Dr. Taubes explains why it keeps failing.
Category Archives: Media Criticism
Tea Party Versus OWS
A comparison.
[Update a few minutes later]
Related: the Left’s idea of tolerance:
So, in the 1950s, after fighting a war against racist, Nazi monsters, Americans brought fresh vigor to their examination of their own racism and began to purge themselves of racist attitudes and policies that had poisoned our history. Likewise, in the ’70s and ’80s, when birth control and other technology made it easier for women to step beyond the bounds of their traditional roles, Americans began to accept the idea of women in the workforce and in positions of power. Today, the AIDS crisis has given us new sympathy for gays, and science is in the process of giving us a better understanding of the origins of sexual preference. In consequence, we are wrestling with questions of how to broaden our definitions of love and relationship without damaging the social fabric that has brought us so far.
So it is and so, in my opinion, it should be. But it does not in any way follow that we should therefore accept the worst, lowest and most despicable and anti-social behaviors from people simply because they belong to a group that may sometimes feel restricted or excluded.
The Left tells me it’s wrong to be suspicious when a black punk wearing a hood and loose pants slouches into my neighborhood? The Left tells me to listen with respect to the destructive deceptions of con-men like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton? The Left tells me not to fight back when some shrill, man-hating feminist virago goes on the rampage? They tell me not to be judgmental when I witness a young woman getting herself drunk enough to accept being used like a piece of meat by any young man without the virility to escort her safely home? And now the Left tells me I should not look askance at some gay weasel who abuses the privilege of speaking to young people by unleashing a foul-mouthed display of hatred, prejudice and rage?
Just say no.
Law School Malpractice
More thoughts on why many lawyers don’t understand the Constitution, from Jen Rubin:
…law schools have given way to the notion that the Constitution is whatever the Supreme Court says it is. In a sense this is true insofar as the principle of judicial review has been concretized and the other branches assent to the courts’ decisions. But the idea that the Constitution has objective meaning that can be ascertained, in part by studying works like “The Federalist,” is still resisted by the vast majority of elite law school faculty. Even weirder from faculty members’ vantage point is the idea that you can thereby assess whether the Supreme Court got a case “right” or “wrong.” That sort of assessment, using the Constitution, its text and its meaning as the touchstone for judicial interpretation is not in fashion, and hasn’t been for decades now, at elite law schools. Students study precedent and view newer decisions as either departures from or natural consequences of earlier cases. But assess that a decision, and maybe a great number before that, are just plain wrong because they misunderstood an aspect of the Framers’ intent or the structure of the Constitution? Perish the thought.
This is why so many “progressive” lawyers (including Barack Obama) have made such fools of themselves in front of a Supreme Court that actually does understand, and care about it, and why so many legal analysts in the media have been so shocked that the court actually takes constitutional arguments seriously.
We’re Wondering That, Too
In a new biography, Barack Obama asks himself, “Am I an American?”
This was a huge fraud foisted on the American people, because the press refused to do their job four years ago.
The Gutsiest President Evar
How he single-handedly killed UBL.
Piers Morgan
He’s as big a failure at Twitter as he is as an interviewer.
Orbital Mechanics, Selenology, Economics And Logistics
Jim Hillhouse doesn’t understand any of them:
The plan germinating from deep within NASA, and that sees some tentative support within Congress, is to fly one, or both, of the Morpheus and Mighty Eagle landers on the first flight of the Space Launch System in 2017. The reason for this is to begin to answer the question of whether, and in what form, there is water on the Moon.
Ummmm…no. We are long past the point of having to “begin” to answer that question.
Continue reading Orbital Mechanics, Selenology, Economics And Logistics
Why Is Bill Ayers Speaking At GreenFestival?
Birds of a feather:
So why does the speaker lineup at today’s event, heavily marketed as family-friendly and all about the food, include Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers, his FBI-most-wanted-list wife Bernardine Dohrn, Van Jones, Jesse Jackson Sr., Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman, and active Occupier Kyla Bourne whose academic interests revolve around “radical democracy and urban social movements?”
The green movement isn’t just a subset of the progressive philosophy. Rather, it’s the religion that’s taken over the left and whose underlying principles are such that Weather Underground terrorists and Occupy activists fit right in at their family-friend[ly] festivals.
While I’m sure that many attendees think they’re wonderful people, they haven’t all thought through the ultimate consequences of their proposals, in terms of humanity and liberty, or what kind of people it allies them with.
Principle Over Bipartisanship
More thoughts on the unprincipled RINOs from Mike Walsh:
For decades, conservatives have been gnashing their teeth as one Glorious Revolution after another is co-opted by the “Washington establishment,” and a crop of scrubbed virgin freshmen is quickly seduced and corrupted by whorehouse pork-barrelism and, worse, programism.
What the Tea Party and other conservatives are saying is simple: Enough. Stop. No mas. Don’t we already have enough laws, enough regulations, enough encroachments on liberty and — more important — isn’t it about time we rolled them back, striking useless laws from the books, eliminating some or most regulatory agencies and severely (and permanently) constitutionally hamstringing the others? Conservatism can be “progressive” too — back to the future. But we’ve let the “progressive” Left push us around for so long that now they openly mock and question the Constitution itself, and regard conservative fidelity to it as a kind of cultism.
…even when the socialists get what they want, they can’t hang on to it. Their beloved Forward-leaning Soviet Union, collapsed in less than a century, taking most of international communism with it. Seismically speaking, the same thing is happening here. As my colleague, Victor Davis Hanson, notes over at PJ Media, “The temple of postmodern liberalism was rocked these last few weeks, as a number of supporting columns and buttresses simply crashed, leaving the entire edifice wobbling.” That temple, too, will come down; the only question is whether our nation will go with it.
And that’s why the RINOs like Lugar and Hatch have to go. The GOP cannot offer a credible alternative to the destructive hate and social division of the Democrats — the party, let us remember, of slavery, segregation, secularism and sedition — unless it cleans out its own Augean stables first, removes the collaborationists and rejects “bipartisanship” as an absolute good in itself, instead of an occasional, pragmatic means to an end.
Yes.
A Crisis Of Contitutional Ignorance
No wonder “progressives” didn’t take arguments against Obamacare seriously.
The deplorable state of education in this country really is frightening.
[Subscription required]