I am honored to join The Washington Times as their new Online Opinion Editor! I will be curating and editing all online opinion content to make The Washington Times THE online destination for influential opinion and fresh debates. I will also be doing some writing for them. Here is my debut column. I hope you enjoy it. And I hope you'll bookmark and favorite www.WashingtonTimes.com . We're taking a great journalistic enterprise and making it even more dynamic, important and fun.
Finally, the U.S. Supreme Court has stepped up to defend Americans' most basic freedoms from the full-frontal assault by the rampaging band of leftists running America. In a 5-4 decision, the Court ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby, a Christian business that objected on religious ground to Obamacare's mandate that they must cover certain contraceptives.
Hobby Lobby is among about 50 businesses that have sued over covering contraceptives. Some, like Hobby Lobby, are willing to cover most methods of contraception, as long as they can exclude abortifacients.
Justice Samuel Alito said the decision is limited to contraceptives. "Our decision should not be understood to hold that an insurance-coverage mandate must necessarily fall if it conflicts with an employer's religious beliefs," he said. He suggested two ways the administration could deal with the birth control issue. The government could simply pay for pregnancy prevention, he said. Or it could provide the same kind of accommodation it has made available to religious-oriented, not-for-profit corporations.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was part of the majority, also wrote separately to say the administration can solve its problem easily. "The accommodation works by requiring insurance companies to cover, without cost sharing, contraception coverage for female employees who wish it," Kennedy said. He said that arrangement "does not impinge on the plaintiffs' religious beliefs." Everyone's rights respected and problem solved. Easy peasy.
Of course, Obamacare was never about health care or health insurance. It was only and always about government power and control. Over you. That's what the contraceptive mandate was all about: social engineering, abortion made even easier to get, and with the government holding the strings of control over all of it.
Thank goodness the Supremes ruled on the side of religious liberty. It's about time. But that 5-4 split is too close for comfort. As we head into 2016, don't forget that the Supreme Court---like all of our courts---hangs by a thread, and with it, our most basic freedoms.
I have said repeatedly that the IRS scandal is the most dangerous scandal in U.S. history for one simple reason: in the past, when the IRS had been abused for political reasons, it was always elites vs. elites. That is, it was the Kennedys using the IRS as a political weapon against Richard Nixon, or Lyndon Johnson using it the same way against Nixon, or Nixon's mere suggestion of using it to go after a certain political opponent (which he never did, by the way, and yet it was enough for the Democrats to make it the second Article of Impeachment against him). It had always been elites using the IRS as a political chainsaw against other elites whom they perceived as political enemies.
Bad enough, right? As usual, Team Obama has taken "bad enough" and made it the worst case scenario.
This IRS scandal is far more dangerous because it's the first time the most fearsome arm of the U.S. government has been used by the elites to target REGULAR Americans...who just happened to disagree with the president's policies and the direction in which he was taking the country. It wasn't just one or two political elites being targeted. It was---is---thousands of average Americans who were under the impression that their First Amendment right to speak out against their government was still intact.
Their folly! They didn't have that right anymore. The Obama administration used the IRS to intimidate, harass, and bludgeon them into silence. That' what makes this the most dangerous scandal in American history.
Thank goodness for Congressmen Trey Gowdy and Darrell Issa and some others who are pressing the arrogant IRS Commissioner and others for answers and are trying to hold them accountable in the face of widespread stonewalling and lies.
When this scandal broke last year---AFTER the IRS ADMITTED to the targeting of conservative groups and apologized for it---Obama proclaimed himself "outraged" and claimed he would "get to the bottom of it."
As I've said before, it's hard to get to the bottom of something when you ARE the bottom of it.
I am honored and thrilled to join The Washington Times as their new Online Opinion Editor! The Times is one of the most influential and important voices out there, and I am truly looking forward to being a part of their fabulous team. I hope you'll join me online at The Washington Times (www.WashingtonTimes.com)! The story is below:
Crowley named online opinion editor at The Washington Times
By Jennifer Harper
The Washington Times
Monday, June 16, 2014
The Washington Times has added a new voice and new leadership to its increasingly robust editorial reach.
Monica Crowley, a longtime contributor to Fox News Channel and host of a nationally syndicated talk show, has been named online opinion editor of the news organization, reporting to The Times’ Opinion Editor David Keene, beginning June 23.
He calls her a “skilled and thoughtful new colleague.”
She will be among other skilled and thoughtful folk. Ms. Crowley will oversee all opinion content that appears online, penned by such contributors as Dr. Ben Carson and Tammy Bruce, as well as Christine O’Donnell, Tom DeLay, Ernest Istook and Steve Deace.
