Netanyahu: You want these fanatics to have nuclear weapons?

Those who say a nuclear Iran would stabilize the Middle East “have set a new standard for human stupidity.”

In an interview to be aired on NBC’s Meet the Press this morning, Israeli Prime Ministers Benjamin Netanyanhu likened the government of Iran to the terrorists that have been killing American citizens and destroying American property in 21 Middle Eastern countries this week:

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

• Tweet

Milestone

This past weekend marked the second anniversary of MoreMonmouthMusings as this domain address.

Traffic to MoreMonmouthMusings.net during the past two years has exceed the entire previous 4+ years at the old blogspot address, which still gets daily traffic, combined.

Thank you for making MoreMonmouthMusings one of your regular stops for news and commentary.  Please patronize our advertisers and thank them for supporting this site.

• Tweet

Is Socialism God’s Preferred Form Of Government?

By Art Gallagher

Michael Riley, a Baptist minister and member of The Asbury Park Press editorial board says “Jesus was a card-carrying socialist” in his Only Human column in today’s print edition.  The column is not yet on the app’s web site.

Someone better inform Barack Obama who insists that he is a Christian, that he is not a socialist, and that he was born in Hawaii.

But Riley is not writing for Obama.  He’s writing to Republicans:

“I hate to break it to the far-right wing in this country (or as it is more commonly called these days, the Republican Party), but Jesus was a car-carrying socialist.  Or, he would have been, if cards had been invented, and if pockets to carry the card had been around and if the word socialism had made it into the language in the first century.

I have no doubt about it.”

I have doubts about what Riley understands about Jesus, government and freedom.   That there will be a slew of cancelled subscriptions to The Press as a result of Riley’s column, I have no doubt.

The first thing that struck me about Riley’s column is that he is talking about Jesus in the past tense.   Even a Jesuit trained lapsed Catholic like me believes in a Living God.  Why is this Baptist minister telling The Press’s remaining readers that Jesus is dead?   Didn’t we just celebrate His resurrection two weeks ago?

Riley paraphrases the Gospel of Luke and Karl Marx to make his case.

“One thing you lack,” Riley quotes Luke quoting Jesus talking to the rich, “go and sell all you possess and give it to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”

“But Jesus was a conservative compared to those who followed him,” Riley continues in the past tense again, “In the book of Acts, we read, ‘All the believers were together and had everything in common,  They sold property and possession to give to anyone who had need.’

No one claimed that any of their possession were their own; they shared everything they had.

That is right out of the Marxist playbook: ‘from each according to his ability to each according to his need.’  And woe to anyone who tried to wiggle out of the deal.”

Without getting all theological and politically scientific on Michael, the Nudnik of Neptune, let me just point out two key words from his paraphrase of Luke paraphrasing Jesus that hopefully will set him straight:

Sell and Give.   Both involve a concept that is fundamental to Christianity and foreign to Marxism: Choice.

Never mind that Christians believe that God created Man (and Woman) and that Marxists believe than Man created God.  Let’s look at selling and giving.

In order for Jesus’s followers to sell all of their possessions, they first had to have them.  Hmmm, how would that happen in a Marxist socialist society?

In order for the rich to give to the poor, someone would have to buy those possessions.  More than likely someone else who was rich.

While Riley starts his column with no doubt that the dead Jesus was a socialist, he seems to have some doubt as he concludes:

Obviously, human sin makes this kind of socialistic/communist economic system unworkable over the long haul and in large groups.  But capitalism is a sinner’s banquet as well, full of abuse and greed and loopholes that turn into nooses for the poor.

The point here is that socialism is not necessarily a dirty word.  It seems to be sort of what God was hoping for as a model for his people.  So let’s not get all high and mighty about using it as an epithet.

How about we do get high and mighty about Liberty, Choice, Charity and Responsibility.

How about the preachers and ministers do their jobs and spread The Word and convert the sinners so that capitalism, the only system that has ever worked and creates genuine sharing and empowerment as opposed to the compelled sharing and mediocrity of Marxism, can work better for the rich and the poor.

