Wednesday PM ~ TheFrontPageCover

The Front Page Cover
~ Featuring ~
The Cowards of Academia
by Dennis Prager
AGHnzvDgAIc_dkrUO59jF21LrUmiQ79dA3RIshU-YlAdfSFPOhc54BmJs1OTRtvnrEX-cCbeiMVXdurlydL03p7YzXsWg_6cAavWTIOYU1PogQU4ftAjtXM=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
.
 How Conservative Is the European 
 'Right-Wing'? 
TRsRLXrOwvxF2iMTeywAUu4f83p99RNxuvMHWqfII2gXHqXyEJbWUzDI2zCVzncWInDm0GXTIjKHAe9s6et5NFymrVsBSCetYz4ZyNiFQIZ6yj5m1isLwp-snXsHuQ=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
By Brian Mark Weber: Since Donald Trump emerged as a viable candidate in 2016 and went on to win the presidency, other politicians in Europe have ascended in popularity including Marine Le Pen in France, Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, and Nigel Farage in Great Britain. Typically, the media have lumped together Donald Trump with just about any non-establishment European political candidate. So, thanks in large part to Leftmedia mischaracterization, most Americans simply assume these upstarts to be in the same grain as American conservatives.
          For example, in 2016 the Washington Post suggested that little separates Trump's rise in the U.S. from the emergence of populists in Europe, and that one of the primary threads tying them all together is an uneducated, aging support base that fears social change.
          There is certainly some truth to that — after all, Trump himself is definitely more populist and nationalist than conservative. But this narrative is a narrow oversimplification of what's happening. Certainly, European populist candidates have latched onto Trump's message by appealing to their own citizens weariness over migrant populations and eroding national sovereignty within the European Union.
          Marine Le Pen, leader of France's National Front party, is headed to a May 7 runoff for the French presidency after Sunday's vote. She's a 20-point underdog against globalist EU proponent Emmanuel Macron. Interestingly, neither establishment party advanced to the runoff. Le Pen regularly warns about the threat posed by immigration into France, saying, for example, "Mass immigration is not an opportunity for France; it's a tragedy for France." She promises to protect citizens from the dangers of unfettered immigration. But one issue alone is not enough to brand Le Pen a conservative.
          Trump applauded her, saying, "She's the strongest on borders, and she's the strongest on what's been going on in France. Whoever is the toughest on radical Islamic terrorism, and whoever is the toughest at the borders, will do well in the election."
          The issue of immigration alone seems to have forged an alliance between American conservatives and European nationalists, but there are more differences than similarities. Populist politicians in Europe are generally not in favor of deregulation or transferring power away from a centralized bureaucracy. Le Pen is all for big government. If anything her policies will result in France's government being more powerful and influential in the lives of the French, not less. And despite the media tall tale, she is far more likely to form an alliance with Vladimir Putin than is Trump.
          Ronald Brownstein writes in the Atlantic, "European populist parties share a common set of priorities focused on restricting immigration, unwinding global economic and political integration (by renouncing the European Union, and, for some of these parties, NATO as well), taking tougher steps to fight Islamic radicalism, and, in most cases, opposing cultural liberalism and secularization at home. On all those fronts, they view Putin not as a threat, but as an ally."
          Nonetheless, the symbolic power of the immigration issue has brought American conservatives and European populists together for the time being. Bill Wirtz and Casey Given explain in the Washington Examiner, "American alternative media outlets have been taken by Le Pen for months. Breitbart News has written about her at least 224 times. The site's editor-in-chief, Alex Marlow, even entertained the idea of establishing a Paris bureau for the website last November." Yet, other than publicly criticizing unfettered immigration into France, there is little that Le Pen has in common with American conservatives.
