Saturday, April 25, 2015

Boko Haram renames itself Islamic State in West Africa

By Robert Spencer / Jihad Watch


Boko Haram renames itself Islamic State in West Africa
Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau has already pledged allegiance to the Islamic State. Now he is solidifying the alliance. “Boko Haram: Terrorist group changes name to ‘Islamic State in West Africa,’” by ‘Jola Sotubo, Pulse, April 23, 2015: According to reports, Boko Haram has changed its name to ‘Islamic State in West Africa.’ The group […]

Read in browser »

share on Twitter Like Boko Haram renames itself Islamic State in West Africa on Facebook Google Plus One Button 

University of Maryland Caves to Muslim Students Demands, Cancels “American Sniper”

Pamela Geller / Atlas Shrugs

A movie about a great American war hero is cancelled (for the second time) from an American college campus because it offends Muslims. And this is somehow, someway normal and OK?

The Oscar-winning movie was supposed to be shown on May 6 and 7, but the university’s Student Entertainment Events (SEE) postponed the event on Wednesday.
“SEE is choosing to explore the proactive measures of working with others during the coming months to possibly create an event where students can engage in constructive and moderated dialogues about the controversial topics proposed in the film,” read a statement from SEE posted on the university’s website.
The Muslim Students Association posted a Facebook message praising the university’s...
Splendid news. Progressives might finally have their Left-of-Hillary, pro-gun control, tax-and-spend liberal candidate in 2016: ex-Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley.

Politico reports:
Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley’s supporters are getting ready for a likely presidential campaign launch in Baltimore in late May, while the candidate meets with prospective donors in the San Francisco area this week. 
It’s part of a significant ramp-up in activity to take advantage of the media vacuum that’s resulted from Hillary Clinton’s status as the only declared Democrat in the presidential race. O’Malley, who left the Maryland governor’s mansion in 2015 after eight years, has recently given a handful of national interviews, including one with NPR during which he raised eyebrows — and his profile — by labeling Republican claims that regulation leads to income inequality as “kind of patently bullshit.”
Realistically, what are his chances? If, for instance, it’s only him vs. Mrs. Clinton, perhaps not zero.

The safe bet is, after all, that HRC will be the nominee, period. No one can hold a candle to her infrastructure or lead in the polls. That’s especially true if no one serious puts his (or her) name forward. But after comparing resumes, O’Malley certainly has a case to make, doesn’t he?

He’s served in government (in an executive capacity) for some 16 years, and he doesn’t have the kind of baggage that Hillary has. And while he’s polling in the low single digits, it’s still early.
Question: Doesn’t he have a better argument to make than, say, Mayor Bill de Blasio, who is reportedly eager to stretch his presidential legs and fill the progressive void?

The X factor here, of course, is whether or not Elizabeth Warren will take the plunge. Some say she might. If she does, all bets are off. Progressives, given the option to pull the lever for Martin O’Malley, or the progressive senator from Massachusetts, will likely choose the latter every time.

But at least to his credit, O'Malley's attacks on Mrs. Clinton are becoming increasingly more explicit. So it begins:
Former Gov. Martin O’Malley (D-Md.) is prodding his fellow Democratic White House hopeful Hillary Clinton in a fundraising email designed to highlight his opposition to the trade deal burgeoning on Capitol Hill. 
The email includes the subject line “Hard choice?” a less-than veiled reference to Clinton’s 2014 book of the same name. The reference conjures up questions about Clinton’s recent support of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which she’s backed away from in recent public appearances.

A few notes on the latest Fox News poll:

(1) President Obama's job approval rating has slipped to (42/53), sliding six net points since last month. He's underwater on all four big issues, and down double digits on three:


(2) His low marks on Iran stem from deep mistrust of that country's leadership. By a 36-point margin, Americans say the regime poses a threat to US national security, with a 51 percent majority saying that the Obama administration has been "too soft" with Tehran. Just two percent say Obama's posture has been "too hard," with one-third of respondents approving of the "balance." Multiple polls show public support for engaging in negotiations with Iran (though suspicion of the regime remains sky high -- and rightly so), but Fox words the question slightly differently, producing a noticeably different result:


(3) On the 2016 race, Fox's numbers are strikingly similar to the fresh Quinnipiac data we examined earlier in the week.  Hillary has some significant image problems (a majority calls her untrustworthy), but holds modest leads over potential GOP rivals (between three and six points; hovering around 46 percent support).  It also confirms the Rubio bounce:
Florida Sen. Marco Rubio receives a five percentage-point bump after his April 13 announcement and has the backing of 13 percent in the race for the Republican nomination -- just a touch over Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker who gets 12 percent among self-identified GOP primary voters. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul comes in at 10 percent, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee earn 9 percent each and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz gets 8 percent.
Rubio is seen as honest (+13), and a leader of the "future" vs. the "past" (+29). Clinton is (-6) and (+2) on those measures, respectively. Fox's write-up also features this nugget, which may be ominous for Jeb Bush: "The Bush dynasty is seen as a negative while the Clinton dynasty is a positive. By a 58-34 percent margin, voters say being related to previous presidents is a disadvantage for Jeb Bush, yet by a 52-39 percent margin they think it’s an advantage for Hillary Clinton." I'll leave you with Hillary Clinton lamenting that America's pro-life culture stems from deep seated" religious beliefs that "have to be changed:"
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton on Thursday said "deep-seated … religious beliefs" have to be changed before the world's women will get full access to abortion. “Far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health care and safe childbirth. All the laws we've passed don’t count for much if they’re not enforced,” Clinton said. “Rights have to exist in practice — not just on paper,” Clinton argued. “Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will." “And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed,” Clinton added.
Although it's true that much of the moral opposition to abortion is rooted in faith (a great many of our societal norms and mores are derived from the Judeo-Christian tradition), Hillary ignores the numerous scientific, ethical and logical reasons to support the pro-life cause. She also breezily calls for the extirpation of deep-seated values in order to achieve political ends -- a phenomenon with which she is intimately familiar (minus the authentically "deep-seated" bit).

Today, Saturday, April 25th, on RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS on CPR Worldwide Media from 11am to 1pm EST, Craig and Diane will discuss the 'too many hats' being thrown into the Republican ring, the truth about Iran's nukes, and Hillary's latest scandals.

Hope you can tune in:
And chat with us live at: