Have a comment?

Judge Jeanine has an opinion (video).

Andrew McCarthy writes:

"If I were investigating Benghazi, I'd be homing in on that 10 p.m. phone call. That's the one between President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton -- the one that's gotten close to zero attention... We have heard almost nothing about what Obama was doing that night. Back in February, though, CNS News did manage to pry one grudging disclosure out of White House mendacity mogul Jay Carney: 'At about 10 p.m., the president called Secretary Clinton to get an update on the situation.'... just a few minutes after Obama called Clinton, the Washington press began reporting that the State Department had issued a statement by Clinton regarding the Benghazi attack. In it, she asserted:

Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation.

"CNS News asked Carney whether, in that 10 p.m. phone call, the president and Secretary Clinton discussed the statement that Clinton was about to issue, and, specifically, whether they discussed 'the issue of inflammatory material posted on the Internet.' Carney declined to answer."

Ditto burying Gunrunner, Benghazi, 2012 election discrepancies, Solyndra and other stimulus payola... ABC et al. finally get off their biased asses, dragged reluctantly to "report": IRS IG Report: Targeting Conservatives Began In 2010. Here's the Inspector General's draft report.

More: I am the face of Team Obama's IRS attacks.

On the puerile, pollyanna progressivism, I'm-so-diversity-sensitive-and-enlightened empathy of cocooned leftists (I can't call them elitists as too many conservatives misguidedly do because they really aren't elite in any sense), who wouldn't, eeek, live in or walk through "that" neighborhood, or ew, have their children go to "that" school, etc., this brilliant piece from Bruce Bower is applicable to a lot: Boston and the Infantilism of Jihad Denial. PDF.

About Islam and jihad generally, see the Freedom Center pamphlets, available on Kindle.

About the biased media generally, this is worth a redux: Excusing Jihad In Boston, by Robert Spencer.

About bias against Islam versus other religions, see generally Brett's Carrel on this website. You be the judge.

"Shame" doesn't come close for STAND DOWN (let them die). Matt Welch at Reason put together quotes from top-level administration officials right after the Benghazi terrorist attack that murdered four Americans, blaming the events on a no-account anti-Muslim video. Vomitous. http://reason.com/archives/2013/05/09/benghazi-hall-of-shame UPDATE, video excerpts:

      

Bottom line: let them die, because if we make a big response, then the big incompetent mess we've made in the Middle East, including the gun-running operation and the continuing terrorist thing will come to light right before the election. 'Cause Obama killed Osama. Arab Spring. Yay. Etc.

Commentary at PJMedia:

"The real question should really be what most compels violence among the almost unlimited number of neurotic individuals in the world with some grievance or other. In our time it is unquestionably Islam, exponentially more than anything else. It's almost as if that religion were designed in its ideology to attract the disaffected and turn them into violent animals..."

Andrew Breitbart vindicated. Media Matters discredited. Why in hell is the major media (again) coming in so late in the day, and too late for anything to be done. NYTimes: U.S. Opens Spigot After Farmers Claim Discrimination. National Review: more, with background.

Okay, we already knew that. Just confirming. Yup, liar. Not the first time Hillary Clinton has lied?

There is something organically wrong with a "religion" that breeds so many terrorists. No excuse or explanation cuts it. It's irrelevant what other factors are involved, when this one is the theme in common. Don't want to tar "all Muslims" with the crimes and sick fanatic beliefs of the "few"? Why not. That "few", i.e."small percentage", in a world with two billion Muslims, is a number in the millions.

We do not contort ourselves into knots of apologia for members of white supremacist organizations because, well they personally are peaceful and, notwithstanding their un-acted on beliefs or simple passivity, haven't themselves stuck a burning cross on someone's lawn or lynched a "black" person. Instead, we readily recognize that even with "moderate" attitudes, mere affiliation, especially coupled with the silence that implicitly condones outrageous acts, provides support for atrocity. No amount of professed disagreement by an organization member would serve to convince us that notwithstanding the individual's public posturing, he does not share distasteful attitudes and beliefs. Hypocrisy abounds, however, with regard to Islam. Why.

