IN TODAY’S EDITION
- What started the NFL protests? The myth of a pandemic of racist cops.
- Conservatives have introduced their first attempt at addressing “Dreamers.”
- U.S. policy on Iran may be about to change for the better.
- Daily Features: Top Headlines, Cartoons, Columnists and Short Cuts.
“To prevent crimes, is the noblest end and aim of criminal jurisprudence. To punish them, is one of the means necessary for the accomplishment of this noble end and aim.” —James Wilson (1790)
NFL players kneeling in protest during the national anthem was a movement steadily gaining momentum. It suddenly exploded last weekend after Donald Trump called out the protesting players for disrespecting the American flag. Now the Leftmedia elite are blaming Trump for causing “division.” But the truth is Trump hit upon an issue that has become deeply offensive to many Americans: Multi-millionaires are protesting supposed injustice and racism in America that is simply not backed up by the facts. Those protesting are demanding that Americans concede to accepting a reality that amounts to a lie. And what is that lie? That police across the nation are systemically racist against blacks. It’s the Democrat war on cops.
Any time an issue like racism is raised, it evokes high degrees of emotion and passion, because it hits at two fundamental truths. First, an individual has absolutely no control over their ethnicity; quite literally they are “born that way.” Second, people naturally gravitate toward and relate to those with whom they share the most in common. And neither of these truths are inherently wrong or evil. When these realities are raised as ultimate delimiters and primary identifiers between people, that’s when the ugly problem of racism emerges. In other words, friction happens when people are taught to attribute everything about themselves and others primarily to the lowest common denominator of race. For example, the reason you got in trouble was because you’re black, or the reason you got into a good school is because you are Asian, etc.
It is precisely this flawed race-based mindset that has been behind the current NFL anthem protests. When objectively looking at the actual data, an honest individual can easily see the flaw in these protesters’ objections. The truth is that police are not a bunch of racists running around seeking black men to kill or imprison.
In 2015, the number of individuals killed by police was 995. That’s out of a total population of 318 million people. Obviously, the bare fact that an individual was killed doesn’t tell the whole story, but of those killed only 90 were determined to be unarmed. Of those unarmed individuals killed only 4% were black men killed by white cops. In the vast majority of all police killings (three-quarters), law enforcement officers were confronted by individuals who were armed. One statistic often left out of the conversation is the number of police killed. In 2015, 124 out of an estimated 900,000 full-time federal, state and local officers lost their lives in the line of duty.
The objective data simply does not support the protesters’ message of a pandemic of racist cops. It is merely a popular myth perpetuated by those who ply their trade by convincing people that they are helpless victims and targets of some massively unjust society, especially the police.
Why is it that none of these NFL players or owners has the courage to actually stand up and challenge the lie that is being perpetuated? The greater problem is not players kneeling during the national anthem, it’s that no one is willing to step up and challenge the lie of systemic racism.
Two Republican senators on Monday introduced what they’re calling the “conservative alternative” to the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act. Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and James Lankford (R-OK) are touting the Solution for Undocumented Children through Careers, Employment, Education and Defending our nation (SUCCEED) Act, a tortured acronym of a name that seeks to address the sympathetic immigrants at the center of the debate over Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). After Donald Trump announced he’d end Barack Obama’s unconstitutional program, declaring he wanted a legislative solution, the GOP is working to provide just that. The question is whether it’s a good solution.
Tillis and Lankford call SUCCEED “a fair and merit-based solution” that provides “undocumented children with the opportunity to earn and keep legal status if they meet specific requirements, pass an extensive criminal background check, and follow one or a combination of three merit-based tracks to demonstrate they are productive members of their communities.” The senators say it’s based on four core principles: compassion, merit, prevention and fairness.
“This is not an amnesty bill,” Lankford insisted, in part because he says it will require companion legislation on border security. Unless one defines amnesty as “whatever lets illegals stay,” Lankford is correct, and the bill has some merit. But it also has the potential for numbers that will alarm some conservatives. Despite its stringent requirements, McClatchy reports the bill could “provide a pathway to citizenship for as many as 2.5 million young undocumented immigrants.” Given that DACA only affected between 800,000 and one million, that’s a big deal.
Republicans are bowing to what they perceive as political reality. Americans by and large are sympathetic toward these “children” (some of whom are as old as 36). This is by Democrat design. As we said last week, Democrats love to use broad brush strokes in painting an overly simplistic portrait of these Dreamers with the goal of including as many illegal aliens as possible in this protected class. Thus, vast majorities of Americans want to help “Dreamers,” though they also favor tightening border security and things like employer verification. Will enough Republicans see this as an improvement over the status quo to pass it?
