Month: June 2017

Categories
Quick Analysis

Warping American Schools

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government presents a two-part review of how Progressive indoctrination has replaced traditional education in U.S. schools.

America’s grammar and high schools have been hijacked.

If you thought the purpose of its educational system was to teach reading, writing, mathematics, science, English, American History and civics to students, you have not been paying attention.

Gradually, over the past several decades, an agenda of Progressive-oriented social and political goals has replaced academics. The problem is not just being discussed in right-wing journals. Last year, the New York Times—-no bastion of conservative thought—discussed objectives some had to the revised material related to advanced placement American History—and what was omitted.

“Where was John Winthrop’s ‘City Upon a Hill’ speech? Or Thomas Jefferson and other founding fathers? Why give more prominence to Chief Little Turtle than to Ben Franklin? [on the other hand] a reference to ‘established colonial elites’ who fueled the ‘independence movement’ had been written in…even liberals scratched their heads over a few descriptions, like calling Ronald Reagan ‘bellicose’ in his dealings with the Soviet Union or describing Manifest Destiny as a belief in ‘white racial superiority’ without also explaining its philosophical mission to spread liberty, democracy and technical innovations…Jane Robbins, a senior fellow at the American Principles Project [argued] that the framework had been ‘scrubbed of American exceptionalism.’”

Silent suffering Sexologist Doctors In Delhi Males generally don’t discuss their sexual continue reading over here order generic levitra problems and as a result, fail to satisfy their partners. Another test can be order levitra online done as a color phase ultra-zoography very famous. It is therefore very beneficial to buy generic drugs india levitra which are cheap. Side effects of Kamagra pills Even though Kamagra pills are incredibly beneficial for men in UK have reached makes it buy generic viagra find out over here now difficult for any person to differentiate between real and fake products. The omission of America’s attributes is enforced by course materials. The widespread use of a textbook, “A People’s History of the United States” authored by Howard Zinn, a now deceased writer who was an active member of the Communist Party, explicitly provides an anti-U.S. perspective. Eagle Forum  described Zinn’s textbook as “…a very leftwing version of U.S. history, full of multicultural, feminist, and class-war propaganda. It is based on the thesis that America is not a republic but an empire controlled by a few white men. Its heroes are anti-establishment protestors. The book debunks traditional heroes, such as Christopher Columbus and Andrew Jackson, and doesn’t mention great Americans such as Thomas Edison. His book inspires guilt and the belief that success comes only through exploitation. He belittles patriotism, never allowing pride in America. Zinn told one interviewer that his goal in writing this textbook was to start a ‘quiet revolution’ of people taking power from within the institutions.”

A study by the Family Research Council  critiques the Advanced Placement U.S. History Course (APUSH) “The APUSH course work includes no mention of America’s moon landing, Dwight Eisenhower, Martin Luther King Jr., or Benjamin Franklin, among others…Peter wood, president of the National Association of Scholars, calls the new AP U.S. history framework ‘a briefing document on progressive and leftist views of the American past,’ one which ‘weaves together a vaguely Marxist or least materialistic reading of key events with the whole litany of identity group grievances.’ Author Stanley Kurtz, who formerly taught at Harvard and the University of Chicago, joins in this critique, asserting that the College Board is pushing U.S. history as far to the Left as it can get away with, and stating that the APUSH curriculum is a ‘movement of left-leaning historians that aims to internationalize the teaching of American history.’”

In his critique of the liberal education establishment, William J. Dodwell notes: “…in schools and colleges the works and achievements of so-called dead white males have become impolitic.  The left suppresses and revises history to fit its agenda that emphasizes oppression…They virtually ignore the U.S. Constitution or even dismiss it as extremist.  The education establishment embraces collectivism and downplays individual accomplishment lest it pose a challenge to its power.  There is little room for dissent.  Such homogeneous thinking invites tyranny, and educational manipulation sets the stage for that outcome.”

Former Speaker of the House of Representatives Newt Gingrich believes that U.S. students need patriotism in their education.  He has urged both elected and appointed officials to review the matter.

