Commentary and analysis on American politics, culture, and national identity, U.S. foreign policy and international relations, and the state of education
- from a neoconservative perspective! - Keeping an eye on the communist-left so you don't have to!
I know, from having my heart broken too many times, if there's one sure thing to drive a man over the cliff it's the rejection of a beautiful woman. And Bourdain had problems before. He'd been a heroin addict at one point.
The Other McCain tweeted the other day:
Bourdain had a history of serious drug abuse. He was divorced twice, and had just been dumped by his girlfriend. Stop pretending that his suicide was mysterious, caused by some "chemical imbalance." That's bullshit.
— The Patriarch Tree (@PatriarchTree) June 9, 2018
Why don't you mention that the reason Bourdain killed himself was because Asia Argento recently dumped him? https://t.co/rM1bxLBfCr
— The Patriarch Tree (@PatriarchTree) June 9, 2018
Here's where things get murky. We know Anthony was shooting his show in France this week -- he'd been there for at least 4 days. However, Asia was back in Rome, strolling around with a French reporter named Hugo Clément. There were photos of them holding hands and hugging, but the Italian photographer who shot the pics pulled them off the market on the heels of Anthony's death.
It's unclear if Anthony and Asia had broken up. If they did, there was no public announcement. Their last public appearance together was at an event was back in April in NYC.
White House officials lashed out at the leader of Canada, one of America’s closest allies, with extraordinary ferocity Sunday as they accused him of trying to make President Trump look weak heading into his summit with the leader of North Korea.
Two of Trump’s top economic advisors branded Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau a backstabber, betrayer and double-crosser who pulled a “sophomoric political stunt” that threatened to embarrass Trump before his much-anticipated meeting with Kim Jong Un in Singapore on Tuesday.
“There’s a special place in hell for any foreign leader that engages in bad-faith diplomacy with President Donald J. Trump and then tries to stab him in the back on the way out the door,” White House trade advisor Peter Navarro said on “Fox News Sunday.”
The administration’s actions drew rebukes from Canada’s foreign minister as well as Democrats and some Republicans in Washington, including Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), who on Twitter called out his party members after Navarro’s comments: “Fellow Republicans, this is not who we are. This cannot be our party.”
The White House anger stemmed from Trudeau’s criticism of Trump’s trade policies at a news conference Saturday after the annual Group of 7 summit, which Trudeau hosted at a resort in Charlevoix, Quebec.
Trump left the summit early, and an administration official told reporters he had joined a lengthy communiqué from the world leaders crafted on Friday and Saturday.
That night, however, Trump abruptly announced via Twitter that he would not sign the joint statement, calling Trudeau “very dishonest & weak” for his trade criticism.
Navarro sharply criticized the G-7 final statement, referring to it as “that socialist communiqué.”
Larry Kudlow, the director of the White House National Economic Council, offered a somewhat different account, saying Sunday that Trump agreed with the language in the communiqué, which Kudlow helped draft. The statement outlined a shared commitment to work on a variety of economic, social, environmental and security issues.
And at the New York Times:
"All Canadians will support the prime minister in standing up to this bully," a former Canadian ambassador to the United States said. "Friends do not treat friends with such contempt." https://t.co/k5In4Fm6dC
I mentioned Dr. K. at my post on Anthony Bourdain yesterday. I'm still trying to process this. If you've seen the outpouring on Twitter, you can't count the number of people who've said that Charles Krauthammer was literally the most important influence on their lives, morally, intellectually, spiritually, and in so many other ways. I don't know if he's the most important for me, but yesterday I literally couldn't think of someone more important, especially intellectually and ideologically. I just love listening to him. I'd watch Fox News' Special Report just to tune into the All-Star Panel, since Dr. K. was the staple of that segment. It was just so good. So good.
In any case, he's not dead yet, and it was a little sad seeing folks speak of Dr. K. in the past tense yesterday, so let's pray and hope for a miracle. Maybe he's still got some time left.
Here's a video from Fox News with the announcement, and I'll have more later:
Today's a sad day. Charles Krauthammer released a statement saying he's got just weeks to live. He's been recovering from a successful surgery to remove a tumor of the stomach, but now the cancer's returned, very aggressively it turns out. More on that later, but it makes me sad. I think I've been just amazed by Krauthammer all these years, even when I disagreed with him, but he's so good. Just so good. It's a wonderful thing that he was able to share some final thoughts with everybody, so folks can respond with their well-wishes.