Riley’s heart might be in the right place, but his head is a dark place.

• Tweet

Monmouth Poll: Christie Approval Numbers 51%-35%

By Art Gallagher

Governor Chris Christie’s approval numbers have slipped 5% since February in a Monmouth University/NJ Press Media poll released this morning.

51% of New Jersey residents approve of the governor’s performance compared to 35% who don’t, according to the poll.  Among registered voters, 50% approve of Christie and 38% do not.

In the February Monmouth Poll Christie earned a 52%-38% rating from all NJ residents and 55% to 37% from registered voters.

Today’s Monmouth Poll results are markedly different than the Quinnipiac Poll released last week which indicates that Christie is enjoying his highest approval numbers ever at 59%-36%.

One thing that is consistent between the two polls:  New Jersey residents prefer Senate President Sweeney’s property tax relief plan over Governor Christie’s 10% income tax cut.

I don’t have time this morning to study the two polls to account for the difference and it’s too early to call the pollsters for comment.  Anyone who can account for the difference in the polls before I get to it is welcome to do so in the comments.

• Tweet

The Democratic Laundromat: Wisniewski’s Washing and Spinning

By Harold Kane and Art Gallagher

The legal money laundering of Assemblyman John Wisniewski in Middlesex County has been in the news this month as Politickernj and The Star Ledger brought to light the how Middlesex Democrats are circumventing state and local pay to pay laws by having government vendors, primarily the Middlesex based CME engineering firm, fund campaigns through PACs when the campaign finance laws prohibited contributions directly to the campaigns in jurisdictions where they were earning large fees.

Wisniewski, of Sayreville, is the Chairman of the State Democratic Party and the Assembly Transportation Committee. 

Despite the fact that the PACs are run by his former staff members and fund campaigns in his district and county, Wisniewski says he has nothing to do with them.  If that is true, the State Democratic Committee needs a new chairman.  If it’s not true, the Democrats still should get a new chairman and the people of the 19^th legislative district should elect a new Assemblyman.

Also in the news this month are the guilty pleas of insurance broker Frank Gartland of Federal Hill Risk Management.  Gartland plead guilty to giving $2 million in bribes to Toms River School Superintendent Michael Ritacco, and to theft by deception and money laundering for bilking the Perth Amboy Board of Education, an Abbott district, out of more than $2 million.

Gartland also admitted to making illegal contributions to the campaigns of former Assemblyman and former Perth Amboy Mayor Joe Vas through “straw” contributors.  Vas is now serving a 6 ½  year sentence for funneling illegal money from a real estate scheme into his unsuccessful 2006 congressional campaign.  Vas was Wisniewski’s running mate and they represented the 19^th district together in the Assembly from 2004-2009.

While all of this bribery, stealing and money laundering was going on, Gartland and his associates were also donating heavily to the Middlesex County PACS that Wisniewski says he has nothing to do with.

Wisniewski and Port Authority Deputy Executive Director Bill Baroni, a former Republican State Senator, got into it this week over the PACS and Wisniewski using his authority as chairman of the Assembly Transportation Committee to issue subpoenas requiring that Port Authority executives appear before his committee.  Baroni accused Wisniewski of a “shakedown” because CME did not receive preferential treatment while pitching their engineering services to Port Authority.

In response, Wisniewski said “the truth is an expendable commodity” for the “Christie character assassination team”

Let’s see some truth from Wisniewski regarding these PACS, including what quid pro quo Gartland received for his “contributions.”

• Tweet

Nuzzi bursting the false equivalency bubble

Far be it from me to note the superficial and inconsequential, but when I see Fluke I think more “chaste librarian” than raging “slut.”

By Olivia Nuzzi

The Sandra Fluke-Rush Limbaugh drama has succeeded in sparking a national debate about false equivalency in the media. Of course, things like sexism and misogyny exist on both the right and left. But on which side is it worse? And on which side – if any – is it fundamental? 

In a piece posted here yesterday, Art Gallagher attacked “misogynists lefties” whom he admitted he had “never heard of” until The Daily Beast’s Kristen Powers brought them to his attention. Though, not knowing about these media figures didn’t stop Gallagher from blindly agreeing with Powers that they were “misogynists.” 