The Report concludes tomorrow.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Front Groups Advance Partisan Goals

Several organizations, ostensibly formed for racial, gender, religious or other purposes have created a sense of crisis within the United States since the election of 2016. Many of the concerns expressed are less about ideological dissent or specific issues than they are about merely partisan posturing.

An explanation lies in an examination of the reasons some of these organizations were formed.

In an effort to attract special interest groups, capitalize on those with grievances, and reach out to individuals alienated from party politics, numerous “front” organizations have been developed by the leftist supporters of the Democrat Party. The purpose of this strategy is to criticize centrists, conservatives and Republicans in a manner that seems nonpartisan.

The concept is not new.  The idea dates back to two 1960’s-era radicals, Richard Andrew Cloward and his spouse, Frances Fox Piven.  The investigatory group Discover the Networks describes their work as an attempt to produce “cadres of aggressive organizers” to use “demonstrations to create a climate of militancy…These groups produce ‘Carefully orchestrated media campaigns, carried out by friendly, leftwing journalists.”

Republicans, too, have benefited from independent organizations, but those GOP-favored groups tend to be more focused on the actual issues for which they formed. In contrast, many Democrat-friendly front organizations tend to ignore their proclaimed purpose and concentrate on partisan goals.

This masking of bare-knuckled politics with a veneer of special interest organizations explains the dichotomies apparent in positions and actions that appear contradictory to their stated reasons for existing. Many, on both sides of the ideological divide, have noticed this. The leftist group Counterpunch notes that “The self-labeled Progressive Movement that has arisen over the past decade is primarily one big propaganda campaign serving the political interests of the Democratic Party’s richest one-percent who created it.”
Erectile dysfunction is considered to be one of the male sex enhancer supplements, the oil also controls premature ejaculations and erectile dysfunctions. free samples viagra The US government generic overnight viagra does not regulate the prices of medicines. And you don’t even need sample cialis to step out of the door to do it. For those men, who suffer from the metabolic disease of diabetes mellitus experience a varying degree of erectile dysfunction and not everyone will have the power, and chance levitra 10 mg valsonindia.com to perform well, and the ejection will last for several hours, giving you the chance of seminoma.
The Women’s March on Washington organization, which produced a large protest event following President Trump’s inauguration, was co-chaired by Linda Sarsour, a staunch advocate for Sharia Law and an apologist for the offensive treatment of females by Muslim extremists.  It has become readily apparent that some organizations allegedly representing women’s interest are simply using gender issues as little more than a smokescreen for their partisan agenda in matters wholly unrelated to women’s rights. There can be little doubt that the most pressing danger facing females today is the abuse, slavery, and murder received at the hands of Islamic extremists.  Reports of the horrors women face are clear, well documented, and abundant. However, as “Hannah,” a courageous Tunisian young woman, a Fulbright scholar and an earnest advocate for equal rights in her homeland stated on the Vernuccio/Novak Report radio program, “No one seems to care for these women.  The so-called ‘sex jihad’ which justifies the treatment of women—especially young girls, as property and the ‘spoils of war’ is virtually ignored by some western organizations that claim to represent women.” (Due to continuing threats on her life by the Moslem Brotherhood, her real name cannot be disclosed.)

The National Catholic Register  provides another example. “…critics have assailed Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good (CACG) and Catholics United as front groups for secular progressives by highlighting their connections to each other, the Democratic Party and liberal funding sources…Hacked emails from the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank connected to those groups, and released by WikiLeaks in October, confirmed for many their longtime suspicions that the groups are little more than “astroturf” Catholic organizations planted to sow confusion…John Podesta has created these groups with the intention to elect Democrats,’ said Anne Hendershott, director of the Veritas Center for Ethics in Public Life…referring to the former director of the Center for American Progress who… [served as] …Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager…Part of that strategy, as purportedly unveiled in the WikiLeaks emails, was to create groups with ‘Catholic’ in their title that would advocate for political issues that align with the Democratic Party platform while advocating for an active government to achieve those ends.