Bethany Mandel has written about suicide this week, first about Kate Spade's death, and the loss of her father to suicide, at the New York Post. And then again today, with the news of Bourdain. It's very profound reading:
In the wake of Kate Spade's death, I wrote about my father's suicide for the first time. Thank you to my amazing husband @SethAMandel for editing this, I don't usually submit things to him because he's brutal, but this time he was kind. https://t.co/nlgHdfBmzJ
— Bethany S. Mandel (@bethanyshondark) June 7, 2018
My column on Obama bending over backward to help the mullahs cash in on the Iran deal made @RealClearNews this morning. Read it here. https://t.co/aHdMaE1c6n
The full history of the Obama administration’s nuclear dealings with Iran has yet to be written, not least because many of the details remain shrouded in secrecy. The bits of the story that do seep out into the public sphere invariably reinforce a single theme: that of Barack Obama’s utter abjection and pusillanimity before Tehran, and his corresponding contempt for the American people and their elected representatives.
Wednesday’s bombshell Associated Press scoop detailing the Obama administration’s secret effort to help Tehran gain access to the American financial system was a case study. In the months after Iran and the great powers led by the U.S. agreed on the nuclear deal, the Obama Treasury Department issued a special license that would have permitted the Tehran regime to convert some $6 billion in assets held in Omani rials into U.S. dollars before eventually trading them for euros. That middle step—the conversion from Omani to American currency—would have violated sanctions that remained in place even after the nuclear accord.
That’s according to the AP’s Josh Lederman and Matthew Lee, citing a newly released report from the GOP-led Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. Lederman and Lee write: “The effort was unsuccessful because American banks—themselves afraid of running afoul of U.S. sanctions—declined to participate. The Obama administration approached two U.S. banks to facilitate the conversion . . . but both refused, citing the reputational risk of doing business with or for Iran.”
Put another way: The Obama administration pressed American banks to sidestep rules barring Iran from the U.S. financial system, and the only reason the transaction didn’t take place was because the banks had better legal and moral sense than the Obama Treasury.
This was far from the first instance in which the Obama administration bent over backward, going far beyond the requirements of the deal, to help the Iranian regime cash in on the deal...
I had this song on the brain for almost a week, since Jack F.M. was playing it repeatedly during my drive time.
Well the kids are all hopped up and ready to go
They're ready to go now they got their surfboards
And they're going to the discotheque Au Go Go
But she just couldn't stay she had to break away
Well New York City really has is all oh yeah, oh yeah
Sheena is a punk rocker
Sheena is a punk rocker
Sheena is a punk rocker now
Sheena is a punk rocker
Sheena is a punk rocker
Sheena is a punk rocker now
Well she's a punk punk, a punk rocker
Punk punk a punk rocker
Punk punk a punk rocker
Punk punk a punk rocker
Well the kids are all hopped up and ready to go
They're ready to go now they got their surfboards
And they're going to the discotheque Au Go Go
But she just couldn't stay she had to break away
Well New York City really has is all oh yeah, oh yeah
Sheena is a punk rocker
Sheena is a punk rocker
Sheena is a punk rocker now
Sheena is a punk rocker
Sheena is a punk rocker
Sheena is a punk rocker now
Well she's a punk punk, a punk rocker
Punk punk a punk rocker
Punk punk a punk rocker
Punk punk a punk rocker
Sheena is a punk rocker
Sheena is a punk rocker
Sheena is a punk rocker now
Sheena is a punk rocker
Sheena is a punk rocker
Sheena is a punk rocker now
Sheena is a punk rocker
Sheena is a punk rocker
Sheena is a punk rocker now...
Where I come from, to insult a man is to challenge him to a fight. Perhaps “progress” has eroded that old-fashioned sensibility down home since I was a boy growing up in Georgia, but surviving to adulthood was not necessarily guaranteed in the culture in which I was raised. My junior year of high school, a quarrel arose between two boys over some no-account, two-timing girl. Neither of those boys made it to graduation. One went to the graveyard, and one went to prison.
Avoid trouble, if possible, but be prepared to defend yourself. Don’t be a bully, don’t let some fool taunt you into throwing the first punch, and don’t go around insulting people just to start trouble.
