[guest post by Dana]

It’s called “smart power”, this showing respect for one’s enemies and empathizing with their point of view. And it’s what Hillary Clinton believes will “change the process for peace in the 21st century.” So, while Clinton is respecting and empathizing away, this is what America’s enemy is doing:

Overall the guidelines make it clear that, in the mind of ISIS leaders, “It is permissible to buy, sell, or give as a gift female captives and slaves, for they are merely property, which can be disposed of.”

The most shocking information the pamphlet offers is the notion that it is “permissible to have intercourse with the female slave who hasn’t reached puberty if she is fit for intercourse; however if she is not fit for intercourse, then it is enough to enjoy her without intercourse.”

There is no clarification offered in the document as to what might make a young girl “fit” to be raped.

And this:

Middlemen with ties to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) have turned to a grim new method of trying to secure funds in recent days. With the group having failed to strike deals to ransom the U.S. hostages in its custody — instead beheading three of them since July — its intermediaries are now trying to negotiate the sale of the body of at least one of the men it killed.

Three sources in contact with ISIS or its associates told BuzzFeed News that it wants to sell the remains of James Foley, the U.S. journalist whose August death was the first in a series of high-profile executions of Western hostages by ISIS hands.

They said ISIS wants $1 million for Foley’s body, which it would deliver across the border to Turkey, and that the group was willing to provide a DNA sample to facilitate a deal.

Is anyone, anywhere, joining Clinton in respecting these animals and empathizing with their plight as you walk down the “smart power” highway together toward peace?

–Dana

Ken White from Popehat has been having wayyy too much fun with this on Twitter. Not sure any of you can top his best ones, but I encourage you to try.

Here’s a small sample of what you’re up against:

Meow meow meow meow, meow meow meow meow, meow meow meow meow MEOW meow meow meow pic.twitter.com/jNJthvqX08

— Popehat (@Popehat) December 7, 2014

"Grounded." "Two weeks." This is BULLSHIT. pic.twitter.com/IOmAirEauc

— Popehat (@Popehat) December 7, 2014

He has way more. But this is just screaming for captions.

UPDATE: Ken comments to note that many of the Popehat captions were from Patrick — although these two were his. (I think I can usually tell the difference, but not always.)

[guest post by Dana]

I heard this on the news today at work and all I could think was, oh what royal hypocrites these people are. Democrats have continuously accused conservatives as being racist if they dare criticize the president. To them, there can’t possibly be any other reason for saying anything negative about him – even if the criticisms succinctly demonstrate how his destructive policies and disregard for the Constitution hurts Americans. It doesn’t matter, because it can’t. There is the company line to adhere to: Conservative Racist. Is there any other kind?

But this week, to the dismay of Democrats, we discover that their own ranks are filled with racists, too – liberal white privileged racists. The worst kind! When Sony Pictures was hacked last week, private emails became public. Prior to a 2013 fundraiser, Sony Pictures Entertainment Co-Chairman Amy Pascal (D) and film producer Scott Rudin (D) joked in an email exchange about the type of movie the president might like:

“Would he like to finance some movies,” Rudin wrote. Pascal wrote b, “I doubt it. Should I ask him if he liked DJANGO?” Rudin responded with “12 YEARS,” to which Pascal responded by naming other films starring African-Americans: “Or the butler. Or think like a man? [sic].”

Pascal, it should be noted, donated $5,000 to Obama’s re-election campaign and $30,800 to the DNC.

Today, both Pascal and Rudin made public apologies for their comments.

From Rudin:

“Private emails between friends and colleagues written in haste and without much thought or sensitivity, even when the content of them is meant to be in jest, can result in offense where none was intended,” Rudin told Deadline. “I made a series of remarks that were meant only to be funny, but in the cold light of day, they are in fact thoughtless and insensitive — and not funny at all. To anybody I’ve offended, I’m profoundly and deeply sorry, and I regret and apologize for any injury they might have caused.”