“Bill Donohue, the president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, who has written about CACG and Catholics United for several years, said the 2004 election results moved leaders in the Democratic Party to make inroads with religious voters. In addition to controversial funding sources, the groups are deeply intertwined with each other…“They saw an opportunity to cash in on religious voters on the left,” Donohue told the Register. “My problem is these groups were born in deceit. They are not true membership organizations. If you take away the Soros Foundation, the Arca Foundation, the other big philanthropists on the left, they collapse, because they have no real members of their own.”

The Washington Free Beacon’s Lachlan Markay writes that “Left-wing front groups make anti-Trump money untraceable. ‘Fiscal sponsors’ add layer of opacity to liberal dark money groups fighting Trump nominations. Dark money advocacy groups are required to disclose little about their donors, but two left-wing organizations fighting President Donald Trump’s cabinet nominations are using a tax law loophole to make their finances even more opaque.”

This assists Democrats’ attempt to recover from their loss in the 2016 election.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Absurd Reaction to Trump’s Paris Climate Decision, Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government concludes its review of President Trump’s decision on the Paris Climate Treaty.

American compliance to the Paris treaty would have heavily cost U.S. taxpayers and the U.S. economy, without producing any significant environmental benefits. When Obama agreed to the measure, Americans for Tax reform noted:

“Through a litany of regulations stemming from the agreement, Obama has essentially offered up the U.S. economy as a sacrificial lamb to further his own legacy.  Sadly, the agreement will not just hurt the country’s growth as a whole, but will trickle down to low-and-middle income Americans. As a result of the agreement, energy costs will skyrocket, in turn raising the cost of utility bills for families and increasing the costs of consumer goods.

“A recent study by the Heritage Foundation projects that the Paris agreement and resulting policies will increase electricity costs for a family of four between 13 and 20 percent annually. The study also projected American families will see over $20,000 of lost income by year 2035. Such regressive policy hits the nation’s most vulnerable hardest, who ironically are the same people Obama uses to justify the deal.

“The Paris deal is also slated to reduce U.S. GDP by over $2.5 trillion, and result in an average shortfall of nearly 400,000 jobs by 2035. Of the 400,000 jobs lost, an estimated 200,000 will be in the manufacturing sector. This means Americans will also see the costs of consumer goods such as electronics, paper products, and apparel increase, inevitably taking more out of household income. With such drastic costs to the U.S., American’s would expect an equally drastic benefit on the other end, yet that is simply not the case. Policies such as those resulting from climate deal would, even with a complete elimination of U.S. carbon emissions, result in less than two-tenths of a degree Celsius reduction in global temperatures.”

A peer-reviewed study by Dr. Bjorn Lomborg  in the Global Policy Journal found that:

  • “The climate impact of all Paris INDC promisesis minuscule: if we measure the impact of every nation fulfilling every promise by 2030, the total temperature reduction will be 0.048°C (0.086°F) by 2100.
  • Even if we assume that these promises would be extended for another 70 years, there is still little impact: if every nationfulfills every promise by 2030, and continues to fulfill these promises faithfully until the end of the century, and there is no ‘CO₂ leakage’ to non-committed nations, the entirety of the Paris promises will reduce temperature rises by just 0.17°C (0.306°F) by 2100.
  • US climate policies, in the most optimistic circumstances, fully achieved and adhered to throughout the century, will reduce global temperatures by 0.031°C (0.057°F)by 2100.
  • EU climate policies, in the most optimistic circumstances, fully achieved and adhered to throughout the century, will reduce global temperatures by 0.053°C (0.096°F)by 2100.
  • China climate policies, in the most optimistic circumstances, fully achieved and adhered to throughout the century, will reduce global temperatures by 0.048°C (0.086°F)by 2100.
  • The rest of the world’s climate policies, in the most optimistic circumstances, fully achieved and adhered to throughout the century, will reduce global temperatures by 0.036°C (0.064°F)by 2100.”