We were raised by old-fashioned country people. Douglas County, Georgia, started growing fast in the 1970s, but it hadn’t yet become the overcrowded suburb it is now. A rural ethos still prevailed, and you couldn’t just call 911 if somebody started trouble. Fistfights were regarded as just part of life, and it wasn’t the kind of culture where people filed assault charges. People settled their own quarrels, and maybe a boy would get suspended a few days for fighting, but unless there was a knife or a gun involved, fighting wasn’t generally regarded as a crime.
“Never hit a girl” was a rule we were taught from childhood. Only a coward would ever raise his hand to a woman. Did “domestic violence” happen? I’m sure it did, but such people were considered trash.
Life was actually more civilized, in many ways, before we had so much “progress,” and I’m sure I’m not the only old guy who perceives this. The late, great Southern humorist Lewis Grizzard once published a book called I Haven’t Understood Anything Since 1962 which summarized his attitude toward “progress.” Fortunately, I was able to continue understanding things up until about 1993, at least, but I digress . . .
Many times when I remind readers that Feminism Is a Totalitarian Movement to Destroy Civilization as We Know It, some commenters will object to my categorical statement: “Not all feminists.”
Sure. OK. Maybe there are women who call themselves “feminists” who aren’t fanatically devoted to the idea that stabbing babies in the head is among their constitutional rights. Maybe there are women who call themselves “feminists” who aren’t blue-haired “nonbinary queers” with facial piercings who enjoy beating up anyone who “misgenders” them. It’s possible, I suppose, that there are some women who call themselves “feminists” who are not constantly ranting about “misogyny” and “the male gaze” while demanding the destruction of “our capitalist imperialist white supremacist cisheteronormative patriarchy.” However, where are these sane, normal “moderate feminists” whose existence is so often alleged, but are nowhere to be seen in the Year of Our Lord 2018?
... asked myself what does John Cox look like, did an image search, and came back to say forget about it, Republicans. As indicated above, I'm practical about voting, and being practical, I'd probably vote for Cox, but as an observer, my practicality has me predicting that California voters — tasked with deciding between idealism and practicality — will spring for the better looking man.
Yeah, well, Cox is probably toast, as I noted at my entry above.
Well, the results are in, and it's almost a near certainty that far-left loon Gavin Newsom will be the state's next governor.
I didn't vote for John Cox, but I'm heartily throwing my support behind, although I'm not confident it'll do any good. But Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton took roughly 60 percent of the vote in the last two presidential elections, and I'd be surprised if Newsom doesn't come close to matching that statewide.
Gavin Newsom, the favorite of the California Democratic Party's core liberal base, coasted to a first-place finish in Tuesday's primary election for governor and faces a November showdown with John Cox, a multimillionaire Republican hitched to the far-right policies of President Trump.
The results mark a stunning defeat for former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, representing the fall of a politician who embodied the growing power of the Latino electorate when he was elected mayor in 2005. Villaraigosa conceded late in the evening, urging those who voted for him to give their support to his opponent.
“I’m asking you to get behind Gavin Newsom,” said Villaraigosa, surrounded by his family. “I’m asking you to stand up and pressure every one of us — Democrat and Republican alike — pressure every one of us to stand up for you, to fight for you, not just for ourselves, but for all of us for an America and a California where every one of us are growing together.”
Newsom, 50, a former San Francisco mayor who is currently serving his second term as California's lieutenant governor, will face Cox, 62, an Illinois transplant and real estate investor who ran for the U.S. House and Senate twice in Illinois, failing to reach the primary in all three. In 2008, Cox also launched a campaign for president before dropping out when he failed to gain any traction.
At Newsom’s election night party in San Francisco, the Democrat vowed to fight for universal healthcare and tackle the state's housing affordability crisis, while promising to offer policy solutions instead of angry rhetoric.
"In politics today, there’s too much anger,” Newsom told his supporters. “Instead, we offered answers. Resistance with results.”
Cox has poured nearly $5 million into his bid for governor, but his political fortunes grew considerably when Trump fired off a tweet endorsing him in the final weeks of the campaign.
After a five-year hiatus from political office, Villaraigosa hoped to recapture the magic that led to his two terms as mayor of Los Angeles, but failed to stitch together support from enough Latinos, moderates and lower-income Californians to finish in the top two.