I have a big problem with anyone making a diagnosis from a distance. Is Rush Limbaugh a misogynist? I suppose to figure that out you’d have to talk to his mother and four wives. 

Does Rush Limbaugh say misogynistic things, and has he done so consistently throughout his career? From his claim that having “two or three abortions” is a part of a feminist “paying her dues” to his cracks about First Lady Michelle Obama’s figure, the evidence isn’t difficult to find. 

However, none of that means that Limbaugh is without insight. And liberals who nod in agreement with the establishment left – conceding that he’s a mere useless blowhard – are not doing themselves any favors. 

Limbaugh is right on occasion – there are indeed militant feminists, and what they espouse is arguably as harmful as Mel Gibson calling your daughter “sugar tits.” Admitting that doesn’t mean that I’m not a feminist, it means I’m not an ideological imbecile (though the readers on this website may disagree.) 

The assertion that “lefties” are never reprimanded for their sexist or racist remarks may read as accurate if you live in a bubble. Evidently, Gallagher’s bubble hasn’t yet been punctured by reality on this topic.

Last May, MSNBC host and converted-liberal, Ed Schultz, was suspended by the network after calling Laura Ingraham a “right wing slut” on his radio program. I condemned that statement, as did every one from Alyssa Rosenberg from the left-wing Think Progress, to the Women’s Media Center’s President Julie Burton, to Keith Olbermann – that’d be one of those “misogynists lefties” Gallagher had “never heard of.”

In 2008, the National Organization for Women (NOW) circulated a petition, protesting MSNBC host Chris Matthews’ “record of ‘overt sexism when discussing women.'” They based this claim on research conducted by the known-liberal watchdog group Media Matters for America. The left-leaning NOW denounced Matthews for “sexist comments” made about Hillary Clinton, then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and the female correspondents who he worked with at MSNBC.

Also in 2008, MSNBC suspended Tucker Carlson’s guest-host David Shuster for suggesting that the Clinton campaign had “pimped out” Chelsea Clinton. 

The late, great Christopher Hitchens was often the subject of liberal rage for his alleged sexism in the form of observations such as “Mrs. Clinton, looking like the dog being washed” and assessments of that same target as being “flagrant, hysterical, repetitive and pathological lying.” One of Hitchens’ later works, a Vanity Fair piece entitled “Why Women Aren’t Funny” saw him denounced as “sexist” by Mediaite’s Rachel Sklar and comedian Sarah Silverman. 

In 2010, liberal hero Michael Moore, along with noted feminist author Naomi Wolfe, was the subject of a left-wing protest labeled “Moore and Me.” After making comments deemed “insensitive” regarding rape allegations against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and offering to post his  $20,000 bail, Moore was declared a “rape apologist.” Also smeared with the label was Naomi Wolfe, who – along with Moore and a handful of others – refused to condemn and dismiss Assange by virtue of the unclear rape allegations made against him. 

And should you be under the impression that those on the left are only castigated when they’re criticizing fellow liberals, you’re mistaken.

Keith Olbermann has come under fire numerous times from the liberal and feminist establishments for his bombastic remarks about conservative women. In 2009, Olbermann was called out by the left-wing Air America’s editor of news and politics, Megan Carpentier, for “belittling” Malkin’s voice with his impersonation of her. Carpentier went on to suggest that Olbermann’s attack relied on “silly stereotypes” and “imagery that brings to mind victims of domestic violence.” 

This past November, Bill Maher – another one of those “misogynists lefties” Gallagher had “never heard of” – was scolded by feminists after he made a joke about the detention of CBS’s Lara Logan, wherein he suggested that America would be willing to send Elisabeth Hasselbeck to Egypt in exchange for the safe return of the foreign correspondent. 

The Sandra Fluke-Rush Limbaugh episode is a unique one, mainly because Sandra Fluke is not a public figure. Limbaugh did not simply take a one-shot at a commentator – he used his platform as the loudest voice in radio to verbally batter a civilian for days. 