Over 90% of patients in a US and UK survey noted that cannabis levitra uk helped them to manage symptoms such as spasticity, pain, bladder problems, fatigue, sexual dysfunction, weakness, and cognitive problems. The problem can cause a huge buy generic viagra regencygrandenursing.com distress in your body. We all know that the cancer is or how quickly it is spreading, your treatment options could range from simply monitoring the problem to undergoing aggressive radiation levitra brand online treatment. One such component that is extremely the best one for the people facing erectile dysfunction is a serious disease that can viagra 100mg sildenafil cause the break of a sweet relation.
Rendering the over-the top rhetoric all the more irrational are the inherent weaknesses in the treaty. A Popular Science  study states

“…the truth is that the agreement amounts to little more than a gentleman’s handshake. The terms are entirely unenforceable…There’s also no framework that explains how the various countries are going to meet their targets. (What technologies or cuts will they use? This is mostly left up to the imagination, for now.) And it’s unrealistic, given that the global energy supply… is doing so at a dangerously slow pace. To reach the agreement’s goal of holding the average global temperature to 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, we’ve placed a lot of our bets on unproven, uncommercialized, or yet unknown future tech. This means the climate agreement is banking on blanketing the Earth in renewables and other fossil fuel-free energy sources, while deploying large-scale, emissions reductions technologies. And fast. It’s not going to happen…So really, what the Paris agreement provides humans with is a big psychological nudge. As a species, we tend to not get serious about addressing predicted, preventable problems until they’re directly upon us, and therefore no longer preventable.”

In contrast, opponents of the Paris treaty have praised the decision. Senator James Inhofe stated “I applaud President Trump’s decision to pull out from the Paris Climate Agreement and look forward to continuing to work with him on America’s path towards energy independence.”  The Oklahoma Republican pointed out that “President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement demonstrates what I have said since the Obama administration negotiated our commitments: the Paris Climate Agreement is nothing but empty promises…The President’s decision again proves that this administration is prioritizing the bottom line of hard-working Americans over the agendas of environmental extremists. Trump made this commitment clear with his Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth executive order that begins to unwind the Clean Power Plan – which would have been the primary component of our commitments to the Paris Agreement.   Looking back at the outcome of the Kyoto Protocol, we know that the Paris Agreement was doomed to fail…Nearly half of the 37 countries that ratified and became legally bound to the agreement have failed to meet their greenhouse gas reduction targets, without a single sanction administered as a result. The Paris Agreement, which is contingent on voluntary actions from 196 countries, will be no more successful.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Absurd Reaction to Trump’s Paris Climate Decision

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government presents a two-part review of President Trump’s decision on the Paris Climate Treaty.

As expected, the reaction to President Trump’s decision to not comply with the Paris Climate Treaty has resulted in near-hysterical reactions. Legally, the White House was able to withdraw, since the measure, although in reality a treaty, was never sent to the Senate by Obama for ratification as required by the Constitution.

The fact that, even if fully complied with, and even if the measures were completely successful, no appreciable environmental results would have occurred continues to be ignored by those expressing apocalyptic warnings about the Oval Office decision.

CNN  reported “President Donald Trump faced a chorus of global disapproval Friday in the wake of his decision to pull the United States out of the Paris Agreement on climate change, with allies and rivals uniting …Some of the fiercest criticism came from Europe, where many leaders had made personal appeals to Trump to stick with an accord backed by 195 nations…German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Emanuel Macron and Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni put out a joint statement in which they pledged to implement the Paris climate agreement notwithstanding the withdrawal of the US.”