Cox declared a second-place victory Tuesday night and wasted no time blasting Newsom and the Democratic Party for California leading the nation in poverty, and government regulations that he said have made homes unaffordable, leading to an explosion of homelessness. In a preview of his general election campaign, Cox pinned the unpopular new gas-tax increase and the so-called sanctuary state policy squarely on Newsom.
“Mr. Newsom, you've had eight years, and your party has made a colossal mess of this once golden state,” Cox told supporters at an election night party held at the U.S. Grant Hotel in downtown San Diego.
Cox said California is in desperate need of a leader with business sense.
"Businesspeople have been elected to office as governor all across this nation to clean up the messes that the politicians have made," Cox said.
Newsom also had a few words for Cox on Tuesday night, yoking the Republican to a president who remains extremely unpopular in California.
“California’s vision and America’s values are one and the same,” Newsom said. “But our values, as you know, are under assault. We’re engaged in an epic battle, and it looks like voters will have a real choice between a governor who will stand up to Donald Trump and a foot solider in his war on California.”
It's Kennedy, who's got her own show nowadays on Fox Business Channel.
Katie Pavlich, who should have her own show on Fox, gave Kennedy a plug yesterday. I don't see the video for the monologue, but Kennedy was on the day before with Steve Hilton, and she gives a rousing analysis of the economy and the impact the Trump administration is having on everyday people (the "populists" of American politics).
. @KennedyNation’s monologue is the best in the business, hands down. If you missed it catch the rerun at 12 am et on @FoxBusiness.
Poppy Harlow does a good job at maintaining objectivity, but it's not until 8:30 minutes into this video where she brings up the issue of the Colorado commission authorities' extreme hostility to religion. I mean, from the case we see intense animus to Christianity:
As the record shows, some of the commissioners at the Commission’s formal, public hearings endorsed the view that
religious beliefs cannot legitimately be carried into the public sphere or commercial domain, disparaged Phillips’ faith as despicable and characterized it as merely rhetorical, and compared his invocation of his sincerely held religious beliefs to defenses of slavery and the Holocaust. No commissioners objected to the comments. Nor were they mentioned in the later state-court ruling or disavowed in the briefs filed here. The comments thus cast doubt on the fairness and impartiality of the Commission’s adjudication of Phillips’ case.
I tweeted:
Leftists like Nina Totenberg are downplaying the Court's ruling, claiming it was decided on the most "narrow grounds," but reading it we see a major statement denouncing the radical left's monstrous religious bigotry and anti-Christian animus. #MasterpieceCakeshop#SCOTUS 🙏 https://t.co/YmJo3xUskj
Actually, it's apparently a very narrow ruling touching on the nature of religious bias in Colorado's anti-discrimination legislation, but either way, conservative proponents of freedom of expression and religious belief are going to be jumping for the moon today.
The Supreme Court on Monday ruled for a Colorado baker who refused to create a wedding cake for a gay couple.
In an opinion by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy that leaves many questions unanswered, the court held that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission had not adequately taken into account the religious beliefs of baker Jack Phillips.
In fact, Kennedy said, the commission had been hostile to Baker’s faith, denying him the neutral consideration he deserved. While the justices split in their reasoning, only Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented.
Kennedy wrote that the question of when religious beliefs must give way to anti-discrimination laws might be different in future cases. But in this case, he said, Phillips did not get the proper consideration.
“The Court’s precedents make clear that the baker, in his capacity as the owner of a business serving the public, might have his right to the free exercise of religion limited by generally applicable laws,” he wrote. “Still, the delicate question of when the free exercise of his religion must yield to an otherwise valid exercise of state power needed to be determined in an adjudication in which religious hostility on the part of the State itself would not be a factor in the balance the State sought to reach. That requirement, however, was not met here.”
Phillips contended that dual guarantees in the First Amendment — for free speech and for the free exercise of religion — protect him against Colorado’s public accommodations law, which requires businesses to serve customers equally regardless of “disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, or ancestry.”
Scattered across the country, florists, bakers, photographers and others have claimed that being forced to offer their wedding services to same-sex couples violates their rights. Courts have routinely turned down the business owners, as the Colorado Court of Appeals did in the Phillips case, saying that state anti-discrimination laws require businesses that are open to the public to treat all potential customers equally.
