Unity, Democrat Style

For four years , we have been told that Donald Trump is the reason why political discourse has declined to new depths of coarseness .
Of course , no one who was paying attention believed it .
But the theme persists ; Joe Biden risibly claims to stand for “ unity.
” But the vicious hatred that Democrats have displayed for years–it didn ’ t begin with Trump , although it admittedly has gotten worse–won ’ t abate with Trump ’ s departure from office .
A case in point is the Washington Post , which published this appalling image @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rats : Dehumanizing one ’ s opponents is of course a tactic favored by totalitarians and would-be totalitarians .
But the Post ’ s repellent image is particularly absurd , because its premise is ridiculous .
The “ artist , ” Ann Telnaes , says : This verges on the insane .
President Trump has filed multiple lawsuits challenging election results that have been certified in multiple states , and alleging voter fraud .
He might be right , or he might be wrong–I think he is probably right , although there won @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such legal rights , as Al Gore did in 2000 , does not “ subvert the Constitution.
” My opinion of the Washington Post is low , but I find it shocking that the Post would print something as outrageous as the above claim , accompanied by rat graphics .
In the Post ’ s defense , it takes its tone from its party ’ s politicians , like Nancy Pelosi .
In a characteristically intemperate outburst , Pelosi continued to spew hatred against the president : Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for President Donald Trump is going just as strong as ever over the weekend when she relentlessly bashed him during a meeting with her leadership .
“ I ’ m counting down the hours ‘ til he ’ s gone .
I plan to pull him out of there by his hair , his little hands , and his feet , ” Pelosi said , according to Politico .
We Republicans didn ’ t think much of Barack Obama , but no one was talking about pulling him out of the White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sheer , irrational hate manifested by Democrats is stunning .

For four years, we have been told that Donald Trump is the reason why political discourse has declined to new depths of coarseness. Of course, no one who was paying attention believed it. But the theme persists; Joe Biden risibly claims to stand for “unity.”
But the vicious hatred that Democrats have displayed for years–it didn’t begin with Trump, although it admittedly has gotten worse–won’t abate with Trump’s departure from office. A case in point is the Washington Post, which published this appalling image of Republican representatives and attorneys general as rats:
WaPo prints cartoon straight from anti-semitic Nazi propaganda. Dehumanizes @realDonaldTrump supporters as rats. pic.twitter.com/qLRYb435UT — Steve Milloy (@JunkScience) December 20, 2020
Dehumanizing one’s opponents is of course a tactic favored by totalitarians and would-be totalitarians. But the Post’s repellent image is particularly absurd, because its premise is ridiculous. The “artist,” Ann Telnaes, says:
All the Republican rats. All of the state attorneys general and U.S. Congress members who collaborated with President Trump in his attempt to subvert the Constitution and stay in office.
This verges on the insane. President Trump has filed lawsuits challenging election results that have been certified in multiple states, and alleging voter fraud. He might be right, or he might be wrong–I think he is probably right, although there won’t be any legal redress–but asserting such legal rights, as Al Gore did in 2000, does not “subvert the Constitution.”
My opinion of the Washington Post is low, but I find it shocking that the Post would print something as outrageous as the above claim, accompanied by rat graphics.
In the Post’s defense, it takes its tone from its party’s politicians, like Nancy Pelosi. In a characteristically intemperate outburst, Pelosi continued to spew hatred against the president:
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) showed that her hatred for President Donald Trump is going just as strong as ever over the weekend when she relentlessly bashed him during a meeting with her leadership. “I’m counting down the hours ‘til he’s gone. I plan to pull him out of there by his hair, his little hands, and his feet,” Pelosi said, according to Politico.
We Republicans didn’t think much of Barack Obama, but no one was talking about pulling him out of the White House by his hair. The level of sheer, irrational hate manifested by Democrats is stunning.


powerlineblog--2020-12-24--Trump Pardons Papadopoulos [Updated]

Trump Pardons Papadopoulos [Updated]

Yesterday President Trump pardoned George Papadopoulos , the minor campaign aide who was swept up in the Russia collusion hoax and pled guilty to one count of lying to the FBI .
Trump said : Mr. Papadopoulos was charged with a process-related crime , one count of making false statements , in connection with Special Counsel Robert Mueller ’ s investigation into possible Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election .
Today ’ s pardon helps correct the wrong that Mueller ’ s team inflicted on so many people .
It certainly does .
Trump also pardoned a less well-known @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s probe , Alex van der Zwaan .
And , of course , he pardoned Michael Flynn at the beginning of the month .
These pardons are all appropriate , and if there are others who suffered convictions in connection with the Russia collusion hoax , they should be pardoned as well .
The FBI ’ s investigation and Bob Mueller ’ s politicized prosecutions were outrageous violations of the victims ’ civil rights , including Trump ’ s .
This reminds me , though : has anyone seen John Durham lately ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ issued another 26 pardons , including Paul Manafort and Roger Stone .
I think this is the last of the Russia hoax defendants , but if there are any left , Trump should pardon them too .

Yesterday President Trump pardoned George Papadopoulos, the minor campaign aide who was swept up in the Russia collusion hoax and pled guilty to one count of lying to the FBI. Trump said:
Mr. Papadopoulos was charged with a process-related crime, one count of making false statements, in connection with Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into possible Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Today’s pardon helps correct the wrong that Mueller’s team inflicted on so many people.
It certainly does. Trump also pardoned a less well-known figure who was entangled in Mueller’s probe, Alex van der Zwaan. And, of course, he pardoned Michael Flynn at the beginning of the month.
These pardons are all appropriate, and if there are others who suffered convictions in connection with the Russia collusion hoax, they should be pardoned as well. The FBI’s investigation and Bob Mueller’s politicized prosecutions were outrageous violations of the victims’ civil rights, including Trump’s.
This reminds me, though: has anyone seen John Durham lately?
UPDATE: Moments ago, President Trump issued another 26 pardons, including Paul Manafort and Roger Stone. I think this is the last of the Russia hoax defendants, but if there are any left, Trump should pardon them too.


powerlineblog--2020-12-25--A silly quarterback controversy

A silly quarterback controversy

“ Arise and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.
” Winston Churchill “ Proclaim Liberty throughout @ @ @ @ @ the Inhabitants Thereof.
” Inscription on the Liberty Bell

Since the days of Sonny Jurgensen and Billy Kilmer, the Washington Redskins (as they were then known) have had plenty of quarterback controversies. Doug Williams or Jay Schroeder; Jeff George or Tony Banks; Donovan McNabb or Rex Grossman; Robert Griffin or Kirk Cousins, etc.
Now, the team has a new quarterback controversy: Dwayne Haskins or random replacement player.
Here’s the story: The Redskins (as they were then known) drafted Haskins in the first round of the 2019 draft. This was the owner’s decision. The club’s football people didn’t want to select Haskins, but Daniel Snyder did.
Haskins struggled in 2019 and struggled early in 2020, as well. He struggled so much that the team’s new coach, Ron Rivera, not only benched him but relegated him to third string.
But then, the team’s other two quarterbacks, Kyle Allen and Alex Smith, were injured. Allen is out for the season. Smith, who recently recovered from an injury that nearly cost him his leg, is recovering from his latest, far less serious, injury. However, he probably won’t be ready to play this Sunday.
Smith’s injury opened the door for Haskins’ return from exile. His play in the game and a half since he took the helm hasn’t been particularly good, but it’s an improvement over how he performed before. He gives the team a chance to win if our defense plays well.
Why, then, the controversy? Haskins should take the field on Sunday by default, right?
The problem is that Haskins violated the league’s coronavirus protocols. After last week’s game, he went to a restaurant and then to a club. (Initial reports said he partied at a strip club, but now it’s been reported that he partied with his girlfriend and others at a hotel.) Haskins did not wear a mask and apparently did not maintain the mandated social distances.
How seriously should we take these violations? On the one hand, Haskins’ behavior doesn’t differ much from that of any number of public officials who have ignored similar rules or guidelines — ones that in some cases they helped set.
On the other hand, the NFL’s rules are the rules. They should be followed.
Moreover, the rules are there are for a reason. The NFL is desperate to complete its season in the midst of a pandemic. When a player unnecessarily assumes a risk, even a small one, of contracting and then spreading the virus, he puts his team and the league in jeopardy.
Haskins violated the rules and assumed that risk. Clearly, he had to be punished. The question is what his punishment should be.
Coach Rivera decided to strip Haskins of his team captaincy. This was a no-brainer. It’s a wonder that Haskins was ever named captain to begin with.
Rivera also fined Haskins $40,000. I assume that Haskins, even on his rookie salary, can pay the fine without hardship. Still, it’s reportedly the heaviest fine yet levied on an NFL player for violating the league’s coronavirus rules.
To me, this is punishment that fits the “crime.” But to many of the professional scolds who cover sports in Washington, D.C., it’s not enough. They want Haskins to be benched on Sunday, if not cut from the team altogether.
The refrain is that Ron Rivera was brought in to change the team’s “culture” which, under Snyder, has been wanting for more than two decades. Rivera has often talked about changing the culture, and Haskins’ case gave him a chance to prove this isn’t just talk.
By benching or cutting Haskins, the thinking goes, Rivera could send a message that knucklehead behavior won’t be tolerated. By playing Haskins on Sunday, as Rivera plans to do, he sends the opposite message.
Benching Haskins sounds good in theory. The problem is that (1) the team has no other plausible quarterback option and (2) the team is in contention for the top spot in the weak NFC East, and thus for a home playoff game.
Assuming Smith can’t go on Sunday, who would replace Haskins in a game that could determine whether the team makes the playoffs? Probably Taylor Heinicke. He hasn’t played an NFL game since 2018. Washington brought him in a few weeks ago to be their quarantine quarterback. He has thrown only 58 passes as a pro.
The other possibility is Stephen Montez. Unlike Heinicke, Montez has been on the team’s practice squad all season. However, he has never played a down of NFL football. The notion of starting either Heinicke or Montez over Haskins in a game with playoff implications strikes me as irrational.
The goal of professional football team is to win. The cultural goal is to build a culture of winning.
Benching Haskins in favor of a nonentity would be a cultural disaster. Dozens of Washington players have busted their guts trying to put this team back in the playoffs. Some, maybe most, have played through physical pain and injury to accomplish this.
Benching Haskins in favor of Heinicke or Montez would amount to a betrayal of these players and their sacrifices. A loss under these circumstance would likely undermine Rivera’s standing with the team.
There are, of course, situations in which winning must take a back seat to other considerations. If Haskins had committed a heinous crime, losing his captaincy and paying a heavy fine wouldn’t be punishment enough. But Haskins didn’t.
It’s easy for Washington Post sportswriters and radio talk show hosts to urge the benching of Haskins. They aren’t in the business of winning football games.
Rivera is. That’s how he is judged by his employer and his players. It’s how he will be judged by Post sportswriters and radio talk show hosts, at the end of the day. And it’s how he should be judged.
Rivera retains the option of cutting Haskins when the season is over. Maybe he should, based on the quarterback’s performances and his immaturity.
For now, however, Rivera should keep playing Haskins until he has a healthy quarterback who can step in and play at Haskins’ level or better.


powerlineblog--2020-12-24--This Week in Racism: Tiki Bars?