Susan Collins kills Republican health reform … again (The Hill)
Sens. Graham and Sanders agree: Don’t send taxpayer money to insurance companies — but for opposite reasons (CNS News)
Obama, Holder group pushes $500,000 into Virginia governor race (The Washington Free Beacon)
Democrat-appointed judges uphold Texas law against sanctuary cities (The Washington Times)
For perspective: The North Koreans interpret everything as a “declaration of war” (Washington Examiner)
Iran defies nuclear deal with latest ballistic missile test (The Washington Free Beacon)
Smithsonian finally gives Clarence Thomas a spot in its National Museum of African American History (The Washington Times)
The Michigan comeback story. How business-tax reform helped revive the state’s economy (The Wall Street Journal)
NFL players arrested every seven days on average (The Daily Wire)
Flag on the play? The NFL might get in trouble with the IRS for getting political (Washington Examiner)
Policy: Trump’s new travel ban is standard security policy. (The Daily Signal)
Policy: Time to base nutrition policy on science. (Real Clear Health)
For more, visit Patriot Headline Report.
Don’t Miss Patriot Humor
Check out Rocky.
If you’d like to receive Patriot Humor by email, update your subscription here.
By John J. Bastiat
“We know Iran has already violated parts of the [nuclear] agreement. … They’re not just walking ‘up to the line’ on the agreement: They’re crossing the line at times.” —National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster
In the wake of his recent comprehensive review of U.S. policy toward Iran, President Donald Trump ably demonstrated he “gets it.” Referencing his future stance on the Iran nuclear deal brokered by his not-ready-for-primetime predecessor, President Trump hinted to reporters last week at the United Nations General Assembly, “I have decided. I’ll let you know what the decision is.” The president has often slammed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), that is, the so-called “Iran Deal.” That deal is also more appropriately termed a “treaty” — unless of course you’re Barack Obama and don’t want the Senate involved in ratifying it. Thus, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to infer Trump’s decision won’t favor Iran.
That’s certainly more than can be said for the previous decision oozing out of the executive branch, which traded Iran’s unverifiable “promise” to “limit” its development of nuclear weapons in exchange for the blanket lifting of crippling economic and political sanctions. In other words, as envisioned and executed during the Obama regime, Iran got a free pass. That ended last week.
Correctly labeling the fatally flawed agreement for what it is, in his address to the UN General Assembly the president branded JCPOA as “one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the U.S. has ever entered into” and “an embarrassment to the U.S.” (Other than that, it’s a great agreement.) The president further warned that the status quo could have grave consequences: “We cannot let a murderous regime continue these destabilizing activities while building dangerous missiles, and we cannot abide by an agreement if it provides cover for the eventual construction of a nuclear program.” These words are welcome and overdue.
Ending this raw deal for America is more than justified. As National Security Advisor and retired Gen. McMaster noted, Iran routinely violates even the overly generous terms of the current agreement. Although the administration did — reluctantly — certify this quarter’s compliance by Iran with JCPOA, the move seems, at the least, to be a political timing piece, not an affirmation that things are “jiggy” with a nation whose stated goal is to wipe Israel “and its allies” (read: us, a.k.a. “The Great Satan,” in Ayatollah-speak) “off the face of the earth.” Sure: Who wouldn’t want to enter a deal with a country like this? In any case, we wouldn’t advise optimism on certification next quarter (deadline October 15th). Some media sources claim ending JCPOA could trigger diplomatic upheaval with the five other nations, including China and Russia, that were involved in negotiating it, but so what? Ruffled “frenemy” feathers are nothing new or abnormally threatening to the U.S., while a nuclear-tipped Iran is.
Moreover, Iran shows no signs of changing its evil ways. Responding to Trump’s UN address, Iran dragged its usual “death to them all” diplomacy up from the gallows to give a fresh stink-eye to the rest of the civilized world. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani flatly declared that any ideas about renegotiation are dead on arrival. He also stated that “the Iranian people deserve an apology” from Trump, since he labeled their government a “murderous regime.” An apology? Since when does truth-in-diplomacy about, well, a murderous regime warrant an apology — especially to the people suffering under it?