There’s no dispute about what triggered the court case in 2012, when same-sex marriage was prohibited in Colorado. Charlie Craig and David Mullins decided to get married in Massachusetts, where it was legal. They would return to Denver for a reception, and those helping with the plans suggested they get a cake from Masterpiece bakery...
Sohpie Mudd is the biggest deal on social media. She’s done gone viral and I am ready for her to take the reigns from all those aging big titty girls we are bored of seeing.
Volare, oh, oh, away from the maddening crowds, we can leave the confusion and all disillusion behind! Such has often been the chant of Italians in search of the elusive political rainbow. "Così Cosà" may have had little meaning when sung in the Marx Brothers film A Night at the Opera, but its gist of tolerant acceptance is meaningful in the effervescent world of Italian politics.
Changing of governments is a familiar fad in Italy. Since the end of World War II 73 years ago, Italy has had 64 governments, and six in the last ten years.
On June 1, 2018, an agreement was reached by the two leading parties in parliament to form the 65th, a coalition government, an improbable and unnatural mixture of left and right, a populist coalition with contradictory policies, to end the weeks of political chaos and wrangling, the longest stalemate in Italian politics.
The political and economic crisis since March 2018 destabilized not only the Italian, but also the European financial system, at least temporarily. With the appointment of a new government, European stocks closed higher. Yet are the barbarians within the city walls? The question remains whether the populists in power with their sharp rhetoric and outlook are a danger to democratic institutions and whether they can reach harmony with the Italian elite and abide by the fiscal rules of the European Union, already troubled by Brexit and other matters.
Italy is the fourth largest country in the E.U., accounting for 15.4% of the eurozone's GDP and 23% of its public debt. But 32% of those under 25, and 10% of all Italians, are unemployed. Only 64% of young people with degrees are employed. Next to Greece, Italy has the highest debt level in the E.U., 132% of GDP, more than twice the E.U. requirement.
A variety of issues confront the new government: membership of the eurozone; the need for economic growth and productivity; the proposals for guaranteed income, pensions, and flat income tax; more foreign investment; reversal of E.U. free trade rules; immigration, 181,000 in 2016; and change in international relations and closer ties with Russia.
The new coalition brings together the two leading parties, the Five Star and the League (formerly the Northern League), and an odd couple of young leaders. To this has been added a compromise figure, a little known University of Florence academic lawyer, 53-year-old Giuseppe Conte, a man with no previous political experience, as prime minister, heading a cabinet of 18, of whom five are women. It is curious that Conte has stated he "perfected" his legal studies at NYU and the Sorbonne, though neither university has any record of him.
In the inconclusive March 2018 election for the 630 seats in Parliament, the two populist anti-establishment and anti-European parties won 349 seats. Five Star, a party formed in 2009 mainly by stand up comedian Beppe Grillo, got 32% of the vote and 222 seats, mostly in the South, while the League got 17% and 124 seats, mostly in the industrial North.
The Five Star is now led by a telegenic, easygoing, youngish looking Neapolitan millennial, 31-year-old Luigi Di Maio. He spoke strongly against corruption and for direct democracy. He came out equally strongly for a referendum on the eurozone, which he called a failed economic and social experiment, but he seems, taking the position of minister of labor and industry, to have moderated his position in recent weeks.
The leader of the League is the Milanese-born 45-year-old Matteo Salvini, college drop-out, tireless campaigner, and shrewd manipulator of social media, who changed the stance of the party from a regional group calling for the wealthy North to secede from Italy to a far-right party like the French F.N. Much of his success was based on his opposition to immigration, especially the 750,000 who had entered since 2011, and his call for mass deportation and for deportation centers around Italy. Now that he has become interior minister, it remains to be seen whether he will implement his proposals. He is said to have praised Russian president Vladimir Putin, opposes sanctions against Russia, and seeks closer ties with Russia. For the U.S., this appears more significant than his complicated sex life.
The two populist parties are divided on issues...
Yeah, let's see those deportations from Italy, heh. Heads will explode in Brussels, and among American bleeding-heart leftists.