This Week in Racism: Tiki Bars?

As we all know , everything is raaaacist today .
Even , the New York Times tells us , tiki bars .
Tiki bars ?
Yup : Since its invention , one kind of watering hole has seen America through its most grueling times : the tiki bar .
.
.
[ A ] new generation of beverage-industry professionals are shining a light on the genre ’ s history of racial inequity and cultural appropriation , which has long been ignored because it clashes with the carefree aesthetic .
.
.
A new wave of industry professionals is reimagining these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to shed the appropriation and racism that have accompanied tiki since its inception .
.
.
A recent movement aims to shift from the word “ tiki ” to “ tropical.
” [ One critic says ] “ We started working with bartenders from different backgrounds who take their culture and share it in a way that creates appreciation and exchange , which is a different power dynamic from appropriation .
It involves consent and equality.
” The article includes the gratuitous detail that one regular DC patron of tiki bars years ago @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Richard Nixon !
That seals it : tiki bars need to become woki bars , right away .
( And need I mention that climate change makes an appearance in the article ?
Because of course it does . )
Reminder : Liberals want conservatives to shut up .
Conservatives want liberals to .
.
.
keep talking .

As we all know, everything is raaaacist today. Even, the New York Times tells us, tiki bars. Tiki bars? Yup:
Since its invention, one kind of watering hole has seen America through its most grueling times: the tiki bar. . . [A] new generation of beverage-industry professionals are shining a light on the genre’s history of racial inequity and cultural appropriation, which has long been ignored because it clashes with the carefree aesthetic. . . A new wave of industry professionals is reimagining these delicious contributions to cocktail culture, looking to shed the appropriation and racism that have accompanied tiki since its inception. . . A recent movement aims to shift from the word “tiki” to “tropical.” [One critic says] “We started working with bartenders from different backgrounds who take their culture and share it in a way that creates appreciation and exchange, which is a different power dynamic from appropriation. It involves consent and equality.”
The article includes the gratuitous detail that one regular DC patron of tiki bars years ago was none other than . . . Richard Nixon! That seals it: tiki bars need to become woki bars, right away. (And need I mention that climate change makes an appearance in the article? Because of course it does.)
Chaser:
Reminder: Liberals want conservatives to shut up. Conservatives want liberals to . . . keep talking.


powerlineblog--2020-12-24--Biden delays the pain of his immigration policies

Candidate Joe Biden pledged to reverse the immigration policies implemented by the Trump administration .
His campaign site ’ s immigration page promised he would “ take urgent action to undo Trump ’ s damage and reclaim America ’ s values.
” Biden almost certainly will carry out the “ undo ” part of his promise .
However , he has already backed away from the “ urgent action ” part .
In other words , the Biden campaign promises in question were lies .
The Post explains that the incoming administration is worried that “ easing up too quickly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trigger a new migration surge at the border.
” It would , indeed , trigger such a surge .
But Biden knew this when he made his “ Day One ” promises .
However , as Mark Krikorian points out , Team Biden is just delaying a border surge .
He writes : The problem for Biden is that it will be politically impossible for him to keep the programs [ that have prevented a surge ] — Remain in Mexico , Title 42 expulsions , safe third-country agreements with Central American countries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mexico likely to continue for long its policy of blocking migrants at its own southern border with Guatemala — something it started to do only because of Trump ’ s threat of trade sanctions .
When those impediments are removed , the basic logic that drove the border crisis will reassert itself : If you can step across the border , or even just present yourself at a port of entry , and you claim to fear persecution , more likely than not you will be released into the interior ( since Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ illegal immigrants , whether they brings kids with them or not ) .
Then , whether or not you actually go through with an asylum application , whether or not you show up for hearings , whether or not you get a deportation order , you can stay indefinitely with no fear of deportation ( because Biden has also said only violent criminals will be deported ) .
Krikorian suggests that Biden is making a political mistake by delaying the border surge his policies are bound to produce : Ironically , by delaying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Biden sets up a situation where news of the renewed border crisis caused by his rollback of Trump ’ s policies may only break through the inevitable media blackout just when the midterm-election campaign is underway .
Republican candidates would do well to start preparing now .
And we should prepare to see those “ Republicans pounce ” headlines in mainstream media outlets .

Candidate Joe Biden pledged to reverse the immigration policies implemented by the Trump administration. His campaign site’s immigration page promised he would “take urgent action to undo Trump’s damage and reclaim America’s values.”
Biden almost certainly will carry out the “undo” part of his promise. However, he has already backed away from the “urgent action” part.
From the Washington Post:
Top advisers to president-elect Joe Biden said Monday they will not immediately roll back asylum restrictions at the Mexico border and other restrictive Trump administration policies, walking back some of Biden’s campaign promises for “Day One” changes.
(Emphasis added)
In other words, the Biden campaign promises in question were lies.
The Post explains that the incoming administration is worried that “easing up too quickly on Trump’s enforcement system could trigger a new migration surge at the border.” It would, indeed, trigger such a surge. But Biden knew this when he made his “Day One” promises.
However, as Mark Krikorian points out, Team Biden is just delaying a border surge. He writes:
The problem for Biden is that it will be politically impossible for him to keep the programs [that have prevented a surge] — Remain in Mexico, Title 42 expulsions, safe third-country agreements with Central American countries — in place indefinitely. Nor is Mexico likely to continue for long its policy of blocking migrants at its own southern border with Guatemala — something it started to do only because of Trump’s threat of trade sanctions. When those impediments are removed, the basic logic that drove the border crisis will reassert itself: If you can step across the border, or even just present yourself at a port of entry, and you claim to fear persecution, more likely than not you will be released into the interior (since Biden has also pledged to end detention of illegal immigrants, whether they brings kids with them or not). Then, whether or not you actually go through with an asylum application, whether or not you show up for hearings, whether or not you get a deportation order, you can stay indefinitely with no fear of deportation (because Biden has also said only violent criminals will be deported).
(Emphasis added)
Krikorian suggests that Biden is making a political mistake by delaying the border surge his policies are bound to produce:
Ironically, by delaying the full effect of his immigration promises, Biden sets up a situation where news of the renewed border crisis caused by his rollback of Trump’s policies may only break through the inevitable media blackout just when the midterm-election campaign is underway. Republican candidates would do well to start preparing now.
(Emphasis added)
And we should prepare to see those “Republicans pounce” headlines in mainstream media outlets.


Brexit Gets Done

Britain ’ s vote to leave the European Union in 2016 stunned many observers and was part of an international populist wave that included President Trump ’ s election later that year .
Britain ’ s “ Remainers ” were never reconciled to the popular vote and worked for years to prevent Brexit from actually taking place .
Now , after years of negotiation and posturing , Britain and the EU have finalized a Brexit agreement .
This is good news , I think , for all who believe in democracy .
You know that Brexit will prove to benefit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ Brexit is finally done .
It will leave the UK poorer.
” In recent months , semi-serious discussion of the potential breakup of the United States has begun .
I wrote about my radio interview with Frank Buckley , author of American Secession : The Looming Threat of a National Breakup , here .
One of Buckley ’ s themes is that if America ’ s red and blue states decide to go their separate ways , the result will not be a civil war as in 1861 .
Rather , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ painful negotiations , like Brexit .
Disunion in the foreseeable future still appears to be a relatively remote possibility , but it is worth studying Brexit as a possible model for an alternative future , if it becomes clear that progressives and the rest of Americans no longer want to share the same country .

Britain’s vote to leave the European Union in 2016 stunned many observers and was part of an international populist wave that included President Trump’s election later that year. Britain’s “Remainers” were never reconciled to the popular vote and worked for years to prevent Brexit from actually taking place. Now, after years of negotiation and posturing, Britain and the EU have finalized a Brexit agreement. This is good news, I think, for all who believe in democracy.
You know that Brexit will prove to benefit the U.K. Why? Because CNN headlines: “Brexit is finally done. It will leave the UK poorer.”
In recent months, semi-serious discussion of the potential breakup of the United States has begun. I wrote about my radio interview with Frank Buckley, author of American Secession: The Looming Threat of a National Breakup, here. One of Buckley’s themes is that if America’s red and blue states decide to go their separate ways, the result will not be a civil war as in 1861. Rather, disunion would be accomplished through long, painful negotiations, like Brexit. Disunion in the foreseeable future still appears to be a relatively remote possibility, but it is worth studying Brexit as a possible model for an alternative future, if it becomes clear that progressives and the rest of Americans no longer want to share the same country.


It’s Fauci Day!

To you it may be Christmas Eve , but to citizens of Washington , D.C. , today is Doctor Anthony @ @ @ @ @ Carlson salutes him : Fauci is the high priest of the Covid cult .
A @ @ @ @ @ garment .
Cable television is his pulpit .
The people of Washington bow before Father @ @ @ @ @ Patagonia fleeces before him to ease his way as he passes .
They consider him @ @ @ @ @ city ’ s mayor , Murial Bowser , has made it official .
Bowser has @ @ @ @ @ date of a notable Christian holiday — “ Doctor Anthony S. Fauci Day.
” Tucker @ @ @ @ @ in television .
His salute to “ Saint Tony ” in the segment below is @ @

To you it may be Christmas Eve, but to citizens of Washington, D.C., today is Doctor Anthony S. Fauci Day. Tucker Carlson salutes him:
Fauci is the high priest of the Covid cult. A paper mask is his sacred garment. Cable television is his pulpit. The people of Washington bow before Father Fauci. They throw their Patagonia fleeces before him to ease his way as he passes. They consider him holy. Now, the city’s mayor, Murial Bowser, has made it official. Bowser has declared December 24th —formerly the date of a notable Christian holiday — “Doctor Anthony S. Fauci Day.”
Tucker must be the funniest man in television. His salute to “Saint Tony” in the segment below is hilarious.