          And there's a risk in making bedfellows of politicians in Europe who appear conservative due to their tough talk on immigration but otherwise embrace a very left-wing political agenda. Categorizing European socialists as part of a right-wing ideology raises false hopes of a global conservative tide and prevents conservatives at home from staying focused on those principles necessary for limited government.
          Conservatives in the United States must be wary of getting caught up in any movement that doesn't move us closer to our conservative objectives. Andrew McCarthy writes in National Review that these goals shared by American conservatives are founded "in a deep understanding of why the Constitution's separation-of-powers framework and promotion of individual liberty are, in the long run, good for society. It is fantasy to believe these objectives will be helped along by populism. More reflective of a mood than a theory, populism is notoriously content to have big-government preening overrun limited-government caution."
          In short, the European "right" is nothing like the American right, in that we stand for liberty, constitutionally limited government, and truly free enterprise, while they stand for big government and the welfare state. The only reason they're lumped in with us is because people confuse nationalism with conservatism. There's plenty of overlap in interests, but the two terms are not synonymous. They like to tell us the Nazis (the National Socialist Workers Party) were "right wing," so anything feeding that narrative gets play. It all depends on how you define your terms, and we don't accept their definition.
          American conservatives and constitutionalists should not expect a wave of limited government policies to sweep across Western Europe anytime soon. Nor should we put our time, energy and efforts into buttressing left-wing politicians simply because they wave the flags of nationalism or talk tough on immigration, or because our media derides them as "right wing." That doesn't mean we shouldn't support European politicians who are intent on tackling some of the same problems we have here at home, but we need to reject the notion that Europe's supposed right wing is in alignment with American conservatism.  ~The Patriot Post
.
G3awWDhq0cgsx1oLFdnSVnRhXyexuF4d4rUDu3lfkpM9CEhh9A5FQE1OH4TFrExvY2Q4ahoGJYapHkZh9qWTNzup1a-HaWzeK4jRKG9BkzXE=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
.
Hannity Fires Back: “I Won’t Be Silenced
by the Alt-Left’s Slander!”
jKjWl8wvgDF-cBMOz6s1K4mt1pxOBsGFmREipaccRXlEm6CagejeDOPckN7cBK1yljB2tK0FT5vZURCUG9aOLJAutqna6GEkmxrXtMkGPM--9vdeG1IFDWiaj4Ypj2LgaavSD5xDrmVS3ib2_sI1i7sb7yPRkjafj_m_vuc6JlTWGFjkuaM1HC7XCPXSWEiJDi0S0ll1e4ANcg=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
by Keely Sharp
{eaglerising.com} ~ With Bill O’Reilly out of the picture, all the liberal sights seem to be on Sean Hannity. However, despite the target on his back, Hannity says he will NOT be silenced by the alt-left’s “vicious slander.”... It is refreshing to see him take a stand not refuse to let the slander slide any longer! The conservative host has been in radio for 30 years, and 21 of those years were with Fox News. He says he has endure numerous slander attempts and he has survived them all. What makes Liberals think that this will take him down? Maybe they should focus on their own, corrupt news anchors….like Rachel Maddow for example. Hannity released the following statement:...http://eaglerising.com/43137/hannity-fires-back-i-wont-be-silenced-by-the-alt-lefts-slander/
.
Ted Cruz Reveals Plan To Make Cartel Boss
“El Chapo” Pay For Border Wall
4heZ7rDXQK3i3StcsJq3BTf9sbMa4tKPBsWTOqi5snVaodBi5IanFFk499ouyngkejHKlFfPlbHtr9q33UX3lPSztbmlhR6WjeDQXDB0aIbQxwhk_ZH95K8spd4ds2B6zQS4=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
by Rick Wells