IUKA, Miss. — When Chris McDaniel first ran for Senate four years ago, his campaign became a cause for disaffected and restless Republicans across the country. Activists waving “Don’t Tread on Me” flags flooded Mississippi. Tea Party-aligned groups spent millions supporting him. Donald J. Trump — who was still a year away from announcing his presidential campaign — took notice and tweeted his endorsement: “He is strong, he is smart & he wants things to change in Washington.”
Mr. McDaniel, a state senator and an attorney, received more votes than any other candidate in that Republican primary, but eventually lost in a runoff to the incumbent, Thad Cochran. But now as Mr. McDaniel embarks on another run for Senate, his campaign contributions are a fraction of what they were in 2014. On a good night, a few dozen people show up to hear him speak. And President Trump is so far keeping his distance from the race.
Mr. McDaniel’s faded political fortunes point up one of the more unforeseen effects of Mr. Trump’s leadership of the Republican Party. Instead of elevating the renegade, insurgent conservatives who have vowed to challenge party leaders in Washington — candidates who are politically and temperamentally cut from the same cloth as the president — Mr. Trump has effectively shut off the oxygen to the noisiest and most fractious wing of his party.
He has endorsed almost every incumbent Republican senator, making it much more difficult for challengers like Mr. McDaniel to wage the kind of primary fights that have sown division inside the party for most of the last decade. In Alabama, Nevada and West Virginia, Mr. Trump has actively worked against candidates that had strong support from grass-roots conservatives.
And while the president has publicly carped at Speaker Paul D. Ryan and Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader — while also privately badmouthing them as unreliable and weak — he has maintained a partnership of mutual convenience with these frequent targets of the right’s ire.
Mr. Trump’s repositioning has led some self-styled conservative agitators to acknowledge that their bomb-throwing, anti-establishment playbook is in need of refinement.
“People are starting to realize that the anti-establishment thing is kind of a luxury we can’t afford right now,” said Stephen K. Bannon, the president’s former chief strategist who six months ago said it was his objective to see Mr. McConnell removed as the Senate Republican leader.
That effort has been put on hold. And Mr. Bannon’s rebellion has considerably smaller ambitions than it did six months ago, when he was trying to recruit challengers to every Republican incumbent senator up for re-election this year, with the exception of Ted Cruz of Texas...
Power corrupts? Nah. I think President Trump --- and his erstwhile advisers like Bannon --- are strategic politicians, and now in the driver's seat, they're careful about maintaining a pragmatic working coalition. It's not like they haven't been doing anything, especially on the economy.
Just as the people in Mariners Church began to pull off their hats, bow their heads and close their eyes to pray, Jimmy Meeks snapped at them.
"Get those heads up!" said the pastor and retired Texas police officer.
Hadn't he just warned them that closing their eyes made them targets? Sheep in the presence of wolves.
"What's wrong with y'all?"
Their eyes duly peeled, he then led the crowd in a prayer.
"Wherever we are, Father, should the wolf cross our path, give us the wisdom to know what to do with that moment, and give us the power and the courage to act to stop the wolf and protect our sons and daughters."
Churchgoers, preachers and law enforcement officers from across Southern California had gathered for a church security seminar in Huntington Beach hosted by the California Rifle & Pistol Assn., which delivered a warning: Faith alone will not protect you in a house of God.
In the sleek sanctuary of Mariners Church, the mostly male crowd sipped coffee, jotted notes and punctured the air with shouts of "Amen!" and "Hooah!" as a series of out-of-town speakers at the Sheepdog Seminar encouraged them to be the ones who step up and protect others if, God forbid, an attacker comes.
In the months since a gunman in November killed 26 people at the First Baptist Church in rural Sutherland Springs, Texas, many people of faith have begun questioning how to keep religious institutions safe, said Rick Travis, executive director of the California Rifle & Pistol Assn. His organization has been inundated with requests for church security training and probably will be hosting events for the next several years, he said.
"We don't want people to be afraid," said Travis, a churchgoer himself. "We want people to be knowledgeable."
The seminar happened four days before a mass shooting at Santa Fe High School in Texas killed 10 people, mostly students, and reignited the never-ending debate over gun control, the 2nd Amendment and the place of firearms in American society.
Appearing on Sunday morning news programs, Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said that teachers need to be armed. He said guns are not the problem.