The Counterrevolution Begins

Eventually I ’ m going to get around to thinking through and writing up my view that while misguided Millennials lean heavily progressive at the moment , the next generation of young people is going to swing sharply to the right out of rebellion against the stifling conformity of the progressive left that went into hyperdrive this year .
In part I ’ m taking in the lessons of M. Stanton Evans ’ s first book in 1961 , The Revolt on Campus , which argued a similar point .
It is quite striking how well that old book holds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meantime , there are some signs of active resistance starting to occur .
This week a fantastic lawsuit was filed in federal court aimed at mandatory “ critical race theory ” sessions in public schools in Nevada , alleging violations of First and Fourteenth Amendment rights .
The suit is being brought by SchoolHouseRights.org .
The group appears to be brand new .
You can read the whole 39-page filing here , but here are a couple of the key parts : Incidentally , the plaintiff student , William Clark , is mixed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wasn ’ t sufficient to clear him of belonging to the Oppressor Class .
Colin Wright of Quillette has a fabulous Twitter thread about the case here .
Meanwhile , there is one solid Victory over Communism to report on this front : a federal court in Texas is forcing the University of Texas at Austin to disband its speech police unit , known under the Orwellian name “ Campus Climate Response Team.
” The Wall Street Journal reported the story today : Political speech is under attack these days from Beijing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ victories where we can get them .
One arrived Tuesday when the University of Texas at Austin agreed to disband its PC police and end policies that suppress speech on campus .
.
.
Students could anonymously report their professors and peers for “ bias incidents ” to the Campus Climate Response Team , which would investigate and threaten disciplinary referrals and “ restorative justice ” meetings with administrators .
The university gave several examples of what constitutes an act of bias , including “ faculty commentary in the classroom perceived as derogatory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ open to highly subjective judgments about what is offensive .
.
.
Circuit Court Judge Edith Jones blasted the bias-response team as “ the clenched fist in the velvet glove of student speech regulation.
” As the saying goes , “ punch back twice as hard.
” Keep suing people !

Eventually I’m going to get around to thinking through and writing up my view that while misguided Millennials lean heavily progressive at the moment, the next generation of young people is going to swing sharply to the right out of rebellion against the stifling conformity of the progressive left that went into hyperdrive this year. In part I’m taking in the lessons of M. Stanton Evans’s first book in 1961, The Revolt on Campus, which argued a similar point. It is quite striking how well that old book holds up and applies today.
In the meantime, there are some signs of active resistance starting to occur. This week a fantastic lawsuit was filed in federal court aimed at mandatory “critical race theory” sessions in public schools in Nevada, alleging violations of First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The suit is being brought by SchoolHouseRights.org. The group appears to be brand new. You can read the whole 39-page filing here, but here are a couple of the key parts:
Incidentally, the plaintiff student, William Clark, is mixed race, but apparently his melanin level wasn’t sufficient to clear him of belonging to the Oppressor Class. Colin Wright of Quillette has a fabulous Twitter thread about the case here.
Meanwhile, there is one solid Victory over Communism to report on this front: a federal court in Texas is forcing the University of Texas at Austin to disband its speech police unit, known under the Orwellian name “Campus Climate Response Team.” The Wall Street Journal reported the story today:
Political speech is under attack these days from Beijing to Berkeley, so we’ll take victories where we can get them. One arrived Tuesday when the University of Texas at Austin agreed to disband its PC police and end policies that suppress speech on campus. . . Students could anonymously report their professors and peers for “bias incidents” to the Campus Climate Response Team, which would investigate and threaten disciplinary referrals and “restorative justice” meetings with administrators. The university gave several examples of what constitutes an act of bias, including “faculty commentary in the classroom perceived as derogatory and insensitive,” and other behavior open to highly subjective judgments about what is offensive. . . Circuit Court Judge Edith Jones blasted the bias-response team as “the clenched fist in the velvet glove of student speech regulation.”
As the saying goes, “punch back twice as hard.” Keep suing people!


powerlineblog--2020-12-25--About Those Detention Centers

About Those Detention Centers

Joe Biden has promised “ immigration reform , ” including a vow to “ end prolonged detention ” and “ @ @ @ @ @ Enforcement ( ICE ) and Customs and Border Protection personnel abide by professional standards and @ @ @ @ @ treatment.
” If , like me , you have never been quite clear on what @ @ @ @ @ why we have them , or why some illegal immigrants are housed there for relatively @ @ @ @ @ with Tom Homan will be of interest .
Homan is a former Acting Director of @ @ @ @ @ , with more than 30 years of experience in immigration law enforcement .
He was @ @ @ @ @ I filled in as host of the Dan Proft Show on Wednesday .
I learned @ @ @ @ @ and expect you will , too .
Basically , everything the Democrats say about detention @ @ @ @

Joe Biden has promised “immigration reform,” including a vow to “end prolonged detention” and “ensure that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection personnel abide by professional standards and are held accountable for inhumane treatment.” If, like me, you have never been quite clear on what immigration detention centers are, why we have them, or why some illegal immigrants are housed there for relatively extended periods, this interview with Tom Homan will be of interest.
Homan is a former Acting Director of ICE in the Trump administration, with more than 30 years of experience in immigration law enforcement. He was one of my guests when I filled in as host of the Dan Proft Show on Wednesday. I learned a lot from the interview and expect you will, too. Basically, everything the Democrats say about detention centers is wrong:


Merry Christmas!

“Arise and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.” Winston Churchill
“Proclaim Liberty throughout All the land unto All the Inhabitants Thereof.” Inscription on the Liberty Bell


powerlineblog--2020-12-25--Thoughts from the ammo line

Thoughts from the ammo line

Ammo Grrrll is not taking Christmas off .
In her final column of the year from hell she advises : JUST SAY THANK YOU .
She writes : I don ’ t know how my fellow Jews feel who frequent this site , but I feel embarrassed when our co-religionists make a big deal out of being wished “ Merry Christmas.
” I know who I am and I do not feel threatened or “ marginalized ” by an innocent wish to be included in a happy day .
Sure , it can be a bit of a pain to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but even devout Christians bemoan the fact that Christmas has largely become a cultural , commercial holiday of gifts , cookies and family fun and there ’ s nothing wrong with any of that .
For the devout , the religious dimension of the holiday is paramount , of course .
And that ’ s beautiful .
Let ’ s break it down , shall we ?
You ’ re out for a nice December walk in Arizona , where it is 73 degrees and sunny .
Because it ’ s Arizona @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; stay for the 80 in January !
A sweet couple you don ’ t know wishes you a “ Merry Christmas.
” Now you have two choices : Option One : you can be a jerk and say , “ Sorry , I ’ m Jewish , ” which makes it sound like you are sorry THAT you are Jewish .
But it also embarrasses the well-wisher needlessly , which is quite a major sin in Judaism , actually .
So go with Option Two : JUST SAY THANK YOU and move @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wish them a Merry Christmas back .
Once , I did blurt , “ Thanks , but I am Jewish , ” and the well-wisher said , “ So am I. I was just being neighborly.
” We both laughed .
There ’ s a lot to say for neighborliness .
An intolerant busybody masquerading as “ woke ” in St. Anthony , MN ( a fairly well-off faculty suburb of St. Paul ) famously sent letters to neighbors about their Christmas lights .
She read them the riot act for making non-Christians @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and I love this part ) or even for those who celebrate the holiday but can not “ afford ” decorations .
Here is a person whom I would not want to know for 5 minutes !
Obnoxious and , it goes without saying , anonymous .
I personally LOVE Christmas lights .
People go to a lot of trouble and I appreciate it .
It ’ s festive .
Judaism makes a pretty big deal about bringing light into the world – and decorations are a whole lotta light .
Hey , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a HOME – how DARE YOU live indoors when others live outdoors ?
Now when the grocery packer at Byerly ’ s , bless her heart , bags up a whole bunch of boxed and canned items that ALL say “ Kosher for Passover ” on them , and she sticks in an order form for “ Easter Ham , ” you can at least shake your head in wonder at the cultural illiteracy involved .
But there is still no need to try to embarrass the person , who was young and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no rule that we can ’ t even SEE the word “ Ham.
” We just can ’ t EAT it .
Heck , it was the name of one of Noah ’ s sons , and he was righteous enough to be chosen to build history ’ s worst cruise ship line .
ON THE OTHER HAND , when I was called many years ago to entertain at a “ Diversity Conference ” in Minnesota and it was scheduled for YOM KIPPUR , the holiest day of the Jewish Year , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the person ’ s head off .
“ Diversity ” is their bag , not mine…you didn ’ t think to check a Jewish calendar ?
Not only do Jews not count for spit in the Diversity Pyramid , but the racist bean-counters now deem Black men to be “ The White males of the Black community.
” Oh yeah , this is all on a trajectory to work out just great .
Back when I was a comedian , on the road a lot , sometimes after a show a fan who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say , “ I saw you last month on Carson and you were so funny !
” Sadly , I was never on Carson , though I did open once for Doc Severinsen in the Twin Cities .
Now once again I could have said , “ I was never on Carson , you must be an idiot to have confused me with another comedian.
” Yeah , that would be terrific in front of her friends .
So , instead , I would just say , “ THANK YOU , glad you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tonight.
” The one time that I felt it was kind of a lie not to correct the person and denied that I had ever been on Carson , the woman INSISTED that I was mistaken .
So , now , instead of just letting it go , I had embarrassed her , annoyed her , held up the line , AND made her believe I had early onset Alzheimer ’ s .
Lord knows who she thought was me .
( And thank God that I am now too old for Early @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to settle for regular old dementia . )
Finally , after one of the many , many times I had lost 20 lbs , a woman at the Chanukkah Fundraiser of the National Council of Jewish Woman came up to me and said , “ Oh .
My .
Gawd , Susan !
You ’ ve lost a MILLION pounds.
” And I did NOT say , “ Heavens to Betsy , woman , you should be a weight guesser at the Fair !
You have hit the nail right on the head @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hundred , not a thousand – but , exactly a million pounds , and thank God , because now I can move out of the Metrodome and back into my own home.
” That is what I wanted to say .
But , sometimes snark is not the best answer .
So instead I just said , “ THANK YOU for noticing.
” In conclusion , and carrying forward the theme of gratitude , I would like to do two more things .
First , thank our wonderful commenter family for making my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and difficult year and wish every last one of you , even trolls , Merry Christmas .
And lastly , I would like to thank Still My President Donald J. Trump for promising and delivering Operation Warp Speed to produce vaccines such that any day now we can abandon masks .
May the time not be distant when we say , “ Let My People Go , ” “ Let Our Faces Show.
” I miss smiling even more than restaurants .
I am a very smiley person .
It goes without saying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have discovered that too many of the people who have taken good enough care of themselves to reach their senior years are…ARGGH… WHITE !
This is totally unacceptable .
So decades younger Fatties of Color will be able to budge the line ahead of us pale geezers .
I missed the “ severely elderly ” cutoff of 75 by one year and will have to get in a prioritized line .
Naturally , all politicians of any color , any age , are ahead in line , because they are just so vitally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a general strike , say , would not be noticed until many years after we would starve from the absence of truckers , farmers , food producers , and grocery stock boys .
As a not-quite-old-enough white lady , I expect to get my vaccination some time after the entire prison population , MS-13 gangsta illegals and their pit bulls , Hunter Biden , obese Muslim terrorists released from jail lest they get the flu , the entire NBA , the fatheads and lard-butts on The View , and all billionaires , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will simply bribe their way to the head of the line .
Oh , well .
If my 95 year old Alabaster White Daddy can survive the Commie Flu , I probably shouldn ’ t even get the shot at all .