{rickwells.us} ~ Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) took a major step towards completely taking the air out of the free-spending Democrats and RINOs’ newfound thrift that exists only in matters related to the blocking border enforcement... If the wall were labeled a renewable energy wall or a sustainable development barrier and painted green it might have a chance, as they’re used to approving projects with names like that without ever looking at the price tag. Dems and RINOs couldn’t care less about border security or its price, they just don’t want to interrupt the flow of illegal drugs and people into the country. Cruz has a plan to remove the price tag as a point of objection, leaving them further exposed as being simply politically motivated hacks. Cruz has introduced a bill that calls for $14 billion seized from Mexican drug cartel boss Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman to be used to fund the border wall between the U.S. and Mexico. Senator Cruz said in a statement, “Fourteen billion dollars will go a long way toward building a wall that will keep Americans safe and hinder the illegal flow of drugs, weapons, and individuals across our southern border.”...http://rickwells.us/ted-cruz-reveals-plan-make-cartel-boss-el-chapo-pay-border-wall/
.
DOJ: Court Decision Does Not Stop Effort
To Cut Funds From Sanctuary Cities
3Aff8lbO6E1OV7oH2Ro7NCfJWv1VKELXMTkRBBuBfWr7yl7tCq-NiV4LId_bCe5l7kTMEp59gVMgMZx4p7QhCp-n32DZlWdeoSb3k-s4IqXd8f1QinklCnFJwNShioR43gp7SR0mQQ2Wpnpoops8ZQ=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
by Alex Pfeiffer
{dailycaller.com} ~ The Department of Justice is not worried about a federal court decision Tuesday that temporarily blocks enforcement of Trump’s executive order that targeted federal funding of “sanctuary cities.”... A spokesman said the DOJ will continue on with its efforts to restrict federal law enforcement grants from jurisdictions that restrict the federal government from accessing information about the immigration status of an individual. The judge sided with the city of San Francisco and Santa Clara County, California, which both were worried about potentially losing billions in federal money. The DOJ lawyers argued that Santa Clara would have lost less than $1 million in funding. However, the judge said that the order was written too broadly. Orrick did uphold the government’s ability to enforce conditions of existing grants and 8 U.S.C. 1373, the federal statute which pertains to sanctuary cities...http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/25/doj-court-decision-does-not-stop-effort-to-cut-funds-from-sanctuary-cities/
.
Mike Lee Warns Trump About Taxpayer
Funding of Soros Groups Overseas
6PWHgj_nZs2NC4idJ1xCzx6biidgsFBiMmprICCaQ497vjU2q_qXkNxPsVvPEkiYiZSgQK3wIyrbJALAIcSuLDO2yKy8SLg1SbJqhuDzNNqGNnP2G52BA7E4CgcXyrA=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
by Fred Lucas
{dailysignal.com} ~ For eight years, U.S. foreign assistance was tied to a leftist political agenda rather than American interests, and it’s now up to President Donald Trump to correct that, Sen. Mike Lee said Tuesday... Lee took particular aim at U.S. support during the liar-nObama administration for the overseas work of nonprofits bankrolled by liberal billionaire George Soros. “Whatever one’s views about abortion, energy regulation, alternative family structures, they are neither core international priorities of the American people, nor essential to American national security. They are domestic political controversies, pet causes of a sort of privileged, globalist elite,” Lee said in the speech at The Heritage Foundation...http://dailysignal.com/2017/04/25/mike-lee-warns-trump-about-taxpayer-funding-of-soros-groups-overseas?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MorningBell&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWmpNNU1XRTVPVEV3TWpndyIsInQiOiJKOHJGSDVkenBDaDNhNGtwbFNsN2tDNVE5QWZkc2dFTWZZOHRaZkVUK2UwY3FNbnVPY2haTGcwazVOS2c2amZaVDdYbldlY1dWOUtCVFhHMnFIM3VXWlwvdGtubGRnSEV0UUoxNzUrMEdvS2NjVW9qNnNBQU9rejkrUTV2SHpGZUgifQ%3D%3D
.
G3awWDhq0cgsx1oLFdnSVnRhXyexuF4d4rUDu3lfkpM9CEhh9A5FQE1OH4TFrExvY2Q4ahoGJYapHkZh9qWTNzup1a-HaWzeK4jRKG9BkzXE=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
.
The Cowards of Academia
YufvTWUuSDSa2qCQ9sEO3DAhuT9e_LOBSiNhvCO4e3DNt8chfHbHN1LWednhCCHOjtnxcQomrb0t9Gkx7bY5oAC9OaIMHFwmrgz98NrKAqsxHSbxNtH-X1q60PPELa_3HS6tx5V4velTVV1-tSEeuZoHe4R2=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
by Dennis Prager
{jewishworldreview.com} ~ Now that student mobs at universities around America and elsewhere in the West have silenced conservative speaker after conservative speaker, it has dawned on a small number of left-wing professors that the public is beginning to have contempt for the universities. As a result, a handful of academics at a handful of universities have signed statements on behalf of allowing "diverse" views to be heard at the university.


