Category Archives: Social Commentary

Law, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Social Commentary

The “Black Lives Matter” Movement

4 Comments

It should be protesting Planned Parenthood.

Business, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Social Commentary

New York City

5 Comments

…goes backward:

The heart sinks. It took so much effort by so many people to clear up the human wreckage that so many years of liberal ‘compassion’ had created in a dying New York. And to see it all—I can’t put it any better than the esteemed New York Post—’pissed away’ by a mayor not smart or perceptive enough to have learned one thing from the experience of the last 20 years, since his own personal demons have left him stuck in the politics of the 1950s and 1960s, is tragic. It is so hard to build; so easy to destroy.”

Morons with no cultural memory electing morons.

Education, Law, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Social Commentary

Live In NH, NV, NY Or MO?

3 Comments

Give your senators hell:

The first panel features four senators — Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y.; Claire McCaskill, D-Mo.; Dean Heller, R-Nev.; and Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H. All four were original sponsors of the Campus Accountability and Safety Act introduced in 2014, and all four are sponsors on the updated version introduced earlier this year.

CASA will surely be the focus of their panel, which is a shame because the bill is devoid of due process protections for accused students. When the bill was first introduced in 2014, I sent six questions to each of the original sponsors. Of the four sitting on the panel this Wednesday, only Ayotte’s office responded — and the response ignored a question about due process. A series of follow-up questions were never answered.

Neither Heller nor McCaskill’s office ever responded to the original questions. A staffer from Gillibrand’s office called me back but was uninterested in answering questions; instead, the staffer merely gave me an overview of the bill. . . .

Those are the eight people who will be addressing campus sexual assault on Wednesday. It is highly unlikely that even one of them will suggest that the draconian measures being thrust upon universities are fundamentally unfair and biased. Not one person is there to suggest that maybe colleges shouldn’t be adjudicating felonies. Not one person is there to suggest that if colleges do continue to adjudicate felonies, then they need to provide students the same protections an actual court of law would provide.

If you wanted to destroy academia, you couldn’t do a better job of what these people are doing. I expect this kind of thing from the Democrats, but it’s sad to see that, apparently, neither party gives a damn about actual justice or due process.

History, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Social Commentary

The Coming Democrat Implosion

9 Comments

Kurt Schlichter agrees with me that the Dems should be more worried about another 1968 than the Republicans should be about a repeat of 1992. I disagree with this, though:

Back in 1968, the Democrat Party was divided between liberals who loved America and liberalsleftists who hated everything about it. The situation is a little different now, with today’s Democrat Party divided between liberalsleftists who hate everything about America and liberalsleftists who really, really hate everything about it.

Fixed it for him.

[Update a few minutes later]

This is a nice summary:

Nineteen sixty-eight was the year normal Americans saw the Democrats for what they were, and that’s the danger for them in 2016 too – that normal Americans will be reminded about what a circus of welfare-chiseling, race-obsessed, work-averse, baby-shredding freaks the Democrat party is.

I hope so.

Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Social Commentary, War Commentary

An Impeachable Offense

56 Comments

Yes, the Iran deal is.

But it’s not like it’s his first impeachable offense. The Founders would be aghast at a Congess that has let a president get away with so much. But it happened because the separation of powers becaame severely weakened with the development of political parties (that most of them hoped would never happen), in which loyalties to one’s own party, even in another branch of government, has superseded loyalties to the institution of Congress and its Constitutional prerogatives. Plus, while electing Barack Obama was clearly an act of color blindness, impeaching and removing him over his repeated abuse of his power would obviously be racist (do I need a sarcasm tag on that one?).

Ultimately, of course, as we saw with Bill Clinton, what constitutes a “High Crime And Misdemeanor,” even when it involves multiple federal felonies and flouting of one’s oath of office, is a political judgment. So we’re stuck with him for another year and a half.

[Monday-morning update]

“The Lawless Underpinnings of the Iran Nuclear Deal”:

Rivkin and Casey are right about the Constitution’s treaty power being circumvented, with the unfortunate blessing of a cowardly Congress. They’re also right that the Administration’s decision to obtain a speedy U.N. Security Council resolution prior to the Corker-Cardin congressional vote is a blatant and reckless end-run around U.S. sovereignty, bypassing our national legislature in favor of a multi-lateral, extra-sovereign body. Any future President wishing to unravel the Iranian nuclear deal–which Secretary of State has assured us repeatedly is “not legally binding“– will now be branded by the U.N. as an international “law breaker,” a point I made back in April.

I hope States do, indeed, continue to refuse to do business with companies doing business with Iran. The financial impact probably won’t be enough to trigger an Iranian accusation that the Obama Administration isn’t enforcing the deal, however, and consequently the Administration is unlikely to march into court claiming that the Supremacy Clause trumps States’ actions. So I doubt States’ doing this will “prompt the [nuclear] deal to unravel.” Nonetheless, this is one interesting and creative way that States can constitutionally push back.

The States need to start reasserting their rights in general, and restore the 10th Amendment and federalism from a federal government run amok (with the aid of both Democrats and Republicans, for decades).

Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Popular Culture, Social Commentary

Jon Stewart’s Racism

Yes, call him out on it:

These liberal/progressives deserve to be called out–every single time–on their hypocrisy. Don’t hold back calling them the “r” word, because they surely would not, if the tables were turned.

Yes (though they’re neither liberal or “progressive” — their ideas are some of the oldest ones in the book). I long ago lost any compunction in calling them racist, because they have no problem whatsoever falsely accusing me of that. And in their case, calling them out on it has the additional virtue of actually being true.