Ammo Grrrll is not taking Christmas off. In her final column of the year from hell she advises: JUST SAY THANK YOU. She writes:
I don’t know how my fellow Jews feel who frequent this site, but I feel embarrassed when our co-religionists make a big deal out of being wished “Merry Christmas.” I know who I am and I do not feel threatened or “marginalized” by an innocent wish to be included in a happy day. Sure, it can be a bit of a pain to be a minority in a majority culture, but even devout Christians bemoan the fact that Christmas has largely become a cultural, commercial holiday of gifts, cookies and family fun and there’s nothing wrong with any of that. For the devout, the religious dimension of the holiday is paramount, of course. And that’s beautiful.
Let’s break it down, shall we? You’re out for a nice December walk in Arizona, where it is 73 degrees and sunny. Because it’s Arizona! Come for the 118 in August; stay for the 80 in January! A sweet couple you don’t know wishes you a “Merry Christmas.” Now you have two choices: Option One: you can be a jerk and say, “Sorry, I’m Jewish,” which makes it sound like you are sorry THAT you are Jewish. But it also embarrasses the well-wisher needlessly, which is quite a major sin in Judaism, actually. So go with Option Two: JUST SAY THANK YOU and move on. Heck, you can even wish them a Merry Christmas back. Once, I did blurt, “Thanks, but I am Jewish,” and the well-wisher said, “So am I. I was just being neighborly.” We both laughed. There’s a lot to say for neighborliness.
An intolerant busybody masquerading as “woke” in St. Anthony, MN (a fairly well-off faculty suburb of St. Paul) famously sent letters to neighbors about their Christmas lights. She read them the riot act for making non-Christians feel bad about not being included (and I love this part) or even for those who celebrate the holiday but cannot “afford” decorations.
Here is a person whom I would not want to know for 5 minutes! Obnoxious and, it goes without saying, anonymous. I personally LOVE Christmas lights. People go to a lot of trouble and I appreciate it. It’s festive. Judaism makes a pretty big deal about bringing light into the world – and decorations are a whole lotta light. Hey, “Karen,” you obviously own a HOME – how DARE YOU live indoors when others live outdoors?
Now when the grocery packer at Byerly’s, bless her heart, bags up a whole bunch of boxed and canned items that ALL say “Kosher for Passover” on them, and she sticks in an order form for “Easter Ham,” you can at least shake your head in wonder at the cultural illiteracy involved. But there is still no need to try to embarrass the person, who was young and clueless, not mean. There is no rule that we can’t even SEE the word “Ham.” We just can’t EAT it. Heck, it was the name of one of Noah’s sons, and he was righteous enough to be chosen to build history’s worst cruise ship line.
ON THE OTHER HAND, when I was called many years ago to entertain at a “Diversity Conference” in Minnesota and it was scheduled for YOM KIPPUR, the holiest day of the Jewish Year, it seemed fine at the time to take the person’s head off. “Diversity” is their bag, not mine…you didn’t think to check a Jewish calendar? Not only do Jews not count for spit in the Diversity Pyramid, but the racist bean-counters now deem Black men to be “The White males of the Black community.” Oh yeah, this is all on a trajectory to work out just great.
Back when I was a comedian, on the road a lot, sometimes after a show a fan who was in line for an autograph would say, “I saw you last month on Carson and you were so funny!” Sadly, I was never on Carson, though I did open once for Doc Severinsen in the Twin Cities. Now once again I could have said, “I was never on Carson, you must be an idiot to have confused me with another comedian.” Yeah, that would be terrific in front of her friends. So, instead, I would just say, “THANK YOU, glad you enjoyed it, and thanks for coming tonight.”
The one time that I felt it was kind of a lie not to correct the person and denied that I had ever been on Carson, the woman INSISTED that I was mistaken. So, now, instead of just letting it go, I had embarrassed her, annoyed her, held up the line, AND made her believe I had early onset Alzheimer’s. Lord knows who she thought was me. (And thank God that I am now too old for Early Onset Alzheimer’s and will have to settle for regular old dementia.)
Finally, after one of the many, many times I had lost 20 lbs, a woman at the Chanukkah Fundraiser of the National Council of Jewish Woman came up to me and said, “Oh. My. Gawd, Susan! You’ve lost a MILLION pounds.”
And I did NOT say, “Heavens to Betsy, woman, you should be a weight guesser at the Fair! You have hit the nail right on the head. I have lost – not a hundred, not a thousand – but, exactly a million pounds, and thank God, because now I can move out of the Metrodome and back into my own home.” That is what I wanted to say. But, sometimes snark is not the best answer. So instead I just said, “THANK YOU for noticing.”
In conclusion, and carrying forward the theme of gratitude, I would like to do two more things. First, thank our wonderful commenter family for making my Fridays so special in a very bizarre and difficult year and wish every last one of you, even trolls, Merry Christmas.
And lastly, I would like to thank Still My President Donald J. Trump for promising and delivering Operation Warp Speed to produce vaccines such that any day now we can abandon masks. May the time not be distant when we say, “Let My People Go,” “Let Our Faces Show.” I miss smiling even more than restaurants. I am a very smiley person.
It goes without saying that the racist twits at the CDC have discovered that too many of the people who have taken good enough care of themselves to reach their senior years are…ARGGH… WHITE! This is totally unacceptable. So decades younger Fatties of Color will be able to budge the line ahead of us pale geezers. I missed the “severely elderly” cutoff of 75 by one year and will have to get in a prioritized line. Naturally, all politicians of any color, any age, are ahead in line, because they are just so vitally important. Never mind that their absence in a general strike, say, would not be noticed until many years after we would starve from the absence of truckers, farmers, food producers, and grocery stock boys.
As a not-quite-old-enough white lady, I expect to get my vaccination some time after the entire prison population, MS-13 gangsta illegals and their pit bulls, Hunter Biden, obese Muslim terrorists released from jail lest they get the flu, the entire NBA, the fatheads and lard-butts on The View, and all billionaires, celebrities, and their extended families who will simply bribe their way to the head of the line. Oh, well. If my 95 year old Alabaster White Daddy can survive the Commie Flu, I probably shouldn’t even get the shot at all.


powerlineblog--2020-12-26--The Week in Pictures: Stimulus Edition

The Week in Pictures: Stimulus Edition


powerlineblog--2020-12-25--The left pushes back on the Stephanie Mohr pardon

President Trump brightened my Christmas season when he pardoned former police officer Stephanie Mohr .
Now , the Washington Post and its leftist sources have brightened it even more by complaining about the pardon .
Their unhappiness makes me happy .
It also tends to confirm the wisdom of Trump ’ s decision .
The first point to make is that the Post has a stake in the persecution of Mohr .
Its sensationalized reporting led to the injustice Mohr suffered .
As I explained here : The Washington Post ran a series of articles alleging police brutality in Prince @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a result of the Post ’ s series , the FBI launched an investigation that soon focused on the canine unit .
The investigation led to an indictment of Mohr on federal civil rights grounds for ] a ] 1995 incident .
She was charged one day before the statute of limitations on her alleged offenses expired .
.
.
.
The frenzy that followed [ the Post ’ s reporting ] apparently failed to produce any convictions other than those stemming from this one incident .
Now , Mohr , the only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Post ’ s attack on the police , has been pardoned .
No wonder the paper is unhappy .
The Post expresses its unhappiness by quoting allies in its attack on the Prince George ’ s County police .
They claim that the successful prosecution of Mohr ( it took two trials to convict her ) paved the way for needed reforms .
Let ’ s assume for purposes of argument that it did .
This doesn ’ t make her ten-year prison sentence just .
Executing Mohr would have sent an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s police force than the ten-year sentence did .
I doubt the Post thinks the death penalty would have been proper in a case where the alleged victim suffered only a wound requiring ten stiches .
If anything , the notion that Mohr was used as an example to achieve public policy goals ( whether worthy ones or not ) argues in favor of a pardon based in part on the excessive nature of her sentence .
The Post and its allies fail to dispute either of President Trump ’ s reasons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that Mohr “ was a highly commended member of the police force prior to her prosecution.
” That ’ s true .
She received numerous commendations for apprehending and subduing criminals .
Catching criminals may not matter to the Post , but for anyone who cares about public safety it ’ s a plus .
The other reason given for the pardon is the excessive length of Mohr ’ s sentence .
Neither the Post nor its allies explains how it can possibly be just for Mohr to have been imprisoned for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ required ten stiches .
The Post quotes a lefty law professor who complains that the pardon sends “ a message that police violence is less serious than other kinds of violence.
” But the ten year sentence sent a message that violence inflicted by the police on suspected criminals will be treated more harshly than other kinds of violence .
Mohr ’ s sentence would be excessive even if she bore sole responsibility for the dog bite .
But she did not .
According to the facts as stated by the Fourth Circuit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mohr released the dog after her training officer sought and obtained consent from the officer in charge of the scene .
The training officer was acquitted .
The officer in charge took a guilty plea in exchange for his testimony against Mohr and was sentenced to 15 months in prison .
( Mohr ’ s testimony was that she released the dog because the suspect ignored repeated instructions to follow police orders .
If so , she shouldn ’ t have been convicted of any crime . )
Thus , far from bearing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mohr doesn ’ t even bear primary responsibility under the only version of the facts that renders her culpable .
Clearly , then , her long sentence was a miscarriage of justice .
I ’ m glad President Trump did what he could to mitigate the injustice .
If that makes the Post and its anti-police allies unhappy , all the better .