"Guns stop crimes," he said on ABC's "This Week." "If we take the guns out of society — if you or anyone else thinks that that makes us safer, then I'm sad to say that you're mistaken. That will just give those that are evil … [the ability] to put more of us in danger."
Were the assembled at the church safety event being told to pack heat in the pews? Not always in so many words — and that wasn't the whole kit and caboodle of advice. But if you're legally able to carry a gun, the speakers said, it's best to do it.
"If you do not have an armed presence in your church, you are simply not ready," Meeks said...
And 4.8 percent is big, big growth for the U.S. economy. Normally, if we start getting above 3 percent the Fed wants to raise interests rates and put on the brakes. The big growth numbers will scare the s**t out of our trading partners, especially the Europeans, who can pound sand and suck on their double-digit unemployment rates.
Around the world, progressive economies like those of Sweden, France, and Germany, which redistribute wealth through high taxes and generous social welfare policies, boast far less poverty and inequality than other nations.
What gives? And how does California maintain its reputation as a progressive leader given the reality on the ground?
If racism is more than just saying nasty things — if it is, as scholars like James Baldwin, Ta-Nehisi Coates, Michelle Alexander and countless others have described, embedded into socioeconomic structures — then California isn’t just the least progressive state. It’s also the most racist.
Real World “Elysium”
In the 2013 science fiction film, “Elysium,” the rich have fled to a luxury satellite orbiting Earth while the poor toil in dangerous conditions below. Life in California today differs in degree, not in kind, from that dystopian vision...
Ms. Kelly continues to wear the extra pounds, but amazingly, her "hourglass" body distributed the extra weight pleasingly. She's lucky in that way, I guess.
I have to say I've never been one to avoid engaging in schadenfreude upon witnessing the defeats of the left, but in the case of Ben Rhodes, I felt sorrow. The man is captured in the moment when he was completely broken, morally and emotionally annihilated. His body, particularly his brain, is literally shutting down. It's a physiological defense mechanism, I imagine to protect the human body from the trauma. There's a non-processing going that is in fact horrible to witness, and I felt bad for Rhodes.
Am a glad he lost? Absolutely. I just think there are many cases when private moments should remain private, and this is one. From what I can remember, Rhodes is a pretty nasty guy, an extreme partisan of the Democrats' agenda, so perhaps he had some of the finger-pointing humiliation coming. But for me, I can only imagine how I felt in 2008 when John McCain lost, and how devastated I was for months. It hurts.
Lots of so-called conservative tweeps were rolling at this on Twitter, but again, just watch for yourself. Ben Rhodes must have consented to this being included in the documentary, so there's that, in any case.
Ben Rhodes reacting to Hillary Clinton's hilarious defeat in 2016 is the funniest part of the new Obama Documentary on HBO.
What makes it even better is throughout the documentary he brags how she is going to win. pic.twitter.com/MGBQNE5ATY
— The Columbia Bugle 🇺🇸 (@ColumbiaBugle) May 30, 2018
This a phenomenal essay. Just read the whole thing at the link. Roger Kimball is one of the very best writing and the disasters that have visited our society.
I sometimes wonder if we'll ever turn things around, but then, we did get President Trump?
ABC has done the right thing. They’ve stood up against racism. It is our country’s original sin. But this is 2018 and it has no place in the hearts of decent people. Unfortunately our president has stoked these evil fires. If he doesn’t applaud ABC, he will continue to stoke evil
#Roseanne effed up. She had to know what would happen by making a stupid crack like that. This is the chance the left was waiting for, and to them, its the beginning of a purge. Trump’s the ultimate target, BAMN. 🤷♂️ https://t.co/3H0NzqrD0z
I use Rep. Rep. Linda Sánchez as an example of newer-style Members of Congress and congressional careers. She represents the 38th district, right next to my college, so she's an interesting example to discuss. Some students live in the district. And she's been in Congress since 2003, so she's got considerable seniority. And of course, she's a Latina.
In any case, she spoke out a year ago about Nancy Pelosi's entrenched leadership, and called for generational change. She's totally right, of course, but now she's in the cross hairs apparently. You know Pelosi's a vindictive bitch, so no matter what happens in the November elections, Sánchez is going to be fighting to keep her spot among the top Democrats in the House.