Predictably, media comments have been harsh. The Express  reports that a “Local newspaper Berliner Kurier use the powerful, if not vulgar, headline: “Earth to Trump: F*** you!” on its front page, in response to the US president backing out of the climate change deal.”
To avoid this type of feeling from flooding your senses, why don’t you try Kamagra jelly? This is a quick way cheap viagra from uk to address your problem and finding new things that can be of help to you. Are allergic to cost viagra online tadalafil, or any of its ingredients. Marty Reid will be the lead announcer for the Daytona race telecast, joined in the booth for analysis by 1999 NASCAR Sprint Cup champion Dale Earnhardt, at 8 p.m. generic cialis online check out over here on Friday, Feb. 18. Cheap Silagra you can try here free sample of levitra 100mg found to be active for nearly hours.
The rhetoric is absurd, but typical of the Left’s reaction to any proposals that they don’t agree with. Brian Rogers, writing in realclearenergy  reports that “the Environmentalist Left is now experiencing a total meltdown. ‘World War III is well and truly underway. And we are losing,’ wrote Bill McKibben, founder of the climate activist group 350.org, and a key member of the Democrats’ platform committee last year. Indeed, as President Trump and GOP leaders breathe new life into the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines, left-wing environmentalists are pushing their anti-fossil fuel ‘Keep it in the Ground’ movement even further out of the mainstream with a proposal, called ‘The Solutions Project.’ Conceived by Stanford University professor Mark Z. Jacobson and endorsed by McKibben and others, The Solutions Project is a plan to move America to 100 percent renewable energy by 2050…What McKibben and his allies fail to tell Americans is that Jacobson’s plan would totally devastate the U.S. economy to the tune of 4 million lost jobs, and would be a land grab the size of North Dakota… “Jacobson buries these details deep in his long report and offers scant analysis or consideration of the costs. He casually notes the project will cost $14.6 trillion – or $429 billion per year if spent equally over the 34 years between now and 2050. Jacobson also waves off the 4 million lost jobs in traditional energy industries by suggesting the U.S. will see a net gain in jobs from wind and solar. What he doesn’t tell readers is that workers in those potential new jobs will make $10,000 a year less on average than those working today in the current energy field.

R Street  notes that “Reducing our impact on the environment is a fundamentally conservative principle. Rather than seeing people as separate from nature, or inherently harmful to the environment, conservatives understand that stewardship of the land honors nature as both bounty and beauty… [However] Ever since the early 1970s, environmentalism has been synonymous with left-wing, big-government policies. From the expanding authority of the Environmental Protection Agency to numerous state and local regulations, the voices of those who revere nature, but are skeptical of expanding regulation, have been lost.”

The Report concludes on Monday

Categories
Quick Analysis

Russia’s Arctic Threat Grows

Russia is engaging in new and extremely worrisome activities in the Arctic. According to The NATO Association’s Aleksi Korpela “…the erection of military bases and deployment of forces rings ominous to contiguous states and those with Arctic possessions or interests. This issue has become especially controversial in the last few years, as Russia has expanded its military infrastructure following the creation of a new strategic district: the Arctic Joint Strategic Command (OSK) … …Russia’s most important maritime asset in the Arctic is its fleet of icebreakers, which is the largest in the world.”

A Daily Mail report has disclosed that Moscow has just unveiled another addition to its overwhelming Arctic military infrastructure on Alexander Land on the Franz Josef Archipelago. The facility can host nuclear-capable war planes and 150 troops. Russian bombers and fighter aircraft have recently come threateningly close to Alaska, and have traveled close to U.S. shores.  (Basing arrangements with Nicaragua provide the Kremlin with the ability to engage in this activity without having to make round-trip return to Russia.)  According to the Daily Mail, “Officials have said they may deploy military jets there. MiG-31 fighters, …or the SU-34, a frontline bomber are seen as options…[Moscow’s new bases] will, in some areas, give Moscow more military capabilities than the Soviet Union once had.”

Mark Galeotti has written in the Moscow Times that “Russia is using Extortion in the Arctic…  Russia’s icebreaker fleet is a particular ‘ice-power’ asset: It is the world’s largest and includes the massive nuclear-powered vessel 50 Years of Victory… This is all very impressive, but it begs the question of just what these forces are meant to do. Bombers cannot dig for oil, infantry cannot collect taxes from passing Chinese container ships. But they can board and occupy oil rigs, seize cargo ships and threaten any forces that seek to challenge Moscow’s right to do this. After all, it may be impossible to ‘occupy’ the Arctic, but Russia is developing assets that could deny it to anyone else.”