President Trump brightened my Christmas season when he pardoned former police officer Stephanie Mohr. Now, the Washington Post and its leftist sources have brightened it even more by complaining about the pardon.
Their unhappiness makes me happy. It also tends to confirm the wisdom of Trump’s decision.
The first point to make is that the Post has a stake in the persecution of Mohr. Its sensationalized reporting led to the injustice Mohr suffered. As I explained here:
The Washington Post ran a series of articles alleging police brutality in Prince George’s County. As as a result of the Post’s series, the FBI launched an investigation that soon focused on the canine unit. The investigation led to an indictment of Mohr on federal civil rights grounds for ]a] 1995 incident. She was charged one day before the statute of limitations on her alleged offenses expired. . . . The frenzy that followed [the Post’s reporting] apparently failed to produce any convictions other than those stemming from this one incident.
Now, Mohr, the only significant scalp taken as a result of the Post’s attack on the police, has been pardoned. No wonder the paper is unhappy.
The Post expresses its unhappiness by quoting allies in its attack on the Prince George’s County police. They claim that the successful prosecution of Mohr (it took two trials to convict her) paved the way for needed reforms.
Let’s assume for purposes of argument that it did. This doesn’t make her ten-year prison sentence just.
Executing Mohr would have sent an even more powerful message to the County’s police force than the ten-year sentence did. I doubt the Post thinks the death penalty would have been proper in a case where the alleged victim suffered only a wound requiring ten stiches.
If anything, the notion that Mohr was used as an example to achieve public policy goals (whether worthy ones or not) argues in favor of a pardon based in part on the excessive nature of her sentence.
The Post and its allies fail to dispute either of President Trump’s reasons for issuing the pardon. One reason is that Mohr “was a highly commended member of the police force prior to her prosecution.” That’s true. She received numerous commendations for apprehending and subduing criminals. Catching criminals may not matter to the Post, but for anyone who cares about public safety it’s a plus.
The other reason given for the pardon is the excessive length of Mohr’s sentence. Neither the Post nor its allies explains how it can possibly be just for Mohr to have been imprisoned for ten years for a dog bite that required ten stiches.
The Post quotes a lefty law professor who complains that the pardon sends “a message that police violence is less serious than other kinds of violence.” But the ten year sentence sent a message that violence inflicted by the police on suspected criminals will be treated more harshly than other kinds of violence.
Mohr’s sentence would be excessive even if she bore sole responsibility for the dog bite. But she did not.
According to the facts as stated by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in her case, Mohr released the dog after her training officer sought and obtained consent from the officer in charge of the scene. The training officer was acquitted. The officer in charge took a guilty plea in exchange for his testimony against Mohr and was sentenced to 15 months in prison. (Mohr’s testimony was that she released the dog because the suspect ignored repeated instructions to follow police orders. If so, she shouldn’t have been convicted of any crime.)
Thus, far from bearing sole responsibility for the dog bite, Mohr doesn’t even bear primary responsibility under the only version of the facts that renders her culpable. Clearly, then, her long sentence was a miscarriage of justice.
I’m glad President Trump did what he could to mitigate the injustice. If that makes the Post and its anti-police allies unhappy, all the better.


powerlineblog--2020-12-26--Podcast: The Three Whisky Happy Hour—2020 in Review

In another wide ranging episode ( our last for the year ) , “ Lucretia ” and I review the best and worst Christmas movies , the best and worst Christmas music , the rank order of the best Will Ferrell movies , whether blended whisky is ever acceptable , why Finnish rock music sounds like a whale being tortured , and whether we can deduct the cost of our whisky under the tax changes of the COVID relief and omnibus spending bill Congress just passed .
Then we finally get around the the biggest stories of 2020—which turn out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told , or told so incorrectly that “ fake news ” hardly begins to describe the malfeasance and incompetence of the media today .
What went on behind the scenes in early March to suddenly propel Joe Biden to the Democratic nomination when he was given up for dead ?
Once upon a time we ’ d have had Theodore White to explain it to us after the fact , but the substantive decline of the news media includes the decline in political journalism about presidential campaigns .
We also discuss how the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the whole COVID pandemic represents perhaps the most egregious media failure since its biased and inaccurate coverage of the Vietnam War .
Finally , are there reasons to think the left has gone too far with its wokery , and will provoke a significant backlash ?
Lucretia and I divide on this question , but that ’ s what happens when you divide about what kind of single malt to drink .
Happy new year everybody !
We ’ ll drink to that .
Listen here , or from the other guys @

In another wide ranging episode (our last for the year), “Lucretia” and I review the best and worst Christmas movies, the best and worst Christmas music, the rank order of the best Will Ferrell movies, whether blended whisky is ever acceptable, why Finnish rock music sounds like a whale being tortured, and whether we can deduct the cost of our whisky under the tax changes of the COVID relief and omnibus spending bill Congress just passed.
Then we finally get around the the biggest stories of 2020—which turn out to be the stories that were not told, or told so incorrectly that “fake news” hardly begins to describe the malfeasance and incompetence of the media today. What went on behind the scenes in early March to suddenly propel Joe Biden to the Democratic nomination when he was given up for dead? Once upon a time we’d have had Theodore White to explain it to us after the fact, but the substantive decline of the news media includes the decline in political journalism about presidential campaigns. We also discuss how the media’s credulous and superficial coverage of the whole COVID pandemic represents perhaps the most egregious media failure since its biased and inaccurate coverage of the Vietnam War.
Finally, are there reasons to think the left has gone too far with its wokery, and will provoke a significant backlash? Lucretia and I divide on this question, but that’s what happens when you divide about what kind of single malt to drink. Happy new year everybody! We’ll drink to that.
Listen here, or from the other guys.


Tiers For Fears

Like most of Europe , the United Kingdom has struggled with the coronavirus .
Its government , driven initially by @ @ @ @ @ “ experts ” of the damage the virus would do , has ordered one shutdown @ @ @ @ @ notorious “ tier ” system .
London and southeastern Britain were designated “ Tier 4 @ @ @ @ @ , meaning , in theory , a virtually complete lockdown .
Not surprisingly , none @ @ @ @ @ Last Wednesday , guest hosting the Dan Proft Show , one of my guests was @ @ @ @ @ the editor of Spiked .
O ’ Neill is an engaging guy whose attitude toward @ @ @ @ @ anti-covid efforts is appropriately skeptical .
The U.K. ’ s experience offers , I think @ @ @ @ @ what we are witnessing in the U.S .
Here is the interview :

Like most of Europe, the United Kingdom has struggled with the coronavirus. Its government, driven initially by ridiculously inflated estimates by British “experts” of the damage the virus would do, has ordered one shutdown after another, using the notorious “tier” system. London and southeastern Britain were designated “Tier 4” for the holiday season, meaning, in theory, a virtually complete lockdown.
Not surprisingly, none of this has worked. Last Wednesday, guest hosting the Dan Proft Show, one of my guests was Brendan O’Neill, the editor of Spiked. O’Neill is an engaging guy whose attitude toward the British government’s anti-covid efforts is appropriately skeptical. The U.K.’s experience offers, I think, an interesting counterpoint to what we are witnessing in the U.S. Here is the interview:


powerlineblog--2020-12-26--The “Dr.” will see you now

The “Dr.” will see you now

Roger Kimball ’ s is the unmistakable voice of the January New Criterion editorial “ The ‘ Dr. ’ will see you now.
” Roger takes snapshots of the episode arising from Joesph Epstein ’ s Wall Street Journal column on Jill Biden , Ed.D.
, from a variety of perspectives .
Roger arrives at the heart of the matter in his conclusion : It was not an encouraging sign that Northwestern University , in addition to issuing its pronunciamentos about Epstein , should go full Orwell ( or full Stalin ) and erase him from their website listing emeriti @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support for “ academic freedom and freedom of expression.
” As Gigot warned in his column for TheWall Street Journal , “ This is how cancel culture works.
” It is very rare that Gigot responds in print to criticism of what appears in his pages .
Doubtless this is because he understands that criticism is a natural part of the metabolism of opinion journalism .
In the normal course of our political life , it is not only expected but salutary .
People have different points of view about contentious issues .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ or should be part of the lifeblood of democracy .
If Gigot stepped into print over this contretemps , it was not so much to defend Epstein or even to respond to the chihuahua-like yapping of his interlocutors .
It was to sound an alarm against that “ big gun of identity politics ” he found operating in the background .
The governing strategy of identity politics is not to encourage free expression but to shutter it .
In essence , it is a totalitarian enterprise , deploying the shibboleths of race , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a stultifying conformity .
It is heartening to see Gigot affirming that , at one of our nation ’ s most important newspapers , “ these pages aren ’ t going to stop publishing provocative essays merely because they offend the new administration or the political censors in the media and academe.
” If , as we suspect , the preview we just witnessed was a sort of sighting shot , it suggests that Gigot is going to have his hands full dealing with ever more intolerant efforts to “ turn the page @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ healing ” and “ unity .
”

Roger Kimball’s is the unmistakable voice of the January New Criterion editorial “The ‘Dr.’ will see you now.” Roger takes snapshots of the episode arising from Joesph Epstein’s Wall Street Journal column on Jill Biden, Ed.D., from a variety of perspectives. Roger arrives at the heart of the matter in his conclusion:
It was not an encouraging sign that Northwestern University, in addition to issuing its pronunciamentos about Epstein, should go full Orwell (or full Stalin) and erase him from their website listing emeriti faculty, despite those earnest declarations of support for “academic freedom and freedom of expression.” As Gigot warned in his column for TheWall Street Journal, “This is how cancel culture works.”
It is very rare that Gigot responds in print to criticism of what appears in his pages. Doubtless this is because he understands that criticism is a natural part of the metabolism of opinion journalism. In the normal course of our political life, it is not only expected but salutary. People have different points of view about contentious issues. A respectful airing of those differences is or should be part of the lifeblood of democracy. If Gigot stepped into print over this contretemps, it was not so much to defend Epstein or even to respond to the chihuahua-like yapping of his interlocutors. It was to sound an alarm against that “big gun of identity politics” he found operating in the background.
The governing strategy of identity politics is not to encourage free expression but to shutter it. In essence, it is a totalitarian enterprise, deploying the shibboleths of race, gender, and radical egalitarianism to enforce a stultifying conformity. It is heartening to see Gigot affirming that, at one of our nation’s most important newspapers, “these pages aren’t going to stop publishing provocative essays merely because they offend the new administration or the political censors in the media and academe.” If, as we suspect, the preview we just witnessed was a sort of sighting shot, it suggests that Gigot is going to have his hands full dealing with ever more intolerant efforts to “turn the page” and enforce ghastly new modes of “healing” and “unity.”


