Filed under: Domestic Policy, Education, Freedom, Intelligence, Liberalism, Progressivism, The United States | Tags: Ill-Informed Students, Political Correctness, Smith College
Smith College President Kathleen McCartney believed she was showing solidarity with students, protesting racism and police brutality when she sent out an email to the entire campus with the subject line: “All Lives Matter.”
The slogan preferred by Smith College students was the more exclusionary “Black Lives Matter.” Have to show our solidarity with the protesters half a continent away who are burning up the town of Ferguson, Missouri because of a tragic incident that had nothing whatsoever to do with race.
Students were not only furious, but offended, according to Fox News.
President McCartney apologized profusely in a second email, saying she had made a mistake “despite my best intentions. I regret that I was unaware the phrase/hashtag “all lives matter” has been used by some to draw attention away from the focus on institutional violence against Black people,”
Well, Ms McCarthy was right in the first place. Our college campuses are well-known as centers of political correctness. Students are there to study because they are young and short on knowledge and experience. The evidence shows that Michael Brown’s killing was not a racial event, nor was the death of Eric Garner. Tragic indeed, but not about race.
Black communities are inclined to have a higher incidence of crime, and the police trying to protect the community are at much higher risk. Crime is decreasing. Most young black men who are killed are killed by other young black men − not by police. Sure there are some bad apples in the nation’s police forces, but for the most part their training emphasizes ways to avoid harm and any excessive use of force. It’s a tough job.
Greg Lukianoff, president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) says the silencing of McCartney is just one more example of the grip of political correctness on college campuses. Increasing numbers of teenagers are learning the wrong lessons about speech. They believe they have a right not to encounter ideas that might conflict with their feelings. They need to learn that not every hashtag that comes over the internet is a valid battlecry, and the difference between propaganda and reality.
Filed under: Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Law, Liberalism, Media Bias, National Security, Progressivism, Terrorism | Tags: Ferguson Missouri, Michael Brown, Police Officer Darren Wilson
Are the Ferguson riots over, and the copycat riots across the country? Will rioters break for Thanksgiving? Its a sad story of the media behaving badly, writing their stories before the evidence was in — riots get lots of TV ratings.
ABC news’ mantra was about Ferguson where “a white policeman shot an unarmed black teenager.”Media people tell themselves that they are just reporting the facts, but it is not a story until there are facts, and claims are not facts. Robert Tracinsky set out some rules for the media for the next Ferguson.
The New York Times published the address of Police Officer Wilson’s home and the name of his wife. That is unforgivable, in an inflamed situation where mobs are crying for his death.
President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder could have quelled the latest rioting in Ferguson. Instead they invited violence. Obama called anger “an understandable reaction” and warned police not to work “against the community.” He added “A deep distrust exists between law enforcement and communities of color. Some of this is the result of racial discrimination in this country.”
For the U.S. Attorney General to announce, essentially, that the decision of the very thorough grand jury investigation that declined to indict Police Officer Darren Wilson isn’t good enough, and his department will be pursuing a further investigation, is not helpful, but then he is still investigating the Zimmerman case in search of “justice” for Treyvon Martin. That is not justice, but something else.
David Harsanyi’s piece at the Federalist seemed to me balanced, fair and straightforward. “Feelings aren’t facts. And “justice” doesn’t exist to mollify your anger.” The grand jury has put all the evidence online for your convenience and enlightenment.
More than anything this case highlights the extent to which Democrats depend on keeping their black base convinced that there is no justice in America for them because of racial prejudice.
Some have said that most of the rioters are not Ferguson residents, but outsiders. They’re all just so upset and angry that they have to break into stores to get some big screen TVs, and burn down a lot of buildings. But then there have been riots in many cities across the country. Time for everyone to go on home.
Filed under: Afghanistan, Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Foreign Policy, Iran, Iraq, Liberalism, Media Bias, National Security, Politics, Progressivism, Statism, Terrorism, The Constitution, The United States | Tags: Opposition or Elimination?, The Party of Hate, Unhinged Democrats
The New York Times, the “paper of record,”is apparently astonished to find Republicans, who regularly criticize the president, showing concern for Secret Service failings in protecting the president and the White House. They assume that is merely a political ploy of some sort. They hate Republicans, want them permanently defeated, jailed, put in camps, killed, gone. They are unable to tolerate dissent, and believe that Republicans hate the president, and not only that, hate him because he is black. That is the theme they try to impress on blacks. If we don’t like the president’s policies, then we must wish him dead? Astonishing.
The headline today was “Showing Concern for the President, Even While Criticizing Him.” Even?
President Obama must be touched by all the concern Republicans are showing him these days. As Congress examines security breaches at the White House, even opposition lawmakers who have spent the last six years fighting his every initiative have expressed deep worry for his security.
