Category Archives: Political Commentary

One More Chance For Justice At The IRS

The House has sent a letter to the new Attorney General:

Specifically, the committee provided documents that show three acts by Ms. Lerner that may have violated criminal statutes. One, she helped to target only conservative organizations, thereby robbing them of equal protection and due process. Two, she may have impeded the Treasury inspector general’s investigation of the matter by giving misleading statements. Three, she risked exposing (and may have exposed) confidential taxpayer information by using her personal email address to conduct official business.

And that’s only what we know so far. Congress’s problem is that the IRS has stonewalled it at every turn. The Treasury inspector general, J. Russell George, has become tentative after all the Democratic criticism of his probe. It seems the Justice Department is the only body with the powers to shake loose some answers about what happened.

The Ryan letter asks Ms. Lynch to tell him the status of that referral, and Speaker Boehner chimed in with a statement calling for the new attorney general to prove to Americans that “justice will be served.”

Ms. Lynch’s response will be enormously telling about her view of her job.

It will. But don’t hold your breath.

Bernie Sanders’ Rape Fantasies

Some thoughts from Ace:

I think it’s pretty stupid to demagogue people over statements like this, honestly. I know where Sanders go this from: He got it from Nancy Friday’s My Secret Garden, supposedly a book containing all of women’s private fantasies (she says she surveyed women), and rape was indeed a major part of the female sexual imagination, she was surprised to find. (Psychologically, it has been explained to me that women feel guilty about sex, but still enjoy sex; the fantasy of being under someone else’s sexual control allows the woman, in fantasy, to enjoy sex, because she’s not making any of the decisions that she would otherwise feel guilty about.)

I don’t know if I buy any of that; I’m just remarking that this isn’t the first time I’ve heard this.

I do know that if I wrote that paragraph not in response to Bernie Sanders, there’s a pretty good chance that the left would demagogue me and Speechcraft Trial me as a Thought Rapist.

And that’s why we must do the same to Bernie Sanders, and make him defend these So Problematic You Guys words.

The left has drawn us all into its insecure, neurotic, grasping, wanting, stupid, paranoid darkness. They have effectively criminalized it to say anything other than “Women are just terrific” and “everything is awesome!”

They are broken, warped people inflicting their psychic tumult on the rest of society.

Yes, tit for tat is exactly the right strategy. Except maybe we need to (in someone’s words) punch back twice as hard. But they won’t stop this Alinskyite BS until it causes them sufficient pain.

The Rashomon Of Apollo And Shuttle

Stephen Smith has a lengthy review of John Logsdon’s latest book.

As he notes, the dual myths of Kennedy as space visionary and Nixon as space villain don’t stand up to any sort of realistic historical scrutiny. In fact, with Apollo, Kennedy set us up for decades of failure, in terms of making spaceflight economically realistic.

Global Cooling

A study predicts decades of it ahead.

Cold is much more deadly than heat, by an order of magnitude.

I have no more confidence in this prediction than I do of predictions for warming (and particularly predictions of catastrophic climate change). The lesson is a) the climate can always be counted on to change, b) we don’t really know what the future holds for climate, c) we need to be prepared for anything, which means maximizing economic growth and d) (related) we need to stop fantasizing that carbon dioxide is a magical climate-control knob.

“To My Liberal Jewish Friends”

An open letter:

The president’s sophistry demonstrates a simple but profound truth: his commitment to the progressive values of tikkun olam is governed by its own “red lines,” and is entirely utilitarian. Which again raises the question: what was his purpose in stressing this shared progressive commitment in his address to you, and what was his purpose in subtly reminding you of the costs of failing to abide by its terms?

The answer, I hope, is obvious. On June 30, Obama will likely conclude a nuclear deal with Iran. This will spark a faceoff with Congress, which has already declared its opposition to the deal. Congress will inevitably pass a vote of disapproval, which Obama will inevitably veto. In order to defend that veto from a congressional override, however, he must line up 34 Senators—all Democrats. This calls in turn for a preemptive ideological campaign to foster liberal solidarity—for which your support is key. If the president can convince the liberal Jewish community, on the basis of “shared values,” to shun any suspicion of alignment with congressional Republicans or Benjamin Netanyahu, he will have an easier time batting down Congress’s opposition to the deal with Iran.

Progressive values have nothing to do with what is truly at stake in this moment of decision. Only one final question really matters: in your considered view, should the Islamic Republic of Iran be the dominant power in the Middle East, and should we be helping it to become that power? If your answer is yes, then, by all means, continue to applaud the president—loudly and enthusiastically—as he purports to repair the world.

He was really speaking for President Jarrett, I think.

Space Settlement

Rick Tumlinson says the concept is taking hold within the space community.

Meanwhile, the Center For American Progress is having a symposium on the past and future of human spaceflight. Interestingly, as Jeff Foust notes on Twitter, NASA isn’t involved. Interesting also that it’s sponsored by a lefty institution. I suspect that this topic may set off a civil war on that side of the spectrum.

Rand Paul

Roger Simon isn’t impressed:

Alas Rand (I had higher hopes for him), like father Ron, has a mega-chauvanistic view of the world. The USA is so big and strong it causes everything, including, at one point, 9-11, and now ISIS, if you can believe that. Never mind that the Islamic State is just another avatar of Islamic imperialism’s desire for a world caliphate that has been going on for centuries, long before our country was in existence — the Battle of Tours (732), the Siege of Vienna (1683) and on and on. The violence has been there forever, too. As any literate person knows, it’s in the Koran and the Hadith. Beheadings were part of Mohammed’s game plan. It’s what he did and what he called for. This was not invented by a cabal of neocons in Chevy Chase, Maryland, in 2003.

And of course ISIS is part of a straight line that goes from the Muslim Brotherhood (founded in Egypt in 1928, long before the current crop of Republicans were even alive) to Al Qaeda via Zawahiri and on into the modern age with ISIS, all working from the same ideological playbook, as are Boko Haram, Hamas, al Shabab, al Nusra, etc., etc.

Rand, again like father Ron, is essentially racist in blaming this on America and not recognizing other cultures have belief systems to which they truly adhere and that those belief systems may be dangerous, even evil. America did not evolve Islamist ideology anymore than it did Nazism, but the Islamists have the potential to wreak just as much havoc if they are not stopped. I don’t blame Dr. Jasser for being upset. I’d be furious. People like him, at immense personal risk, have been working for the necessary reform of Islam every waking moment of their lives.

Yes. It is profoundly racist to deny the Arabs (and other people) moral agency, but that’s, of course, always the attitude of the Left. It is sad to see Senator Paul fall for the same thing. On foreign policy, he seems to be running for the wrong party’s nomination.

[Update a few minutes later]

More links from Elizabeth Price Foley.