Rush reflects

Rush Limbaugh opened his final show of 2020 “ by reflecting on what ’ s important.
” Occasioned by the dire prognosis and related treatment he has lived with since early this year , Rush remembered and avowed : There ’ s something about Christmas , my childhood memories of it , the families getting together and the children making it what it was .
My feelings of thankfulness always surface .
My feelings of great gratitude always surface at the Christmas time of year , and it ’ s no different this year .
Now , in January of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the month , I received a — you all know , but there ’ s something I want to say about it — stage 4 , advanced lung cancer , terminal diagnosis .
The objective of everybody involved was to extend life for as long as possible as enjoyably as possible .
I wasn ’ t expected to make it to October and then to November and then to December — and yet here I am .
Today I ’ ve got some problems , but I ’ m feeling pretty good today @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
God knows how important this program is to me today , and I ’ m feeling natural in terms of energy , normal in terms of energy , and I ’ m feeling entirely capable of doing it today .
You know , I have a philosophy there ’ s good that happens in everything .
It may not reveal itself immediately , and even in the most dire circumstances , if you just wait , if you just remain open to things , the good in it will reveal itself .

Rush Limbaugh opened his final show of 2020 “by reflecting on what’s important.” Occasioned by the dire prognosis and related treatment he has lived with since early this year, Rush remembered and avowed:
There’s something about Christmas, my childhood memories of it, the families getting together and the children making it what it was. My feelings of thankfulness always surface. My feelings of great gratitude always surface at the Christmas time of year, and it’s no different this year. Now, in January of this year, toward the end of the month, I received a — you all know, but there’s something I want to say about it — stage 4, advanced lung cancer, terminal diagnosis. The objective of everybody involved was to extend life for as long as possible as enjoyably as possible.
* * * * *
I wasn’t expected to make it to October and then to November and then to December — and yet here I am. Today I’ve got some problems, but I’m feeling pretty good today. God’s with me today. God knows how important this program is to me today, and I’m feeling natural in terms of energy, normal in terms of energy, and I’m feeling entirely capable of doing it today.
* * * * *
You know, I have a philosophy there’s good that happens in everything. It may not reveal itself immediately, and even in the most dire circumstances, if you just wait, if you just remain open to things, the good in it will reveal itself.


Lockdown mysteries

Following the politics and public health policy of the COVID-19 epidemic in Minnesota , I have drawn several inferences .
Among them are these .
The disease places the elderly and infirm ( i.e.
, those with one or more of seven identified underlying medical conditions ) at elevated risk of death .
At last word , those with significant underlying conditions account for some 94 percent of fatalities attributed to the disease in Minnesota .
We should be warned to look out for ourselves and , if in residential care , protected .
The disease places the rest of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be left free to look out for ourselves with the appropriate public health guidance .
The lockdowns imposed on us to prevent spread of the disease are both futile and destructive .
The collateral consequences of the lockdowns render them unconscionable on any rational scale weighing costs against benefits .
Stanford University ’ s Jay Bhattacharya is one of the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration .
In the October number of Hillsdale ’ s Imprimis , Dr. Bhattacharya observes : The widespread lockdowns that have been adopted in response to COVID are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a method of disease control .
Nor were these lockdowns part of the original plan .
The initial rationale for lockdowns was that slowing the spread of the disease would prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed .
It became clear before long that this was not a worry : in the U.S. and in most of the world , hospitals were never at risk of being overwhelmed .
Yet the lockdowns were kept in place , and this is turning out to have deadly effects .
Dr. Scott Atlas criticizes lockdowns in the second @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans to understand in the Wall Street Journal column “ A pandemic of misinformation.
” This is the central reality : [ N ] early all states used the same draconian policies that people now insist on hardening , even though the number of positive cases increased while people ’ s movements were constrained , business activities were strictly limited , and schools were closed .
Governors in all but a few states—Florida and South Dakota are notable exceptions—imposed curfews , quarantines , directives on group gatherings , and mask mandates .
Mobility @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Gallup and YouGov data show that 80 % to 90 % of Americans have been wearing masks since early August .
Lockdown policies had baleful effects on local economies , families and children , and the virus spread anyway .
If one advocates more lockdowns because of bad outcomes so far , why don ’ t the results of those lockdowns matter ?
That is a good question .
There is much more to the same effect here .
Considering the role of the media in misinforming the public with political attacks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pain and misery of the lockdowns , Dr. Atlas concludes : “ It is not at all clear that American society with its cherished freedoms will survive , regardless of our success in defeating the pandemic threat .
”

Following the politics and public health policy of the COVID-19 epidemic in Minnesota, I have drawn several inferences. Among them are these.
The disease places the elderly and infirm (i.e., those with one or more of seven identified underlying medical conditions) at elevated risk of death. At last word, those with significant underlying conditions account for some 94 percent of fatalities attributed to the disease in Minnesota. We should be warned to look out for ourselves and, if in residential care, protected.
The disease places the rest of us at minimal risk. We should be left free to look out for ourselves with the appropriate public health guidance.
The lockdowns imposed on us to prevent spread of the disease are both futile and destructive. The collateral consequences of the lockdowns render them unconscionable on any rational scale weighing costs against benefits.
Stanford University’s Jay Bhattacharya is one of the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration. In the October number of Hillsdale’s Imprimis, Dr. Bhattacharya observes:
The widespread lockdowns that have been adopted in response to COVID are unprecedented—lockdowns have never before been tried as a method of disease control. Nor were these lockdowns part of the original plan. The initial rationale for lockdowns was that slowing the spread of the disease would prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed. It became clear before long that this was not a worry: in the U.S. and in most of the world, hospitals were never at risk of being overwhelmed. Yet the lockdowns were kept in place, and this is turning out to have deadly effects.
Dr. Scott Atlas criticizes lockdowns in the second of “three realities” he urges Americans to understand in the Wall Street Journal column “A pandemic of misinformation.” This is the central reality:
[N]early all states used the same draconian policies that people now insist on hardening, even though the number of positive cases increased while people’s movements were constrained, business activities were strictly limited, and schools were closed. Governors in all but a few states—Florida and South Dakota are notable exceptions—imposed curfews, quarantines, directives on group gatherings, and mask mandates. Mobility tracking verifies that people restricted their movement. Gallup and YouGov data show that 80% to 90% of Americans have been wearing masks since early August. Lockdown policies had baleful effects on local economies, families and children, and the virus spread anyway. If one advocates more lockdowns because of bad outcomes so far, why don’t the results of those lockdowns matter?
That is a good question. There is much more to the same effect here.
Considering the role of the media in misinforming the public with political attacks about who is to blame for the pain and misery of the lockdowns, Dr. Atlas concludes: “It is not at all clear that American society with its cherished freedoms will survive, regardless of our success in defeating the pandemic threat.”


powerlineblog--2020-12-27--Are Democrats In Trouble In 2022?

Are Democrats In Trouble In 2022?

That is the question posed by Adam Nagourney , a loyal Democratic Party foot soldier , in the New York Times : “ A Stinging Setback in California Is a Warning for Democrats in 2022.
” This is rich .
Nagourney doesn ’ t cite any Republican attacks that were “ false or exaggerated.
” It would be interesting to scour the archives of the Times in search of an occasion when Nagourney ( or , perhaps , any other Times reporter ) has characterized Democrats ’ attacks on Republicans as “ false or exaggerated.
” Like , for example @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Times eagerly embraced and helped to perpetrate .
Were claims of Russian collusion false or exaggerated , Adam ?
The Times isn ’ t talking .
Further , it is leading Democrats like Bernie Sanders and The Squad who tell us the Democrats are the party of socialism .
And Nancy Pelosi , when asked on-camera to explain the difference between a Democrat and a socialist , was stumped .
She couldn ’ t come up with a thing .
Likewise with defunding the police .
Does Nagourney think it was Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a battle cry across America ?
In a number of cities , Democratic politicians have done their best to make defunding a reality .
And , as Ed Morrissey points out , Joe Biden was the only candidate in the Democratic presidential contest who came out against abolishing private health insurance , which the Democrats will surely do if they ever have the opportunity .
Funny how that happens–what Democrats like Adam Nagourney determinedly call “ protests against police abuses ” consist largely of arson , assault and looting .
Nothing says “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like looting a pharmacy , liquor store or jewelry store .
There is a reason why countless stores in urban areas were boarded up , and in many cases remain boarded up , and the reason isn ’ t that someone is “ protesting against police abuses.
” Further , Democrats in a number of cities , like Seattle , Portland , Chicago and Minneapolis , proved to be so sympathetic to rioters that they were unwilling to take effective measures to stop them .
Voters noticed .
One more thing : Nagourney @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and arson were “ heavily covered on local television ” is revealing .
The Times , the Washington Post , the Associated Press , the broadcast networks and other reliable Democratic outlets tried to suppress information about the riots that took place across the country , precisely so that such information would not damage the Democratic Party .
But they failed , mostly on account of local news coverage , which was less dedicated to the Democratic cause and more interested in letting viewers know what was going on .
So , are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Will 2022 be a disaster for the Democrats ?
I certainly hope so , and I think the Republicans will take the House and expand their control over the Senate .
( I anticipate winning at least one of the two Georgia runoff elections . )
The president ’ s party almost always loses ground in his first midterm elections .
Last time the Democrats elected a new president , Barack Obama , the 2010 midterms were a disaster for them .
And there was a great deal more enthusiasm for Obama in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Democrats have other problems , too .
Their turnout this year was driven largely by antipathy toward President Trump in some quarters , and by voter fraud .
We do not yet know how many of their votes were fraudulent , nor do we know what measures will be taken between now and 2022 to improve election security .
But it seems safe to assume that there will be less fraud two years from now ( if only because there will be less mail-in voting ) , and , in any event @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the picture .
Too , it is highly probable that by 2022 , a great many voters will be disillusioned with the rapidly-failing Joe Biden , assuming that he is still president in two years .
There is usually an element of buyer ’ s remorse in a president ’ s first midterm election , and by 2022 the remorse could be profound .
So on paper , 2022 shapes up as an excellent year for the GOP .
Of course , the reality is that we have little idea what the landscape @ @ @ @ @ @ @ No one could have predicted in 2018 the events , foremost among them the much-hyped Wuhan flu , that reversed what looked like an easy re-election for President Trump .
Nevertheless , at this stage there is every reason for Republicans to look to the future with confidence , and for Democrats like Adam Nagourney to fret .