“The American people want to know: Is the president safe?” Representative Darrell Issa of California, the Republican committee chairman who has made it his mission to investigate all sorts of Obama administration missteps, solemnly intoned as he opened a hearing into the lapses on Tuesday.
Yet it would not be all that surprising if Mr. Obama were a little wary of all the professed sympathy. Although the target of the legislative scrutiny is the Secret Service, not the president, the furor over security has left the White House on the defensive.
The American Interest noticed as well “GOP Taking Advantage of Events to Make WH Look Incompetent?”
Those horrible, mean, nasty Republicans are apparently “using” the revelations that the Secret Service isn’t being managed very well to create an impression of general incompetence at the White House. Here’s the money graph from the New York Times:
So unfair! Botch the public rollout of your most important domestic political program, fail to reform the VA after campaigning on a promise to do exactly that, and then make serial misjudgments about world affairs while Russia launches a war against Ukraine even as the U.S. goes back into Iraq—and those awful Republicans start a whisper campaign about your competence. Right before midterms, too! Have they no shame?
I am very critical of the president’s policies, and the Democrat Party’s policies. I believe they are responsible for the worst economic recovery ever. The recent recession was not the worst recession since the Great Recession of the 1930s. It ended, officially, in 2009. ObamaCare is a badly conceived disaster. Immigration is an unfolding disaster. Federal agencies are corrupt and show no signs of improvement. Foreign policy is one misjudgment after another. I think Obama was unprepared for the office and mistook his ability to sway audiences with his speeches for qualification for the highest office. But I don’t hate him personally. I don’t wish him harm. I don’t know of any Republicans who do. I oppose his ideology with all my being, but he is the president, and I respect the office.
Democrats hated George W. Bush and wanted him dead, because he was a Republican and because he was president. They hated everything about him. They said so. They hated the way he walked. They hated the way he talked. They hated his “squint.” They hated that he was from Texas. Doubt me? Here is the evidence, if you have forgotten.
Filed under: Capitalism, Domestic Policy, Economy, Election 2014, Freedom, Liberalism, Politics, Progressivism, The United States | Tags: Americans Want Growth, Economic Growth and Jobs, Not Reducing Income Inequality
“A prominent Democratic polling firm has found that voters don’t view reducing income inequality as a top priority. Instead, they want economic growth.”
(emphasis added) WSJ columnist William Galston has the story:
Surveys of 3,000 Americans conducted between January and March of 2014 by the Global Strategy Group found that fully 78% thought that it was important for Congress to promote an agenda of economic growth that would benefit all Americans. Support for policies that help the middle class and bolster equal opportunity for everyone were also highly rated. Strategies to spread wealth more evenly and reduce income inequality received the least support. 53% believe that fostering economic growth is ‘extremely important,’ compared with only 30% who take that view about narrowing income inequality.” (emphasis added)
Well, well, well, well. But I thought that reducing income inequality was the bright shining goal of all Democrats. This is a leftist polling group! The results didn’t receive much attention when they were released in April, nor since. James Freeman suggests that “the findings would have rudely interrupted the months-long media celebration of Thomas Piketty and his error-filled and widely unread book on income inequality. And the survey data suggest that the core message of President Obama and his political outfit Organizing for Action is off target. From increasing the minimum wage to forgiving federal student loans to mandating more pay for women, the Obama economic message is all about redistributing wealth, not creating it.”
Specifically, Mr. Galston notes that by “a remarkable margin of 64 percentage points (80% to 16%)” voters “opt for a candidate who focuses on more economic growth to one who emphasizes less income inequality.”
Trouble is, there is a deep secret on the Left. Democrats do not know how to create growth. The basic idea behind this version of the Democratic Party is that all good things are done by government, and only by government. All the stuff that Obama has done to benefit his cronies — the wind farms, the solar arrays, the rejection of the Keystone pipeline extension, the rejection of private enterprise are meant to create growth, but to reward Obama’s bundlers and supporters first. Cast your mind back across the Obama administration’s efforts at progress. Any rapid economic growth there? Anywhere?
Have you not noticed that whenever the subject comes up, Obama starts talking about roads and bridges or infrastructure—apparently with no recognition of the fact that such governmental projects require layers and layers of permissions and plans and approvals and fundraising that would put any such project off for at least five years, probably more with the usual environmental lawsuits. Any jobs involved go only to union workers, but that is by design. Jobs for ordinary people seem not to be involved. Who listens to the people anyhow?
War on Women. ObamaCare. Minimum Wage. Renewable Energy. Building from the Middle Class Out. More Government Job Training. Economic Patriotism.
Their new focus on “economic patriotism” is exactly the problem. They cannot conceive of allowing American companies to escape any taxes by moving, and the only solution is to devise laws to prevent their doing so. I rest my case.