Ms. Crowley herself will remain as a Fox News contributor, where she has offered commentary both on- and off-camera since 1996. She also plans to write original content for The Times.
“We’re thrilled to have Monica join The Washington Times,” said Larry Beasley, The Times’ president and chief executive officer. “With her extensive background, talent and education, Monica will enhance our online offerings from around the country and the world.”
In conservative media, Ms. Crowley has been there and done that. She has hosted her own syndicated radio show since 2005, now heard on over 120 stations. She’s written four books, and her work has been featured in The New Yorker, The Wall Street Journal, The Los Angeles Times and Newsweek, among many publications. She has been among the few commentators to characterize ongoing strife in the Middle East and Afghanistan in spiritual terms.
“This is a holy war, whether we want to see it that way or not; whether it’s politically correct to say it or not, this is the truth,” Ms. Crowley told Fox News following the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl in exchange for five Taliban fighters. She also characterized both the unrest in Iraq and porous U.S. borders as the source of “humanitarian disasters” in a Monday column.
“Monica is the quintessential 21st century thought leader, able to communicate her conservative values in all mediums in the most cogent way,” said John Solomon, the Times’ editor and vice president of content and business development. “David, Larry and I are excited to have her at the helm of our digital opinion strategies, where we know she will find new audiences for the great content we already offer while finding fresh new voices to add to our lineup.”
In a media marketplace brimming with tales of the next best thing and much disposable fare, Ms. Crowley brings some authentic institutional knowledge to the table.
She once served as Richard Nixon’s foreign policy assistant, was an editor at both Talk magazine and ReganBooks, is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and received her doctorate in international relations from Columbia University.
“I’m thrilled to join the Times’ extraordinary team,” Ms. Crowley said. “The Times plays such a leading and influential role in the national debate, and I’m truly excited to be a part of this energetic and growing organization. I look forward to expanding its intelligent, important and dynamic online opinion.”
Mr. President: You authorized and led a military operation in Libya that led to the overthrow and death of that country's leader, Moammar Qaddafi, based on the possibility of a murderous rampage by Qaddafi's crew and a resulting humanitarian crisis...that never materialized. And yet, you chose not to act when the Iranian government killed scores of its own people in 2009 or when the Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad began killing scores of his own people, in some cases with chemical weapons, which you had described as a "red line" which, if crossed, would prompt U.S. action. You did nothing. Those slaughters and humanitarian disasters are very real, unlike the one Qaddafi never launched---and you didn't lift a finger.
We now have stampeding jihadis committing mass slaughter across Iraq, forcing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis to flee in the face of the most vicious and unspeakable terror. And on our own southern border, we have thousands of illegal aliens pouring into the U.S., being housed in secretive government warehouses, and being shipped to different parts of the country. Most of them are underage and unaccompanied children, sent into the U.S. illegally at the behest of their parents and home governments.
True humanitarian disasters? You bet. And yet from you, crickets.
Where is the resolve you showed when intervening in Libya for a non-existent crisis?
I've heard so many people--on the left and the right---say that Obama's goal has been to "end" the wars in which the United States has been engaged since the Islamic terror attacks against us on September 11, 2001. I think they believe that that is a sensible use of the word "end." But a one-sided end is...surrender. The enemy gets a vote as to whether a war has "ended." They get a veto over that concept. And unless and until they are thoroughly vanquished, the war---from their side---is not over. When they vote to continue the war, and we vote to "end" it, it's a surrender.
Winston Churchill famously said, "Never surrender!" President Obama never fails to surrender. Iraq is falling to al Qaeda, Afghanistan is falling to the (newly replenished) Taliban, Libya and Syria are falling to chaos, Iran is marching toward a nuclear weapon, Russia is invading its neighbors, and China is newly aggressive in Asia and the world. All because the American president has checked out. He has decided that he will never use military force in any meaningful way (witness the lack of any attempt to save our people under terrorist attack in Benghazi.) Our enemies know this, and they are taking full advantage of it. Why wouldn't our enemies seize the moment to advance their interests and attack ours? There's nobody there to stop them. American weakness and lack of leadership breed contempt and violence.
In war, you either win, lose despite trying to win, or surrender.
In a historic development, the House Majority Leader---Eric Cantor---went down in a ball of flames in the GOP primary, losing to a relatively unknown conservative challenger. Dave Brat ran as a true Constitutional conservative and campaigned on fiscal discipline, cutting spending, tax reform, and against amnesty for illegal immigrants. Given the mass influx over the southern border by thousands of illegals---and given Cantor's inclination to grant them amnesty---coupled with his elitist view that Washington mattered more than his district---he got creamed. Brat won by 12 points.