As Trump further noted, “The Iranian government masks a corrupt dictatorship behind the false guise of a democracy.” As has been documented in myriad articles on countless occasions, Iran is also one of the world’s leading state sponsors and exporters of terrorism. More recently, it colluded with North Korea to co-develop both countries’ ballistic nuclear weapons programs, while simultaneously giving the middle finger to International Atomic Energy Agency nuclear facility inspectors. Iran restricted and even denied inspectors’ access to facilities that must be inspected to certify compliance with the JCPOA.
Then, last weekend, Iran test-fired another long-range ballistic missile as a figurative shot across the bow.
The only way to deal with rogue regimes such as these is to speak in the one language they all understand: Power. Iran must be made to understand that relief on likely soon-to-be-re-imposed sanctions is directly tied to its conduct, and that bad conduct means no relief — or even tighter sanctions. A good first step in that direction is to decertify Iran’s compliance with the JCPOA.
As U.S. Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley noted, “If the president chooses not to certify Iranian compliance, that does not mean the United States is withdrawing from the JCPOA. If the president finds that he cannot certify Iranian compliance, it would be a message to Congress that the administration believes either that Iran is in violation of the deal, or that the lifting of sanctions against Iran is not appropriate and proportional to the regime’s behavior, or that the lifting of sanctions is not in the U.S. national security interest, or any combination of the three.”
In other words, decertification doesn’t end JCPOA; it simply gives the U.S. more leverage than it currently has. That’s at least a small first step in the right direction.
MORE ANALYSIS FROM THE PATRIOT POST
- DNC’s Funding Slump — Year to date, Democrats have raised less than half that of Republicans. But it’s a wider and deeper problem.
- Merkel Wins Again, but Germany Is Changing Course — Many media outlets focused on her fourth victory, but the real news is how much support she lost — and why.
BEST OF RIGHT OPINION
- Dennis Prager: Who’s Divisive — the President or the Players?
- Cal Thomas: The Vietnam War Revisited
- James Shott: Will the Special Counsel Investigation Produce Anything Relevant?
For more, visit Right Opinion.
OPINION IN BRIEF
Tony Perkins: “Maybe these [NFL] players believe that making the National Anthem the villain of a centuries-long racial divide makes a powerful statement. But in the process, it shows contempt for far more than President Trump. It dishonors the black airmen, soldiers, sailors, and Marines who’ve come home in caskets draped with those very stars and stripes. And I suppose most teams were too busy sitting out America’s proudest tradition to realize that Sunday was Gold Star Mother’s Day, set aside to honor the moms whose military sons and daughters paid the ultimate price. How many of those grieving women watched the NFL’s demonstrations with tears streaming down their face at these players’ ungratefulness? How many veterans who lost limbs in Iraq and Afghanistan tuned in wishing they could stand for anything ever again?”
Insight: “Watch out for the fellow who talks about putting things in order! Putting things in order always means getting other people under your control.” —Denis Diderot (1713-1784)
Questions worth asking: “Someday, maybe, we’ll get around to asking: What would have happened if Hillary Clinton’s very real email scandal — with its mountainous evidence of felony mishandling of classified information and destruction of government records — had been investigated with the no-holds-barred vigor [Robert] Mueller and his band of Hillary donors are applying to the surmise of Trump collusion in Russian espionage?” —Andrew McCarthy
Observations: “NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell says he is ‘proud of our league.’ I am disgusted. Goodell says that the players have free speech rights. Tell that to Tim Tebow who knelt during games to honor God and was pilloried for it. What do you think Goodell would do if an NFL player took a knee and said he did it to protest abortion on demand?” —Gary Bauer
Non Compos Mentis: “NASCAR again proved to be an insular oddity in American sports culture on Sunday as Monster Energy NASCAR Cup Series pre-race festivities at New Hampshire Motor Speedway were completely devoid of the type of national anthem protests that have permeated other professional sports.” —USA Today (Who knew that a sport sticking with sport was an “insular oddity”?)
Village Idiots: “People in Hollywood, for the most part, are people from the Midwest who moved to Hollywood to have a career. So this idea of ‘coastal elites’ living in a bubble is ridiculous. … I laugh when I see [Trump] say ‘Hollywood elite.’ Hollywood elite? I don’t have a star on Hollywood Boulevard, Donald Trump has a star on Hollywood Boulevard! F— you!” —George Clooney
And last… “In democracies, we the people get the government we deserve. We also get the celebrities we deserve, the artists we deserve, and the athletes we deserve. Because ultimately, we the people get to decide who and what gets our attention, and who and what does not.” —Mike Rowe
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Managing Editor Nate Jackson
Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.