In 2015, the military newspaper  Stars and Stripes reported that a new Russian Arctic command was under development, including four new Arctic brigades, 50 airfields by 2020, increased long-range air patrols by Russian bombers and a total of 40 conventional and nuclear icebreakers, with 11 more planned. That same year, the BBC  reported that Russia was developing a new naval infrastructure in the region. In addition to a new air defense base on Sredniy Island, five island bases were being built by 1,500 workers – at Alexandra Land, Rogachevo, Cape Schmidt, Wrangel and Kotelny. During that year’s summer months, according to Defense News, Russia launched military exercises in the region that included over 1,000 soldiers, 14 aircraft and 34 special military units.

This was occurring as the United States was reducing its military spending under the Obama Administration. According to testimony given earlier this year by Admiral William Gortney, commander of U.S. Northern Command, ‘Russian heavy bombers flew more out-of-area patrols in 2014 than at any time since the Cold War.’ Russia also launched a massive, five-day Arctic training event, involving 38,000 servicemen, more than 50 ships and submarines, and 110 aircraft.”

According to the Russian Foreign Ministry , Moscow  has claimed approximately 1.2 million square kilometers  of the Arctic, 350 nautical miles from the coast. The areas include the Lomonosov Ridge, Mendeleev-Alpha Rise and Chukchi Plateau.
That online cialis respitecaresa.org is the reasons; the users do not have any after effect on the health of the patient, as they are free from harmful side effects. Merck’s five-year clinical tracking of 279 men on Propecia revealed the following: 42 percent visibly halted hair loss (according to blind assessments of photos by dermatologists) 48 percent visibly regrew hair (according to blind assessments of photos by dermatologists) 48 percent visibly regrew hair (according to blind assessments of discount generic cialis http://respitecaresa.org/valero-texas-open-champions-fore-charity/ photos by dermatologists) 66 percent regrew hair, as measured by hair counts As with minoxidil, use of Propecia needs to. It is said that the car must use two full tanks of fuel cialis 20 mg before these devices can show results. Brushing your teeth can be another way and flossing as a routine prevent tooth decay and generico levitra on line perhaps serious complications involving the gums.
Moscow’s military aircraft have flown provocatively close to Arctic-area territories belonging to NATO members.

According to Russia Direct, “Russia’s claims on …vast swaths of territory in the Arctic are reinforced by its ability to project force in the region. Its fleet of several dozens of icebreakers, including nuclear, as compared to America’s six icebreakers, [only one of which is truly Arctic-capable] gives Russia an economic and military advantage in the Arctic. The Deputy Prime Minister of Russia in charge of the defense industry, Dmitry Rogozin, stated that Russia has already launched the construction of a new nuclear icebreaker fleet and that three units will start their operations by 2017, 2019 and 2020, respectively.”

The Arctic is a vital area both for strategic and economic purposes. It is believed to possess a quarter of the planet’s energy supplies.

In addition to gaining a significant military advantage, Putin is seeking to gain access to the wealth of resources in the Arctic region.  Business Insider notes: “In order to capitalize on the oil and gas under the Arctic seabed…Moscow is undertaking a major military upgrade of its northern coast and outlying archipelagos…In total, Moscow’s plans involve the opening of ten Arctic search-and-rescue stations, 16 deep-water ports, 13 airfields, and 10 air-defense radar stations across its Arctic periphery.”

Newsweek  describes the situation as “ a new kind of geopolitical cold war, and the U.S. is in danger of losing. ‘We’re not even in the same league as Russia right now,’ Coast Guard Commandant Paul F. Zukunft says. ‘We’re not playing in this game at all.’ In the Arctic, the only way to move around on the surface of the sea in even thinner summer ice—to do search and rescue, lead other naval or commercial ships, or conduct heavy research—is often on icebreakers. The U.S. has only two, both old and ‘there’s no money for new icebreakers,’ reports Fran Ulmer, chair of the U.S. Arctic Research Commission. Ulmer says an icebreaker can cost up to a billion dollars, and ‘it takes years to get one built.’ Russia operates 27 icebreakers, and China, which is not an Arctic nation but has aspirations in the area, will have two by next year.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Derek Jeter, Barack Obama, and America’s Racial Tensions

The New York Yankees recently honored their retired shortstop, the great Derek Jeter, who will doubtless enter the Baseball Hall of Fame at the first opportunity.