Far be it from me to note the superficial and inconsequential, but when I see Fluke I think more “chaste librarian” than raging “slut.” Not to mention, Fluke’s testimony itself had nothing to do with sex. Which leads me to believe that Limbaugh didn’t even bother to listen to her speak – and perhaps he didn’t even bother to look at her. Had he done so, he would’ve witnessed a civil woman discuss a friend who paid, out of pocket, for the birth control pills she was prescribed to treat a medical condition. 

It’s true that both the liberal and conservative movements have leaders, followers and mouthpieces who often thoughtlessly employ incendiary rhetoric. But it’s also true that those with sharp tongues on both sides of the aisle face consequences. 

Unfortunately for ideologues, more people are governed by their sense of Right and Wrong than Right and Left. 

Olivia Nuzzi was briefly a MMM contributor until Dan Jacobson’s triCityNews lured her away with money and colorful language. We’re glad to have her back, even if only to set us straight.

• Tweet

Misogyny On The Left

In a column published yesterday on The Daily Beast, Kirsten Powers, who is also a FoxNews analyst, calls the leftist media on their hypocrisy over the Rush Limbaugh/Sandra Fluke controversy.

Powers doesn’t want anyone to give Limbaugh a break over calling Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute.”  On the contrary, she says his apology is an inauthentic attempt to keep his advertisers from abandoning him.  She’s probably right.   Kirsten wants Rush to grovel more and to call Fluke on the phone, just President Obama did.

While I agree that Limbaugh’s comments were inappropriate and over the top, I predict that Fluke will parlay the resulting exposure into a lucrative media career.  Watch out Rachel Madow and the lefties on The View — Sandra Fluke is your new competition.  If living well is the best revenge, we’ll be seeing more of Fluke gloating than we’ll see or hear of Limbaugh groveling.

Powers has nothing to worry about.  Fluke is no competition for Kirsten.  Kirsten has integrity.

Which is why Powers calls out Chris Matthews, Keith Olberman and a couple of misogynists lefties I’ve never heard of (I’m sure they’ve never heard of me either), in graphic detail.

What if they said those horrible things about Jews or African-Americans, Powers asks rhetorically as if the answer was obvious. 

The answer is obvious, but not the one Powers was implying.  If Matthews or Olbermann said something racist about a Jew, nothing much would happen.  If they said something racist about an African American, they would be boycotted and/or fired.  Only Whoopie Goldberg, Jessie Jackson and rappers are allowed to make money using the N-word.

Bill Maher, the “grand pooh-bah of media mysogyny” is allowed to make money using the C-word.  He can refer to conservative women like Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman and Rick Santorum’s wife in sexist and sexual terms, make money and get a pass from Gloria Steinem.

Powers says that unless the left stream media starts holding their resident misogynists to account, “the fight against media misogyny will continue to be perceived as a proxy war for the Democratic Party, not a fight for fair treatment of women in the public square.”

What fight against media misogyny?  Powers just laid it out perfectly in her piece.   The left isn’t fighting against media misogyny.  They are the media misogynists!

The right doesn’t have a media misogyny problem.  Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Megyn Kelly, Sarah Palin and a great deal of the FoxNews talent, including Powers are not demeaned by male members of the media right or center right.  When male members of the media right, like Bill O’Reilly for example, criticise Maddow, The View women or Nancy Pelosi, he never does it in a misogynist manner.  I’m sure someone can come up with right wing media types on the fringe who are consistently misogynistic, but no one with the prominence of Maher, Matthews or Olbermann. 

Limbaugh is not consistently misogynistic, like those lefties.  I don’t know what is in Rush’s heart, but if he was consistently misognynistic his career would be over.  And not because of the left wouldn’t tolerate it.  Rush’s listeners would not tolerate such behavior.

Rush Limbaugh didn’t apologise because the the outcry from the leftist media and the Democrats. He lives for and cashes in over outcrys from the left. He apologised because of the outcry from Republicans and his right-wing advertisers.

We’ll know the left is fighting against media misogyny and that the Democratic Party truly stands for women’s rights when President Obama’s Super PAC returns the $1 million dollars that Bill Maher donated. 

