Category Archives: Education

Media Bias

It’s gotten so bad that even Howie Kurtz is starting to notice it. See, if you think that the definition of marriage is between a man and a woman, you’re a bigot. Toss gays off buildings? Who are we to judge?

And this exchange between Ben Smith and Hugh Hewitt was in fact very enlightening:

Elsewhere, John Nolte of Big Journalism listens to Hewitt’s interview with Smith and spots this juxtaposition: “BuzzFeed Pledges Allegience to Gay Flag — Editor Ben Smith Won’t Call Shariah Evil.”

Or as Ace notes, “it is quite obvious that [Smith] has never even thought about the questions Hugh Hewitt poses before. Simple, obvious questions everyone even pretending to be a thinker must ask himself, like ‘Why is it I feel comfortable declaring there are no two sides on gay marriage, and yet I cannot bring myself to criticize Shariah law?’”

Which dovetails well with this observation from Matt Lewis of the Daily Caller, when as a (more or less) conservative, he debates leftists: “I’ve noticed an uptick in the following phenomenon: I go on a TV debate show, and the people I’m talking to fail to grasp my points. I don’t mean they disagree with me — I mean they don’t comprehend what I’m saying.“

Why, it’s as if the left and right are speaking an entirely different language — as Insta-guest blogger John Tierney noted here yesterday.

Yes. And that’s partly a difference in world views, and partly a deliberate attempt to obfuscate and Newspeak the language.

Chelsea Clinton Too Expensive?

Hire Ashe Schow instead!

For those who like to get the most for their money, here’s an itemized menu of what you can get if you hire me instead:

• Bargain basement price of $200 per minute (limit of three-hour event)

• $10 per person for a handshake (light grip but not limp)

• $15 per person for a photo with me*

• $20 per person for a handshake and a photo

• $25 per person for a photo in which I appear enthusiastic

• $30 per person for a hug**

• $5 per person for a minute of light conversation

• $10 per person for a minute of light, enthusiastic conversation

• $15 and speaker will call your mom on your cell phone

• $25 per person for a lengthy, deep conversation with your mom in which I tell her we’re best friends***

Seems like a much better deal to me. I like the a la carte plan, particularly the hug.

But as Ed Driscoll notes, that doesn’t allow them to contribute to the Clintons’ personal slush fund.

Senator Gillibrand

She thinks there is no such thing as an innocent man being falsely accused:

She’s suggesting that the criminal justice system isn’t easy enough for accusers. Police and juries won’t throw someone in jail based on nothing but an accusation. Therefore, a kinder, gentler justice system needs to exist to do just that. It is that kind of thinking that has prompted more than 70 male students to sue their universities after being expelled and treated like criminals without evidence — and sometimes with evidence that points to a false accusation.

Ashe Schow is doing yeowoman’s work in continuing to spotlight these Kafkaesque anti-male fascists.

The Law-School Bubble

How it happened:

The small town lawyer used to loom large in the American psyche. When an American of a certain age pictured a lawyer he thought of Abraham Lincoln, Atticus Finch, Perry Mason, or Matlock.

These lawyers were regular guys who took the business that walked in the door. If you went to law school expecting to be Perry Mason or Matlock you were certainly disappointed by how boring your life was, but not by what you earned.

After L.A. Law and The Firm Americans stopped thinking of lawyers as solo practitioners and somehow decided that all lawyers were good looking, interesting, and super, extra rich. This drew a whole new wave of confused history majors from college to law school, and floated a thirty year boom in the number of law schools, the number of law students, tuition, and profits. This was awesome news for law schools, less so for everyone else.

It didn’t help that it was subsidized by the student-loan program.

Fainting-Couch Feminists

A new video from Christina Hoff Sommers on how they threaten freedom:

I recently encountered fainting couchers at Oberlin College and Georgetown University. I visited both campuses to give talks on the need to reform feminism and correct exaggerated victim statistics. In the past, activist students who disagreed with me came to my lectures to spar and debate. Today, they issue trigger warnings and accuse me of giving them PTSD. At both Oberlin and Georgetown, activists organized safe spaces were where students could flee if they were panicked by my arguments. While I spoke at Oberlin, 35 students and a therapy dog sought refuge in a safe room. (I feel badly that I triggered a dog.)

Clearly, she is history’s greatest monster.


More opinions coming today. Follow live at (where else?) Scotusblog.

[Update a couple minutes later]

Heh. From Amy Howe: “Don’t type the phrase ‘the Ninth Circuit is affirmed’ that often. My fingers rebelled.”

[Update a couple minutes later, scrolling through]

Court ruled against the government in Horne, in favor of the raisin farmers. This is potentially huge. It could be major blow to idiotic anti-market agriculture policies dating back to the Depression.

[Update a few minutes later]

Here is Amy’s round up of today’slast week’s court action, prior to today’s rulings [oops].

[Late-morning PDT update]

Hearing that more decisions will be announced not only on Thursday, but Friday as well. Both King v. Burwell and the same-sex marriage rulings will be huge.

[Late-afternoon update]

Ilya Somin discusses the implications of the Horne ruling:

whatever one thinks about the compensation issue, the Court’s holding on the question of whether a taking has occurred is an important victory for property owners. It ensures that personal property gets the same level of protection as real property under the Takings Clause, and that the government cannot avoid takings liability by giving owners a small share of the proceeds from the disposition of their property.

The ruling also calls into question a number of other similar agricultural cartel schemes run by the federal government. In addition to property owners, consumers of agricultural products are likely to benefit from the decision, if these cartel schemes can no longer operate. Freer competition between producers in these agricultural markets will increase the amount of goods sold, and thereby lower prices. Lowered food prices are of particular benefit to poor and lower-middle class consumers, who generally spend a higher proportion of their income on food than the affluent do.

Republicans don’t emphasize enough how these market interventions by the government hurt the poor. Including minimum wages laws.