That is the question posed by Adam Nagourney, a loyal Democratic Party foot soldier, in the New York Times: “A Stinging Setback in California Is a Warning for Democrats in 2022.”
The Democrats’ losses came for a number of reasons, including forces particular to California and the complications of campaigning during a pandemic. But as much as anything, they reflected the potency of Republican attacks, some false or exaggerated, that Democrats were the party of socialism, defunding the police and abolishing private health insurance.
This is rich. Nagourney doesn’t cite any Republican attacks that were “false or exaggerated.” It would be interesting to scour the archives of the Times in search of an occasion when Nagourney (or, perhaps, any other Times reporter) has characterized Democrats’ attacks on Republicans as “false or exaggerated.” Like, for example, the Russia collusion hoax, which the Times eagerly embraced and helped to perpetrate. Were claims of Russian collusion false or exaggerated, Adam? The Times isn’t talking.
Further, it is leading Democrats like Bernie Sanders and The Squad who tell us the Democrats are the party of socialism. And Nancy Pelosi, when asked on-camera to explain the difference between a Democrat and a socialist, was stumped. She couldn’t come up with a thing.
Likewise with defunding the police. Does Nagourney think it was Republicans who made “defund the police” a battle cry across America? In a number of cities, Democratic politicians have done their best to make defunding a reality. And, as Ed Morrissey points out, Joe Biden was the only candidate in the Democratic presidential contest who came out against abolishing private health insurance, which the Democrats will surely do if they ever have the opportunity.
The attacks — led in no small part by Mr. Trump as a central part of his re-election strategy — came at a time when parts of California were swept by street protests against police abuses, some of which turned into glass-shattering bouts of looting and confrontations with law enforcement that were heavily covered on local television.
Funny how that happens–what Democrats like Adam Nagourney determinedly call “protests against police abuses” consist largely of arson, assault and looting. Nothing says “I’m against police abuses” like looting a pharmacy, liquor store or jewelry store. There is a reason why countless stores in urban areas were boarded up, and in many cases remain boarded up, and the reason isn’t that someone is “protesting against police abuses.” Further, Democrats in a number of cities, like Seattle, Portland, Chicago and Minneapolis, proved to be so sympathetic to rioters that they were unwilling to take effective measures to stop them. Voters noticed.
One more thing: Nagourney’s statement that riots, looting and arson were “heavily covered on local television” is revealing. The Times, the Washington Post, the Associated Press, the broadcast networks and other reliable Democratic outlets tried to suppress information about the riots that took place across the country, precisely so that such information would not damage the Democratic Party. But they failed, mostly on account of local news coverage, which was less dedicated to the Democratic cause and more interested in letting viewers know what was going on.
So, are the Times’s fears well-grounded? Will 2022 be a disaster for the Democrats? I certainly hope so, and I think the Republicans will take the House and expand their control over the Senate. (I anticipate winning at least one of the two Georgia runoff elections.) The president’s party almost always loses ground in his first midterm elections. Last time the Democrats elected a new president, Barack Obama, the 2010 midterms were a disaster for them. And there was a great deal more enthusiasm for Obama in 2008 than for Biden in 2020.
The Democrats have other problems, too. Their turnout this year was driven largely by antipathy toward President Trump in some quarters, and by voter fraud. We do not yet know how many of their votes were fraudulent, nor do we know what measures will be taken between now and 2022 to improve election security. But it seems safe to assume that there will be less fraud two years from now (if only because there will be less mail-in voting), and, in any event, President Trump will be out of the picture.
Too, it is highly probable that by 2022, a great many voters will be disillusioned with the rapidly-failing Joe Biden, assuming that he is still president in two years. There is usually an element of buyer’s remorse in a president’s first midterm election, and by 2022 the remorse could be profound.
So on paper, 2022 shapes up as an excellent year for the GOP. Of course, the reality is that we have little idea what the landscape will look like in two years. No one could have predicted in 2018 the events, foremost among them the much-hyped Wuhan flu, that reversed what looked like an easy re-election for President Trump. Nevertheless, at this stage there is every reason for Republicans to look to the future with confidence, and for Democrats like Adam Nagourney to fret.


powerlineblog--2020-12-27--The vaccine scramble is on

The vaccine scramble is on

To the surprise of no one , disputes have broken out about who should be given priority for vaccination against the Wuhan coronavirus .
There are disputes within hospitals and among various types of health care workers .
There is also a dispute about whether various public officials and politicians should jump ahead of health care workers who are at risk because of the work they do .
In general , I believe priority should go to these health care workers .
I have no problem with top officials like Mike Pence getting priority .
It won ’ t do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incapacitated .
But once you get much below that level — to members of Congress not in the line of presidential succession , for example — this kind of rationale doesn ’ t apply .
On the other hand , I ’ m not angry that members of Congress are jumping ahead of health care workers .
It would be seemly if they didn ’ t .
However , a day or two of extra waiting for the vaccine , if that ’ s what we ’ re talking about , isn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any health care worker who has avoided infection for the past nine months .
What really bothers me is when a member of Congress tries to justify jumping ahead on the theory that he or she is doing the public a service by showing faith in the vaccine ’ s safety .
I doubt that anyone disinclined to get vaccinated will change his mind because Lindsey Graham volunteered for it .
Anyway , the argument is a phony one .
Right now , members of the general public aren ’ t able to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or not , and they won ’ t be able to until health care workers are vaccinated .
Thus , members of Congress will have the opportunity to demonstrate their faith in the vaccines to the masses after health care workers are taken care of .
Kevin Bishop , Graham ’ s flack , tried to defend his man this way : Rubbish .
No serious person will criticize a member of Congress for not getting vaccinated “ first.
” Republicans Rand Paul and Brian Mast and Democrats Tulsi Gabbard and Ilhan Omar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , declined to be vaccinated ahead of health care workers .
I ’ m not aware of any of these members being ripped for their decision by anyone worth listening to .
In any case , the choice here is between a selfless decision and a selfish one .
It won ’ t do to defend the selfish decision just because some might criticize the selfless course .
The Washington Post acknowledges that members of both political parties are jumping ahead of health care workers .
Nonetheless , it tries to turn the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that some Republicans who jumped ahead have “ minimized the pandemic.
” But Post reporters Fenit Nirappil , Issac Stanley-Becker , and William Wan fail to identify anyone who minimized the pandemic but received the vaccine early .
They do name several politicians who haven ’ t always worn masks and one , Governor Abbott of Texas , who reopened his state in May .
But disagreeing with the Post , and with Dr. Fauci , isn ’ t the same thing as minimizing the pandemic .
Anyone who takes the vaccine obviously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Why else get the shot ?
If that person hasn ’ t been wearing a mask , it ’ s because he doesn ’ t think masks prevent spread , not because he thinks the virus poses no health threat .
Similarly , it can ’ t reasonably be inferred from his decision to reopen Texas that Gov .
Abbott didn ’ t take the pandemic seriously .
Presumably , his decision was based on some combination of concern about the health and economic effects of a lengthy lockdown and skepticism about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ per capita from the virus in Texas are below the national average .
If we want to punish governors for their responses to the virus , let ’ s start with Andrew Cuomo .
Deaths per capital from the virus in New York are almost double the national average , and Cuomo ’ s irresponsible policies , most notably his policies regarding long-term care facilities , are partially to blame .
Here ’ s a better idea .
Let ’ s not obsess over who is getting the vaccine when — at least @ @ @ @ @ @ @ let ’ s not hunt for political advantage when members of both parties are conducting themselves in basically the same way .

