabian Peninsula.

The takeaway is that Muslims today look to the example of Muhammad and the Treaty of Hudaibiyah as one of the primary go-to strategies to defeat their enemies. Enter into a treaty for the purpose of gaining strength so that you can eventually defeat your enemy. “Hudaibiya” is now a code-word meaning “kiss the hand of your enemy until you have the opportunity to cut it off.” This strategy is ingrained in Islamic legal teaching.

In addition, Islamic law forbids a Muslim leader or society from signing a treaty for longer than 10 years, a principle based on Muhammad’s strategy that you only enter into a deal like this when you’re in a position of weakness. Iran has been under harsh economic sanctions for decades, and oil prices have fallen to the lowest level in a decade. Iran is economically weak. Interestingly, the deal Obama has negotiated with Iran expires after 10 years.

All classical Islamic jurists accept Hudaibiya as a binding principle. In fact, in December 2013, Iranian leaders talked about the negotiations and openly referred to Hudaibiyah. They all understand that Muslim rulers can only make temporary truces with unbelievers, which can be broken at their discretion if it will further the cause of Islam.

This is Islamic law. Muhammad is cited as the precedent for it, but it is embedded in their law. Leaders only engage in any kind of negotiation or treaty when they are in a position of weakness; otherwise, they just keep waging jihad. Peace with one’s enemies is never the end-game for those who follow Islamic law, but apparently the Obama administration is either ignorant of this principle or willfully cooperating with it.

So who do we believe?

Yesterday, energy secretary Ernest Moniz said, “I want to say this is not an agreement for 10 years or 15 years or 20 years. It is a long-term agreement with a whole set of phases...So that's the way we’re thinking about it. It's not a fixed-year agreement. It's a forever agreement in a certain sense, with different stages.”

In an interview on NPR yesterday, the president said, “What is a more relevant fear would be that in Year 13, 14, 15, they (the Iranians) have advanced centrifuges that enrich uranium fairly rapidly, and at that point, the breakout times would have shrunk almost down to zero.”

Double standard?

End of last week, comic Steven Crowder released video of his efforts to buy a same-sex wedding cake in Dearborn, MI. The three stores in the video refused. Only thing is, they were run by Muslims instead of Christians. I have yet to see this reported by anyone in the mainstream media and I have yet to hear of any protests. We wouldn't have a double standard here would we? Is there anyone willing to take on the Muslim community for their anti-gay religious beliefs? I doubt it.  Crowder video