Tuesday, October 10, 2017

The Coming Storm in Spain: Today's News for October 10th

Associated Press (via Yahoo News):
The focus of the deepening clash between Catalan separatists and Spanish authorities is shifting to the regional parliament for a key session likely to include a historic declaration of independence that Spain has pledged to crush.

Catalan president Carles Puigdemont hasn't revealed the precise message he will deliver Tuesday evening with separatist politicians expecting some sort of declaration based on the results of the disputed Oct. 1 referendum on independence.

At stake is the territorial integrity of Spain, threatened by a growing separatist movement that is sorely testing the strength of its constitution and the skill of its national and regional leaders.

Some expect a strictly symbolic declaration, while others believe a risky full-scale break with Spain will be attempted, even as Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy vows he will use all lawful means to keep Spain intact.

The Spanish leader has said he is willing to use a constitutional clause that allows Madrid to take over direct control of regions if they violate Spain's constitution — a move that could apply in this case because Spain's constitutional court had suspended the referendum.

Its results are therefore considered invalid under Spanish law.
The Declaration of Independence was considered invalid under British law in 1776 too. Contrary to many political beliefs today, especially in Europe and among many American Leftists, the natural rights of mankind are not superseded by government authority, regardless of what the government says.

In other words, just because Spain calls it illegal, that doesn't make it so.

It does, however, make this situation volatile. This situation has the strong potential for outright civil war. Such a civil war could have serious implications within the European Union. For example, what if a region or government were to come out in support of the Catalan separatists? Could this lead to another country leaving the EU? While there is no talk of that now, mainly because Catalonia wants to remain within the European Union, will the Catalans still feel the same if the EU openly supports Spain against them?

Back in America...

Business Insider:
Vice President Mike Pence's brief appearance at an Indianapolis Colts game Sunday — which he left in protest after several players knelt during the national anthem — most likely cost taxpayers more than $250,000.

The cost of flying Air Force Two from Las Vegas — where Pence on Saturday attended a memorial event for victims of the shooting there last week — to Indianapolis was roughly $100,000, CNN reported.

After his early exit from the game, he flew to Los Angeles to attend a Monday fundraiser for Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher; that flight cost about $142,500, CNN reported.

That almost $250,000 expenditure does not account for the costs of advance personnel or Secret Service security measures at the Colts' stadium ahead of the appearance. It also does not take into account the costs of Pence's hotel room in Indianapolis and any additional security measures there.

As CNN reported, some of the costs of the flight from Indianapolis to Los Angeles will be reimbursed by the Republican National Committee, since he's attending a political event. The outlet reported that if Pence did not make the trip to Indianapolis, and instead flew from Las Vegas to Los Angeles, the flight would have cost about $45,000.
Was it a political stunt? Most certainly.

Was the kneeling during the National Anthem by overpaid sports brats a political stunt? Absolutely.

Are both of them wrong? Yes.

Admittedly, the spending of American's money on political stunts is annoying, the kneeling stunt encourages the following:

Fox News:
The 2014 shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., has spawned a violent domestic threat from “black identity extremists” who have stepped up attacks on police, according to an explosive new report by the FBI’s counterterrorism division.

The warning, first reported by Foreign Policy magazine, says that “it is very likely BIEs proactively target police and openly identify and justify their actions with social-political agendas commensurate with their perceived injustices against African Americans ...”

Brown, an African-American 18-year-old, was shot in August 2014 after struggling with white police officer Darren Wilson. Although Brown's supporters claimed it was a deadly case of police brutality, Wilson was cleared of wrongdoing and resigned in November 2014.

The shooting led to protests in Ferguson that then spread to other parts of the country. It gained added momentum after subsequent racially charged police shootings, spurred on via on social media and the group Black Lives Matter.
This was also "spurred on" by the Mainstream Media, which reported the shootings with big glaring headlines. But when facts later revealed many of the shootings were justified, that news got buried, leaving many with the impression these shootings were racially motivated, when in fact they would have happened regardless of the skin color of the criminals involved. They weren't racially motivated. They were action-motivated. "Suicide by cop", if you will.

Continuing:
The FBI report said that the agency previously had analyzed the potential for violence of black identity extremism, a term that was unfamiliar before it appeared in the document. What has changed, according to the the report, is that violence has now actually occurred and is 'likely" to continue.