Cantor's loss did not happen by accident. Normal Americans are fed up, and many of the polls don't show it. According to his own pollster, he should have won by 34 points. In Texas, mushy moderate Lt. Gov. Dewhurst first lost to Senator Ted Cruz and was then smacked down a second time a few weeks ago in another GOP primary, which he lost to a conservative radio host.
Conservatives and other Americans who really want their country back are motivated. This is not necessarily the Tea Party, although the Tea Party plays a vital role in educating, inspiring, and motivating the movement. It is bedrock conservatives and others who are finally saying enough is enough.
Last night's earthquake should put all elitist statists---on both sides of the aisle---on notice: we're coming for you.
Hillary Clinton, bathing in the glow of her new "memoir," told ABC's Diane Sawyer that she and Bill were "dead broke" upon leaving the White House. It's funny: the evil 1% have a different definition of "dead broke" than the rest of us.
According to her joint tax return with Bill for 2001, they had a $16,165,110 income for her first year out of the White House.
Even before they left the White House, their joint income for 2000 was $359,000, not exactly “dead broke” for most normal people, particularly given that the Clintons had all of the usual expenses covered by the taxpayer, from housing and transportation to child care, insurance, electricity, healthcare. Their bills were nil.
At the tail end of their first presidency, Hillary got a book advance of $8 million, and not to be outdone, Bill got a $15 million deal at about the same time. She got more than $2 million of this in 2001.
The Clintons have amassed a huge amount of wealth since leaving office---upwards of $100 million. I don't begrudge anyone the right and ability to make a ton of money---that's what America is all about. It's the land of opportunity, where if you work hard and are ambitious enough, you can succeed beyond your wildest dreams---as clearly the Clintons have.
But that kind of money?? That's Goldman Sachs territory. Which means she will have an incredibly tough time making the "income inequality" argument. Of course, throughout history, socialists and communists have made that argument while luxuriating in their dachas and socking away big money in foreign accounts: "poverty for thee but not for me...and by the way, I'll help you get out of it " (which they never do because they need the permanent underclass).
So I expect Hillary will follow the same well-worn path of arguing that she's been "blessed" but that her policies aimed against income inequality will "level the playing field" for everyone...you know, the old "fair shot" routine. That's just corrupt socialism dressed up, which is what I expect her to argue because she believes it ideologically. It's just that she and Bill don't want to live like "everyone else," although they'll claim they know how "everyone else" lives.
The hypocrisy stinks to high heaven...but like Obama, she will have the protection of the press because they believe that leftist policies "help" more people than the capitalist ones that made the Clintons rich. Make no sense? Exactly.
The rich really are different from everyone else, and the super-rich are...well, the Clintons.
On this day 70 years ago, American, British, and Canadian troops landed at Normandy, France, and began the greatest invasion the world has ever seen. Unlike previous invasions, Operation Overlord wasn't an invasion of conquest. It was a liberation. The oppressed people of Europe, long held under the evil, tyrannical jackboot of Nazi Germany, were about to be freed by the extraordinary exertions and sacrifices of free men from free countries, who wanted to give the same freedom to those held in bondage.
It came at a heavy cost. And today, we remember those who served---and those who died---in the greatest act of liberation known to man.
"Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen of the Allied Expeditionary Force! You are about to embark upon a great crusade, toward which we have striven these many months. The eyes of the world are upon you. The hopes and prayers of liberty loving people everywhere march with you. In company with our brave Allies and brothers in arms on other fronts, you will bring about the destruction of the German war machine, the elimination of Nazi tyranny over the oppressed peoples of Europe, and security for ourselves in a free world.
"Your task will not be an easy one. Your enemy is well trained, well equipped and battle hardened, he will fight savagely.
"But this is the year 1944! Much has happened since the Nazi triumphs of 1940-41. The United Nations have inflicted upon the Germans great defeats, in open battle, man to man. Our air offensive has seriously reduced their strength in the air and their capacity to wage war on the ground. Our home fronts have given us an overwhelming superiority in weapons and munitions of war, and placed at our disposal great reserves of trained fighting men. The tide has turned! The free men of the world are marching together to victory!
"I have full confidence in your courage, devotion to duty and skill in battle. We will accept nothing less than full victory!
"Good Luck! And let us all beseech the blessings of Almighty God upon this great and noble undertaking."