Powers is too smart to have the audacity to hope that happens.  Otherwise she would have called for the President’s PAC to return the money.  She left that task up to The Weekly Standard.

In the meantime, the “fight against media misogyny” is a “proxy war for the Democratic Party,” just like this whole fabricated contraception controversy is a proxy war for the Democratic Party.

• Tweet

Governor Christie Takes Action to Root Out Waste and Abuse to Make Every Education Dollar Count

Trenton, NJ – Today, Governor Chris Christie took another important step to move forward with common sense reforms of the state’s system of education funding by convening a task force of experts to root out and eliminate well-documented instances of abuse and manipulation of the school funding formula due to fraud in the Free and Reduced Price School Lunch Program. The Education Funding Task Force, created by Executive Order, will act on the Governor’s commitment to make every education dollar count and ensure funding is not being misdirected, but actually getting to those economically disadvantaged children who need it most.

“Providing a great education that prepares every single child in our state for college or a career has been a top priority of my Administration. For this reason, I’ve proposed a budget that increases state support for education to its highest level ever and an agenda of bold reforms to turn around failing schools,” said Governor Christie. “But how we spend education dollars in our schools is just as important as how we provide them. Funding must follow the child more closely and get to the students who need it most. This Task Force will help to root out and eliminate well-documented fraud and abuse in the Free and Reduced Price School Lunch Program, which has led to the possible misdirection of tens of millions of dollars of education funding.”

The School Funding Reform Act (SFRA) is designed to distribute greater amounts of school aid to districts serving greater numbers of students who are economically at-risk and districts with less property wealth. Currently, participation in the federal Free and Reduced Price Lunch Program serves as the proxy for classifying and counting economically at-risk students. Recent studies and news reports clearly identify high levels of fraudulent enrollment in the program – undercutting the state’s ability to fairly and appropriately determine aid levels for schools. A 2011 report by the State Auditor found that as many as 37 percent of the students in the program are enrolled fraudulently.

Recognizing the importance of maintaining integrity and reliability in this program is crucial to ensuring a fair, accurate and equitable distribution of funding to schools. The Education Funding Task Force is charged with examining the state’s school funding formula and developing recommendations concerning those areas of the formula that may be susceptible to fraud or subject to outside manipulation. This includes participation in the Federal Free and Reduced Price Lunch Program as a proxy for at-risk status and the municipal tax abatement program. 

The Task Force will specifically consider the following issues: 

·         Economically effective measures of student poverty;

·         Educationally sound measures of defining at-risk students;

·         Appropriate adjustments to SFRA to account for municipal property ratable bases that may be artificially deflated as a result of municipal property tax abatements;

·         Identifying all aspects of the SFRA that may be susceptible to fraud, or subject to undue outside manipulation and recommendations to address these abuses; and

·         All other such other matters as may be referred to the Task Force by the Governor.

The Education Funding Task Force will be composed of 7 members from inside and outside of government, each with expertise in education funding, policy, administration, governance and fiscal management. All members of the Task Force will serve without compensation.

The Task Force was first called for in the Department of Education’s Education Funding Report released last month, in a recommendation aimed at exploring the use of a new measure for at-risk students in place of participation in the Free and Reduced Price Lunch Program. The funding report outlined a series of common sense measures to improve the school funding formula and to help close the state’s persistent achievement gap by making education funding more closely follow the child.

A copy of Executive Order 89 can be found as an attachment to this release.

• Tweet

Steven Bridges, Presidential Impersonator, Dies at 48

• Tweet

Halfacre’s ABC nomination approved by Senate Judiciary Committee

Former Mayor Mike Halfacre’s nomination as the Director of the Division  Alcoholic Beverage Control was unanimously approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee this afternoon.

In answering questions posed by members of the committee, Halfacre expressed his commitment to combat underage drinking and to run his agency has a regulatory and enforcement body, not a policy making body.

Halfacre was appointed Assistant Attorney General and Acting Director on February 6.  His nomination is scheduled be voted on by the full Senate on March 15.

• Tweet