These statements are worthless.

While some of the professors who have signed them may sincerely believe that the university should honor the value of non-left free speech, one should keep in mind the following caveats.

First, the number of professors, deans and administrators who have signed these statements is very small.

Second, while no one can know what animates anyone else, it's a little hard to believe that many of those who did sign are sincere. If they are, why haven't we heard from them for decades? Shutting out conservatives and conservative ideas is not new. Plus, it's easy to sign a letter. You look righteous "Of course, I support free speech." and pay no price.

Third, these statements accomplish nothing of practical value. They are basically feel-good gestures.

If any of the rioting students read these statements — a highly unlikely occurrence — it is hard to imagine any of them thinking: "Wow, I really have been acting like a fascist, rioting and shutting down non-left-wing speakers, but now my eyes have been opened and I'm going to stop. Even though my professors have taught me that every conservative is a sexist racist xenophobic Islamophobic hatemonger, next time one of these despicable human beings comes to campus, I will silently wait for them to finish talking and then civilly ask challenging questions."

Thanks to left-wing indoctrination that begins in elementary school, most American students do not enter college as supporters of free speech. As reported in The New York Times on Feb. 7, 2017, a Knight Foundation survey found that only 45 percent of students "support that right when the speech in question is offensive to others and made in public."

If any professors want to do something truly effective, they should form a circle around a hall in which a conservative is scheduled to speak, with each of them holding up a sign identifying themselves as a professor: "I am (name), professor of (department)."

If just 1 percent of the professors on campus — that would mean just 43 faculty members at a place like UCLA — were to stand in front of the building in which a conservative was to speak, that might actually have an impact. If they were then attacked by left-wing thugs, other faculty members would be forced to take a position.

But it won't happen. It won't because the university is a particularly cowardly place. And it has been so for many decades. In the 1970s, when I was a graduate student at Columbia University, left-wing students took over classrooms and administration offices. But I recall no faculty members objecting; and the college presidents and deans, were, if possible, even more craven.

Ann Coulter was scheduled to speak this week at the University of California, Berkeley. Last week, the university announced it was canceling her speech, providing the usual excuse that it couldn't guarantee her safety, or others'. This excuse is as phony as it is cowardly. Berkeley and other universities know well that there is a way to ensure safety. They can do so in precisely the same way every other institution in a civilized society ensures citizens' safety: by calling in sufficient police to protect the innocent and arrest the violent. But college presidents don't do that sort of thing — not at Berkeley, or Yale University, or Middlebury College, or just about anywhere else. They don't want to tick off their clients (students), their faculty, leftist activist groups or the liberal media.

Under pressure, Berkeley's cowardly administration rescinded its cancellation and rescheduled Coulter's speech during the daytime during pre-finals week, when there are no classes and many students are not on campus. Coulter has rejected these changes and vowed to speak on the originally scheduled date.

So, next time you read a statement by some professors — virtually all of whom, remember, have been silent for decades — on behalf of allowing opinions other than their own to be expressed on their campuses, take it with a large grain of salt. It's primarily because some alumni are finally withholding funds from their closed-minded alma maters, or because the students they have produced have become so violent even the mainstream media can't ignore it.

Until they line up to safeguard people like Ann Coulter and stop teaching their students that conservatives are deplorable human beings, their open letters aren't worth the printer toner that prints them.
E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Command Center to add comments!

Join Command Center