Monthly Archives: March 2015

NASCAR Goes PC Over Indiana Law

This is some pathetic PC caving. Issuing a preemptive statement condemning a perfectly legit law. In fact, this law should be a no brainer.

NASCAR is disappointed by the recent legislation passed in Indiana. We will not embrace nor participate in exclusion or intolerance. We are committed to diversity and inclusion within our sport and therefore will continue to welcome all competitors and fans at our events in the state of Indiana and anywhere else we race.

Hopefully this will tick off NASCAR’s Red State base. If NASCAR IS disappointed with Indiana, hopefully NASCAR’s fans will be disappointed with it for it’s absolutely craven PC behavior.

Message to Americans: Resistance is Futile

The oh-so-politically correct Charlotte Observer just published an op-ed by two members of the Charlotte Immigration Integration Task Force. Stefan Latorre and Emily Zimmern co-authored the piece, entitled Charlotte, start now integrating immigrants. The message is direct: The Charlotte region is undergoing “seismic demographic shifts” which “translate into a time of dramatic change.”

Can’t argue that point — history is full of examples of the dramatic changes resulting from demographic shifts, including Lebanon, Kosovo, and Tibet.

But Latorre and Zimmern assure us that the seismic demographic shift heading our way will bring nothing but prosperity. That shift is inevitable anyway, so we might as well enjoy it.

Co-author Stefan Latorre will certainly benefit from more mass migration from Latin America. He’s an immigration attorney born in Colombia and raised in Miami. He now has law offices in Charlotte; Monroe; Hickory; Greensboro; Columbia, South Carolina; and Jacksonville, Florida. So we know his views are not only well-informed, but totally without bias.

Emily Zimmern is the executive director of the Levine Museum of the No New South. She’s also held leadership positions in the United Jewish Appeal. Interestingly, the UJA does not believe in open borders for Israel. In fact, it is dedicated to preserving Israel as a Jewish state, even if that involves the blockade and military assault on Gaza. The United Jewish Appeal’s stance is so rigid, it’s angered Jews who reject Israel’s harsh measures:

Members of Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) gathered outside the offices of the United Jewish Appeal-Federation of Jewish Philanthropies in New York today, criticizing the group’s support for Israel’s policy towards Gaza, including the blockade of the coastal territory and the ongoing military assault. …

The JVP petition is also addressed to Jerry Silverman, the head of the umbrella group Jewish Federations of North America, which UJA is a part of. But when JVP members tried to set up a meeting with Silverman last week, the Federations had a blunt message: there would be no in-person meeting. The umbrella group said they refuse to be in “direct communication” with JVP.

“Your ongoing support for boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel render any kind of direct communication, beyond this email, impossible,” said Federations’ Managing Director of Communications Rebecca Dinar in an e-mail to JVP. “If you alter those tactics, accept Israel as a Jewish State and explicitly condemned BDS we would be open to arranging a meeting.”

I have no problem with Zimmern or anyone else defending Israel’s right to protect its identity. But the hypocrisy and self-promotion of the co-authors of the Observer piece is troublesome.

Mike Church on Foreign Policy

This is from Mike Church’s Facebook page, although he doesn’t go by that name on Facebook:

I feel compelled to respond to a comment I hear more and more often from listeners to the Mike Church show on SiriusXM Patriot Channel. It goes like this:

LISTENER OBJECTION: Mike, I love you 95% of the time, your historical knowledge and insight on the Founders and the Constitution is awesome BUT your history and OPINION on foreign policy, war and Christianity is warped and unbelievably ignorant.
Signed,
“Conservative Listener”

I RESPOND: Your latter complaint defeats your former compliment. I use the same hagiographic method to study the Constitution’s history as I do Christianity’s and war. I suggest you: stop listening COMPLETELY (If I’m wrong using the same method for the latter I must be wrong in the former). Recall your like of this page and never visit it again and “unfriend” me here.
I wish you well in your pursuit of sophistry and perpetual war and will continue praying for you.

Pax Domini tecum.
Me

He is absolutely right that non-interventionism flows directly from Constitutionalism, a point that needs to be made incessantly. But I don’t think this is the right approach. “Conservative” interventionists need to be engaged and challenged. Otherwise, how does he expect to make any headway?