To the surprise of no one, disputes have broken out about who should be given priority for vaccination against the Wuhan coronavirus. There are disputes within hospitals and among various types of health care workers. There is also a dispute about whether various public officials and politicians should jump ahead of health care workers who are at risk because of the work they do.
In general, I believe priority should go to these health care workers. I have no problem with top officials like Mike Pence getting priority. It won’t do for the U.S. vice president to be incapacitated. But once you get much below that level — to members of Congress not in the line of presidential succession, for example — this kind of rationale doesn’t apply.
On the other hand, I’m not angry that members of Congress are jumping ahead of health care workers. It would be seemly if they didn’t. However, a day or two of extra waiting for the vaccine, if that’s what we’re talking about, isn’t likely to cause serious harm to any health care worker who has avoided infection for the past nine months.
What really bothers me is when a member of Congress tries to justify jumping ahead on the theory that he or she is doing the public a service by showing faith in the vaccine’s safety. I doubt that anyone disinclined to get vaccinated will change his mind because Lindsey Graham volunteered for it.
Anyway, the argument is a phony one. Right now, members of the general public aren’t able to get the vaccine whether they want it or not, and they won’t be able to until health care workers are vaccinated. Thus, members of Congress will have the opportunity to demonstrate their faith in the vaccines to the masses after health care workers are taken care of.
Kevin Bishop, Graham’s flack, tried to defend his man this way:
Refuse the vaccine and be criticized for encouraging others to get it, yet you won’t go first. Take the vaccine early and face criticism for cutting in line.
Rubbish. No serious person will criticize a member of Congress for not getting vaccinated “first.” Republicans Rand Paul and Brian Mast and Democrats Tulsi Gabbard and Ilhan Omar are among those who, unlike Graham, declined to be vaccinated ahead of health care workers. I’m not aware of any of these members being ripped for their decision by anyone worth listening to.
In any case, the choice here is between a selfless decision and a selfish one. It won’t do to defend the selfish decision just because some might criticize the selfless course.
The Washington Post acknowledges that members of both political parties are jumping ahead of health care workers. Nonetheless, it tries to turn the story to its partisan advantage by claiming that some Republicans who jumped ahead have “minimized the pandemic.” But Post reporters Fenit Nirappil, Issac Stanley-Becker, and William Wan fail to identify anyone who minimized the pandemic but received the vaccine early.
They do name several politicians who haven’t always worn masks and one, Governor Abbott of Texas, who reopened his state in May. But disagreeing with the Post, and with Dr. Fauci, isn’t the same thing as minimizing the pandemic.
Anyone who takes the vaccine obviously thinks the pandemic is a serious matter. Why else get the shot? If that person hasn’t been wearing a mask, it’s because he doesn’t think masks prevent spread, not because he thinks the virus poses no health threat.
Similarly, it can’t reasonably be inferred from his decision to reopen Texas that Gov. Abbott didn’t take the pandemic seriously. Presumably, his decision was based on some combination of concern about the health and economic effects of a lengthy lockdown and skepticism about the efficacy of such lockdowns.
Deaths per capita from the virus in Texas are below the national average. If we want to punish governors for their responses to the virus, let’s start with Andrew Cuomo. Deaths per capital from the virus in New York are almost double the national average, and Cuomo’s irresponsible policies, most notably his policies regarding long-term care facilities, are partially to blame.
Here’s a better idea. Let’s not obsess over who is getting the vaccine when — at least not at this early date — and let’s not hunt for political advantage when members of both parties are conducting themselves in basically the same way.


Happy Kwanzaa?

I assume that not a lot of people celebrate Kwanzaa , an entirely synthetic “ holiday ” that was invented in 1966 .
But that isn ’ t the worst of it : Kwanzaa ’ s inventor , Ron Karenga , is a horrible person who served four years in prison for imprisoning and torturing two women , and also was implicated in , although not convicted of , multiple murders that were carried out by his henchmen .
( Today , naturally , he is a college professor , supported by California taxpayers . )
Moreover , the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a celebration of collectivism .
I guess that seemed cutting-edge in 1966 .
One person who does observe Kwanzaa , allegedly , is Kamala Harris .
She released this video in which she purports to recall the heartwarming inter-generational Kwanzaa celebrations of her childhood : What are the chances that there is even a sliver of truth to Harris ’ s account ?
Many are skeptical .
Steve Sailer says , “ Pics or it didn ’ t happen.
” It ’ s possible , of course .
Harris was born in 1964 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kwanzaa was concocted .
What is striking to me is how insincere Harris seems in the video .
To me , it appears that she is smiling , not at happy childhood memories , but at the idea that some rubes might actually fall for the tale she is spinning .
Her patent lack of authenticity is a key reason why her presidential campaign crashed on takeoff , and she hasn ’ t become a more convincing story-teller in the time that has gone by since .
Which is probably a good thing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be president one of these days .

I assume that not a lot of people celebrate Kwanzaa, an entirely synthetic “holiday” that was invented in 1966. But that isn’t the worst of it: Kwanzaa’s inventor, Ron Karenga, is a horrible person who served four years in prison for imprisoning and torturing two women, and also was implicated in, although not convicted of, multiple murders that were carried out by his henchmen. (Today, naturally, he is a college professor, supported by California taxpayers.) Moreover, the “seven principles” of Kwanzaa are essentially a celebration of collectivism. I guess that seemed cutting-edge in 1966.
One person who does observe Kwanzaa, allegedly, is Kamala Harris. She released this video in which she purports to recall the heartwarming inter-generational Kwanzaa celebrations of her childhood:
Our Kwanzaa celebrations are one of my favorite childhood memories. The whole family would gather around across multiple generations and we’d tell stories and light the candles. Whether you’re celebrating this year with those you live with or over Zoom, happy Kwanzaa! pic.twitter.com/21bzGHZpYe — Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) December 26, 2020
What are the chances that there is even a sliver of truth to Harris’s account? Many are skeptical. Steve Sailer says, “Pics or it didn’t happen.”
It’s possible, of course. Harris was born in 1964, so she was a child when Kwanzaa was concocted. What is striking to me is how insincere Harris seems in the video. To me, it appears that she is smiling, not at happy childhood memories, but at the idea that some rubes might actually fall for the tale she is spinning. Her patent lack of authenticity is a key reason why her presidential campaign crashed on takeoff, and she hasn’t become a more convincing story-teller in the time that has gone by since. Which is probably a good thing, given that she is likely to be president one of these days.


The Media’s Double-Standards

I know , taking note of media double standards is an insult to shooting fish in a barrel , but every now and then you find something that stands out for special recognition .
One of the things we hear endlessly from the media is that the Trump Administration has been hostile in unprecedented ways .
Oh ?
As it happened , I stumbled across an account of the Kennedy Administration ’ s treatment of the media as assembled by Fletcher Knebel in Look magazine in late 1962 ( sorry—no link ) : The Washington press corps has taken almost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kennedy rule as during the three previous administrations put together .
—Kennedy personally has called down at least six Washington correspondents either for their writings or for their publications .
—Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy has reproved at least four newspapermen for stories he disliked .
—The Federal Bureau of Investigation questioned six newspapermen in connection with stories concerning policies of the Kennedy Administration .
—The White House cancelled 22 subscriptions to the New York Herald Tribune .
—Administration officials , reporters charge , put “ the freeze ” on some reporters who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Theodore C. Sorenson has reprimanded some newspapermen .
—White House Press Secretary Pierre Salinger has rebuked about a dozen reporters for their stories .
—Even the Kennedy women have gotten into the act .
Ethel Kennedy , wife of the Attorney General , and Mrs. Jean Smith , sister of the President , braced one correspondent for his story about dunkings in the Bob Kennedy pool .
Keep in mind that the press corps in 1962 Washington was largely leading sycophantic cheerleading for JFK , covering up JFK ’ s philandering , drug @ @ @ @ @ @ @ personal tax returns of his enemies anyone ? )
and infirm health .
If the media back then reported on JFK as they have about Trump , JFK would have been impeached within a year .
That said , I am sure Schlesinger was right about the columnist , and the reporter who wrote up the “ dunking ” in the pool was just warming up for Chappaquiddick .

I know, taking note of media double standards is an insult to shooting fish in a barrel, but every now and then you find something that stands out for special recognition.
One of the things we hear endlessly from the media is that the Trump Administration has been hostile in unprecedented ways. Oh? As it happened, I stumbled across an account of the Kennedy Administration’s treatment of the media as assembled by Fletcher Knebel in Look magazine in late 1962 (sorry—no link):
The Washington press corps has taken almost as many lumps in 19 months of Kennedy rule as during the three previous administrations put together. —Kennedy personally has called down at least six Washington correspondents either for their writings or for their publications. —Three Kennedy Administration officials have threatened to sue newspapers. —Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy has reproved at least four newspapermen for stories he disliked. —The Federal Bureau of Investigation questioned six newspapermen in connection with stories concerning policies of the Kennedy Administration. —Pentagon security officials quizzed three correspondents. —The White House cancelled 22 subscriptions to the New York Herald Tribune. —Administration officials, reporters charge, put “the freeze” on some reporters who offended them. —White House Special Counsel Theodore C. Sorenson has reprimanded some newspapermen. —White House Press Secretary Pierre Salinger has rebuked about a dozen reporters for their stories. —White House aide Arthur Schlesinger Jr, a Pulitzer-Prize historians, called one columnist “an idiot.” —Even the Kennedy women have gotten into the act. Ethel Kennedy, wife of the Attorney General, and Mrs. Jean Smith, sister of the President, braced one correspondent for his story about dunkings in the Bob Kennedy pool.
Keep in mind that the press corps in 1962 Washington was largely leading sycophantic cheerleading for JFK, covering up JFK’s philandering, drug abuse, abuse of power (leaking personal tax returns of his enemies anyone?) and infirm health. If the media back then reported on JFK as they have about Trump, JFK would have been impeached within a year.
That said, I am sure Schlesinger was right about the columnist, and the reporter who wrote up the “dunking” in the pool was just warming up for Chappaquiddick.


powerlineblog--2020-12-27--In Nashville, officers speak

In Nashville, officers speak

Five of the six Metropolitan Nashville Police officers who responded to the call for help before the RV blew up @ @ @ @ @ a press conference recognizing their bravery this morning .
( Officer Miller is out of @ @ @ @ @ 5 relates it , the officers responded to “ shots fired ” call and , @ @ @ @ @ a recorded message saying the vehicle contained a bomb , took several measures to evacuate @ @ @ @ @ from Second Avenue N. It was an inspiring and emotional event .
In the video @ @ @ @ @ his or her story .
In this year from hell for law enforcement and the @ @ @ @ @ officers should be heard .

Five of the six Metropolitan Nashville Police officers who responded to the call for help before the RV blew up Friday morning appeared for at a press conference recognizing their bravery this morning. (Officer Miller is out of town.) As NewsChannel 5 relates it, the officers responded to “shots fired” call and, upon hearing an RV play a recorded message saying the vehicle contained a bomb, took several measures to evacuate as many people as possible from Second Avenue N. It was an inspiring and emotional event.
The responding officers were:
• Officer Brenna Hosey
• Officer Tyler Luellen
• Officer Michael Sipos
• Officer Amanda Topping
• Officer James Wells
• Sergeant Timothy Miller
In the video each of the officers tells his or her story. In this year from hell for law enforcement and the rest of us, these officers should be heard.