(Democrat) Victor Davis Hanson reviews the book “South Park Republicans,” and notes that the new puritans are on the left:
Dour, humorless, self-righteous, eager to use the coercive power of the state to impose ideological orthodoxy, so-called “liberals” and “progressives” had become enemies of freedom. These days the humorless, repressed enforcers of rigid standards of behavior are the politically correct professors and media pundits, the dour feminists (“That’s not funny!”), the race-tribunes, and the identity-politics hacks that monitor the media and popular culture for any deviations from the party line of liberal dogma, multiculturalism, and victim-politics.
He’s correct, in my opinion. It’s not just coincidence that Massachusetts is one of the bluest of the blue states. Modern (il)liberal nannyism is a direct descendant of the Puritan strain in American history, brought there by the East Anglians who settled that region, as described by David Hackett Fischer in Albion’s Seed. It continues to echo down the generations.
[Update on Saturday morning]
Someone notes that I didn’t read carefully–it’s on VDH’s web site, but the review is actually by Bruce Thornton.
…who screamed at the “murder” of the noble Rachel Corrie, when something like this happens? Somehow, I don’t think that there will be any memorials set up for this and worshiped by the moonbats. Or protests of Caterpiller about it.
Kerry Country points out one of the potential effects of the SCOTUS ruling:
This has to be a godsend for towns and cities that have been stymied so far in their attempts to shut-down any businesses, corporations, or private groups of which they disapprove. Private gun ranges, airfields, RV tracts, hunting preserves, fishing resources, minority religious congregations, newspapers — all are now fair targets for seizure and closure “for the economic benefit of the people.”
I think they’re right. To hell with stare decisis (particularly in a 5-4 vote). This is a ruling that should be overturned, or at least narrowly restricted, as soon as we can replace at least one of the justices who voted in favor.
…yes, this decisionis another blow to freedom, and property rights, and is another travesty by this court. At least Scalia voted the right way this time. This is one of the worst terms in my memory.
Keith Cowing has now posted a transcript from the Q&A portion of the Griffin talk on Tuesday. It’s quite interesting, with good questions (and answers) from Keith himself, Jim Muncy, Klaus Heiss, Lori Garver, Debra Lepore (of Kistler), Mike Lounge from Boeing, and others.
A: Contrary to what some suggest, it does not stand for “Git mo’ Peking chicken for Muhammad, he wants a second portion.” It stands for “Guantanamo,” a facility the United States built to see if the left would ever care about human rights abuses in Cuba. The experiment has apparently been successful.
…to be successful in business? Here’s an interesting article about your boss, the potential psychopath:
…cynics might say that it can be an advantage to lack a conscience. That’s probably why major investors installed Dunlap as the CEO of Sunbeam: He had no qualms about decimating the workforce to impress Wall Street. One reason outside executives get brought into troubled companies is that they lack the emotional stake in either the enterprise or its people. It’s easier for them to act callously and remorselessly, which is exactly what their backers want. The obvious danger of the new B-Scan test for psychopathic tendencies is that companies will hire or promote people with high scores rather than screen them out. Even Babiak, the test’s codeveloper, says that while “a high score is a red flag, sometimes middle scores are okay. Perhaps you don’t want the most honest and upfront salesman.”