“It is very likely that BIEs’ perceptions of unjust treatment of African Americans and the perceived unchallenged illegitimate actions of law enforcement will inspire premeditated attacks against law enforcement over the next year,” the report said. “It is very likely additional controversial police shootings of African Americans and the associated legal proceedings will continue to serve as drivers for violence against law enforcement.”

Attacks in which police officers are targeted have been on the rise in recent years. The most high-profile such incident occurred last year in Dallas, when a gunman named Micah Johnson hid in a parking garage and fired on 11 police officers, killing five of them, during a protest against officer-involved shootings. The FBI report noted that Johnson referred to anger over police shootings and toward whites as what drove him to kill the five police officers.
Let's be clear on this: This does NOT mean there isn't racism against blacks in this country. However, we aren't in 1960, regardless of how people want to paint today's situation. Most of the so-called systemic racism today actually works FOR blacks, in the form of affirmative action programs which lower the bar for people of color.

There undoubtedly exist more subtle forms of racism against blacks, but there also exist social mechanisms against it. When brought to public scrutiny, racists face a cultural branding which would shame even Hester Prynne into thinking twice. This was not present in 1960.

And yet, the perception of widespread racism against blacks burns bright today, and is encouraged by Leftists, since it keeps the black community voting for the Left's beloved Democrats in overwhelming majorities. Unfortunately, this also gives a cause to any potential black martyrs and radical white Leftist sympathizers.

In political news...

Associated Press (via MSN):
Backers of U.S. Sen. Susan Collins say they wish they could clone the moderate Republican powerbroker from Maine who has been a crucial swing vote in Congress as Republicans struggle to deliver on President Donald Trump's legislative agenda.

Collins says she will decide during the Senate's weeklong Columbus Day recess whether to stay in the Senate, where she has served for four terms, or again run for governor in Maine.

The Associated Press interviewed 10 of Collins' current and former colleagues and staffers, along with Maine political observers. They said the senator is carefully weighing whether she can have more impact in the Senate or as a governor replacing the term-limited, Trump-allied Republican Gov. Paul LePage.

"I feel like that losing her in the Senate is losing the only existing bridge between the Democrats and Republicans that is there," said Michael Bopp, who has worked as legislative director and counsel to Collins.
Bopp means losing a CINO?

Every time conservatives try to get something done, Collins is typically standing in the way. Even if a Democrat takes her seat, at least it would be a true representative of Maine's Leftist political leanings.

In other political news...

CBS News:
Disney CEO Bob Iger would not confirm or deny rumors yet again about a potential presidential run in 2020. He is set to step down from the company in 2019.

According to the LA Times, during a discussion at Vanity Fair's New Establishment Summit in Los Angeles last week, a Vanity Fair reporter inquired of the audience if they would support an Iger run for office, leading to a round of applause.

"That sounds tepid — so maybe that's a sign," Iger responded. "And my wife is out there somewhere and I can guarantee that she's not cheering," he added.  "I will figure it out when I have to figure it out."

The magazine had previously asked Iger of his political ambitions back in May, which the CEO also deflected. 

Iger did, however, wade into more political territory by discussing the recent mass shooting in Las Vegas, saying that the country must face its problem with gun violence.

"These are incidents that touch everybody," Iger said. "Where is the outrage here? This is a huge crisis for our country. We should demand a dialogue about this from our politicians."
Give Iger credit: The guy has done a masterful job as Disney's CEO, adding both Marvel Comics and Lucasfilms to Disney's already impressive intellectual property portfolio. Disney is now the 800 pound gorilla of IP on Wall Street.

Does that translate to "presidential candidate"? One can make the argument Iger is more qualified than Donald Trump ever was.

But Iger's statement about the Vegas shooting displays a disturbing political naivety. That is as silly as demanding a law every time there is a problem. Some laws require simpler solutions than "send somebody to jail for xxx". And a dialogue by our politicians, as Iger suggests, can only end in a new law, which may or may not solve the problem which caused the shooting in the first place. 

At this point, we only have the barest glimmer of why the Vegas shooter did what he did, and Iger is calling for a dialogue? Discussing a solution to a problem before all the facts are in is foolhardy, at best. I doubt Iger runs Disney that way.

Then again, Iger might just be showing his diplomatic skills. Who knows what kind of candidate he might be then?

No comments:

Post a Comment