From Pascal:

“The content of my emails to Scott were insensitive and inappropriate but are not an accurate reflection of who I am,” she said. “Although this was a private communication that was stolen, I accept full responsibility for what I wrote and apologize to everyone who was offended.”

Unsurprisingly, sexist Al Sharpton, smelling an opportunity to be front and center, got right up on his own sanctimonious soapbox and singled out Pascal because her apology wasn’t enough:

“These emails nominate Amy Pascal to be considered by some of us in the same light” as former Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling, Sharpton said in a statement.

Sharpton called on Pascal to immediately meet with black leaders, and said Sony must take steps “to respect the African American community and reflect that respect in their hiring and business practices.”

Pascal should tell Sharpton to bugger off, however, she will meekly acquiesce and meet with whomever the reverend deems necessary for her rehabilitation. All the while, she will be denouncing her white privilege and cough up thousands of dollars more to donate to some diversity project somewhere to atone for her sin. Ironically, Rudin, meanwhile, will be just fine basking in his continued white male privilege. And money.

–Dana

Obama voter, college writing instructor, and poet Catherine Keefe has a piece in the Washington Post titled I’m an Obama supporter. But Obamacare has hurt my family.

“If you’re one of the more than 250 million Americans who already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance — this law will only make it more secure and more affordable,” President Obama promised in 2012.

The fact that this wasn’t true would be our biggest disappointment. In November 2013, Jim learned his small-business policy would be canceled because it didn’t comply with the new mandate to cover pediatric dentistry and maternity care. So Jim went to Covered California, the state’s health insurance exchange, to look for coverage for his employee and himself.

He found that the cost of his employee’s individual “bronze” plan monthly premiums went up 13 percent, and that his own new individual “silver” plan was also more expensive. In 2014, Jim was individually paying $82 more a month in premiums. The deductible (the amount you have to pay before the insurance company starts footing the bill) did go down — from $5,000 to $2,000 for each individual insured. But if you added together 12 months of premiums, the deductible, and the new policies’ out-of-pocket maximums, we were potentially on the hook for $13,260 — rather than the $11,024 from 2013 — if Jim got very sick. Around this time, Jim was diagnosed with prostate cancer, so the threat of high medical bills was real.

Keefe’s plan was cancelled as well. They couldn’t keep their doctor. And trying to enroll in ObamaCare (their only option, since the policies Obama promised they could keep had been cancelled) was an exercise in frustration: “But contacting Covered California, especially by phone, was maddening. The elevator music they played on hold became our winter soundtrack.” The bureaucratic maze will be familiar to the millions who were lied to by our president and have suffered as a result.

Never mind, however. Her husband has been treated, and now says ObamaCare helped him get better!

Jim treated his prostate cancer with radiation, and received his recommended echocardiogram and MRI. So in 2014, we paid the maximum out-of-pocket expense and the insurance company covered the rest. Tallying his medical costs, Jim said, “I take back what I said. Obamacare did help me get better.”

And Keefe herself now gets $28 acupuncture treatments for free! So despite the headline, the end of the article — while expressing dissatisfaction with the uncertainty, lack of freedom to choose a doctor, and impending bureaucratic hassles — basically sends the message that ObamaCare helped this household.

Never mind the fact that they both had insurance policies before Obama got into the middle of everything and got them cancelled. They now thank ObamaCare, and by extension Obama, for her husband getting better.

This is what is so infuriating about American society. Here were people who were just fine under a (not very free) market, and the government then introduced distortions. They underwent maddening bureaucratic hassles, and lost freedom of choice, but apparently (due to government handouts that will increase the deficit by nearly $2 trillion over 20 years) had their costs go down slightly, post-subsidy. And so they are grateful to their government.

Nobody who “benefits” from inefficient and market-distorting government programs seems to be able to contemplate the possible greater success of a market alternative — even when (like Keefe and her husband) they experienced that alternative just last year.

So that’s your problem right there. What do we do about such attitudes? I don’t know. I’m better at diagnosing the problem than the solution.