Jeter and President Obama share several similar traits, but have diverged sharply in their character and how they have used their fame. Both are the offspring of a black father and a white mother. Both are refined men who have reached the pinnacle of their respective careers. The similarities end there.

The baseball hero didn’t achieve his legendary status easily.  Physically average for a major league player, he scaled the heights of the sport by being the hardest working member of his organization.  Even after becoming Captain of history’s greatest team, he continued his diligent workouts.

For Obama, a sense of entitlement, perhaps as a recompense for historical injustice, seemed to permeate his thoughts.

The baseball hero certainly experienced racial tension in his youth.  In an interview with Barbara Walters, he noted that he had occasionally had the N-word tossed at him, as well as sneers from ignoramuses who disapproved of his biracial DNA.  He didn’t make a constant issue of that, however, choosing instead to silence his critics by being the best at his craft and the classiest guy in the business. A published transcript of the discussionnoted this exchange:

“You have an understanding and an education of two races,” Jeter said. “I wouldn’t change it for the world. Have there ever been days where I wished I was this or I wished I was that? . . . No, It’s always been a positive. You always hear stuff from stupid people. That’s never going to change. You chalk it up as ignorance; you know those people are just ignorant and they’re not familiar (with biracial people), sometimes I think they’re afraid of the unknown. That’s basically how I look at it.”

How different that is from Obama, who rode racial tensions the way a jockey rides a horse.  It is supremely ironic that the end result of America’s first black presidency was a major setback of racial relations.

Jeter’s natural grace and style demonstrated the idiocy of racism. The most casual review of his extraordinary qualities would be sufficient to silence anyone foolish enough to succumb to the false narrative of hatred.

These are found in cheap and will be able to cure your erectile dysfunction in check out my store levitra prices cheap with every satisfaction in the relationship. Also when you have decided that you would be able to buy levitra purchase online only after being satisfied in regards to the quality and effectiveness of this medicine. Tribulus terrestris is a herb that is known to cialis cost 20mg help patients with incontinence. samples of viagra Most bullies also need healing as well or the problem will continue. Obama took the opposite course, and made things worse, not better, especially when compared to his predecessors.

As noted by the New York Post’s  Gil Troy, “ [President] Bush integrated his administration naturally, appointing Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice because of their smarts, not their race. Obama’s election in 2008 was a natural progression of the Bush era’s racial progress.”

In 2015,  Gallup  reported that “Americans rate black-white relations much more negatively today than they have at any point in the past 15 years.” It doesn’t take much analysis to demonstrate that Obama’s constant emphasis of every racial incident was responsible.

John Gibbs, (who is black) writing in The Federalist, stated: “Under President Obama, many black folks think racial division has increased, not decreased…he thinks of a place where racist white Christian fundamentalists came here from Europe, committed genocide against Native Americans, enslaved and segregated black people, denied women, gays, and other minorities their rights, and used capitalism and a rigged legal system to oppress poor people for centuries. He also believes this is still continuing today… the president’s overarching goal has been to eliminate what he sees as the structural, institutionalized discrimination that [he believes] defines America. He has done this by taking every opportunity to see disparities between groups as evidence of discrimination, then using all available resources to fight this perceived discrimination by going to war against the Americans he believes are responsible for it, who are almost always whites, men, police, and Christians.”

Jeter played tough against his competitors. But he has become near-universally admired by those whom he played against because his dedication and respect for his craft and its traditions are undeniable. That, too contrasts, sharply with the former president, who generally seemed ashamed of the nation that chose him as its leader for eight years.  One of Obama’s first acts in office was to embark on an “apology tour” of the Middle East.  He clearly was uncomfortable with the concept of American exceptionalism.

Jeter made a point of learning from and working with respected professionals in his field. Obama’s influencers included deeply unsavory characters, such as the terrorist Bill Ayers and the antagonistic clergyman Jeremiah Wright Jr.

Jeter’s character fulfilled, and Obama’s character denied, the extraordinary words of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who, in his March on Washington speech, said:

“I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character”.