Much of the media readily attempts to blemish all "Tea Partiers" or Republicans ("rightwingers") with vague but nonexistent insinuated transgressions. Few seem to have a problem denigrating "single mothers" for the failures of a few. Not to mention the constant apparently PC dissing of "white men". It's not even considered offensive or impolite to actively discriminate against innocent white males via affirmative action. Why.

Unlike an immutable characteristic such as race or sex, identification with a religion is a choice. (No, it's not about "race".) There is no reason to "tolerate" or respect crackpot dangerous delusions and beliefs. Social disapproval has been the best way for eons to regulate human behavior and beliefs. (Smoking, anyone?) Let the marketplace of ideas and freedom, unrestricted with misguided notions of "diversity" and "respect" do its work. Islam is poisonous crap. The proof is in what it creates. (Many other belief systems also are crap but they aren't fostering terrorism, and their most devout followers -- that would be "devout" not "radical" -- aren't seeking an obscene world in which, among other things, living women are put into shrouds and the punishment for apostacy is death.) Also see Legal Insurrection: language matters.

NYTimes: Boston bomber was "Angry The World Pictures Islam As A Violent Religion". For real? Praise Allah, he's proved that wrong. I refuse to link to such drivel. Google if you want it. NYPost, far better (have times changed or what):

"The dynamic is bizarre. Americans are attacked and, in return, are warned by their president to behave. Obama used that formula to defend the proposed mosque at Ground Zero, saying it was important that 'we stay focused on who we are as a people and what our values are all about.' Apparently, the president sees the Constitution as a suicide pact."

"...In the wake of Boston's tragedy, those who stand up to ask who/what/why are lambasted -- even by conservatives. 'Let's all come together. It's a time to bond and grieve and worry about the victims. Don't ask all these questions...

"To me, pretending that it doesn't matter who did this, or that we can deal with that 'later,' is a slap in the face to us all." Read the full post. Better, read the entire blog.

Of course, Obama is all-in. From Medical News Today:

A team led by academics from the University of Bristol reviewed 48 articles on neuroscience meta-analysis which were published in 2011 and concluded that most had an average power of around 20 per cent -- a finding which means the chance of the average study discovering the effect being investigated is only one in five. The paper, published in Nature Reviews Neuroscience, reveals that small, low-powered studies are "endemic" in neuroscience, producing unreliable research which is inefficient and wasteful.

A politically motivated ignoramus who somehow got a job teaching 4th grade in Jacksonville, Florida, -- Cheryl Sabb -- dictated this sentence to her students at the end of a lesson on the U.S. Constitution, and had them write it down:

I am willing to give up some of my constitutional rights in order to be safer or more secure.

(Once in a while we make a decision that in hindsight, and with the passage of time only seems better and better. Home schooling my kids was one of those.)

At Sam Harris's website: "Liberals like Greenwald, who are so eager to swing the flail of Islamophobia, display a sickening insensitivity to the plight of women, homosexuals, and freethinkers throughout the Muslim world. At this moment, millions of women and girls have been abandoned to illiteracy, compulsory marriage, and lives of slavery and abuse under the guise of 'multiculturalism' and 'religious sensitivity.'"

At No Quarter, Special Operations Speaks on Benghazi.

In other news, it looks like the grand plan of the Palestinian apologists acting under the umbrella of "Anonymous" to "erase Israel from the Internet" on Holocaust Remembrance Day has fizzled. Nice hack at http://www.opisrael.com/.

Is neuroscience the salvation of its flawed and primitive psychology precursor? Not quite, and not yet. From Salon, Neuroscience Needs its Einstein: "Believing that knowledge of brain wiring can tell us the nature of consciousness is like predicting what sound will come out of a set of speakers by looking at wiring diagram of the component parts."

Collecting data that is not building upon and objectively testing a core theory does not itself constitute a field of science. (And never mind that there is no such thing as a "mind".)