Rep. Linda Sánchez called for a new generation of Democratic leadership. Her allies fear it might cost her her own spot in the upper echelon.https://t.co/kO600ptfUm
Forget Nancy Pelosi. The most endangered member of House Democratic leadership is its most recent entrant and the highest-ranking Latina in Congress, Rep. Linda Sánchez.
As vice chairwoman of the Democratic Caucus, Sánchez occupies the obscure No. 5 spot in Democratic ranks, a position deemed the “potted plant” of leadership by veteran lawmakers. But what is normally a launching pad to greater ambitions could be a blunt end to Sánchez’s so-far promising leadership career as some members have her in their cross hairs come November.
For Sánchez, the trouble started last fall when she shocked the caucus by publicly calling for a change in House Democrats’ leadership regime, long led by Pelosi, Minority Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland and Assistant Minority Leader Jim Clyburn of South Carolina.
It was a sentiment dozens of lawmakers have shared privately — but it was unheard of for a member of leadership to express to the media.
For her part, a defiant Sánchez shrugged off any potential blowback — even if that includes getting booted from leadership.
“It’s not about me, it’s about the future of the caucus,” Sánchez told Politico. “My ultimate goal is to leave behind a stronger Democratic Caucus with an effective majority because I think that would leave the country better off. That’s my ambition for my congressional career.”
The dilemma facing Sánchez is at the heart of tensions within the Democratic Caucus over its static top leadership. Pelosi and her team have made it clear they want to stay in power if Democrats win back the House in November, but their decade-plus reign has left a wake of frustrated younger members with little room to advance.
Sánchez gave voice to frustrations that most members are comfortable expressing only privately, and lawmakers say they’re watching closely to see whether she pays a price for speaking out.
What happens to Sánchez also has significant implications for the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and its influence over leadership. She’s not the only prominent member of the group who might want to move up in the ranks where few slots, if any, might be open.
Rep. Ben Ray Luján of New Mexico could push for a promotion if his stint as chairman of Democrats’ campaign arm helps them win back the House. Other prominent CHC members, including Reps. Joaquin Castro of Texas and Pete Aguilar of California, are also mentioned in the leadership mix, according to members.
Interviews with 20 Democratic lawmakers and aides indicate an overwhelming sense that Sánchez will face a challenge for her leadership post this fall. But opinions are mixed as to whether she’s built up enough loyalty within the caucus to beat back a potential opponent.
So far, no one has stepped forward to say they are planning to challenge Sánchez. And the California Democrat could even have an opportunity to move up if the top three leaders step aside, especially if Democrats underperform in the midterm elections...
I watched TV all day yesterday, which is unusual for me, since I don't watch that much TV, except for baseball. I recalled that HBO plays the entire 10-part "Band of Brothers" series on Memorial Day, and I tuned in around 9:00am. And once I got going, I couldn't stop watching. I love that show. I love it more than just about anything else ever made.
After it was over on the West Coast, I clicked over to the main HBO channel and caught the new documentary of John McCain. It was surprisingly good. McCain generates intense passion, if not hatred, so folks can just take my word for it, or just watch it and judge for themselves. McCain's a patriot, no doubt. But that doesn't absolve him from the disgusting wishy-washy flip-flopping he's engaged in his entire life, and of which he's now currently engaging with relative gusto. All the bad calls he's made, the one's that don't accord with the radical left's cultural PC dominance, are now jettisoned for the convenience of preserving a legacy. The biggest repudiation he's made is of selecting Sarah Palin as his running mate in 2008. Actually, I think that's one of the best things he's ever done. If he hadn't chosen Palin it's likely that Obama would have matched the Electoral College victories of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan in 1972 and 1984, respectively. That is, McCain would have probably one just his home state of Arizona if it wasn't for Palin on the ticket. She energized conservatives around the country and give the GOP a real forward/progressive orientation. Say what you will about Sarah Palin --- not the least of which she was often a policy lightweight --- the woman is genuine and genuinely conservative, and perhaps paved the way for the Trump administration today, and the resurgence of the regular, red-blooded Americanism that has driven the left-wing establishment literally insane since November 8, 2016.
Now John McCain's even saying that his support for the Iraq war was a mistake. Really, really, that's a bridge too far for me. It wasn't a mistake. McCain was right all along, and he would have been right for our country. Islamic State would have never emerged under a McCain presidency. The nucleus of the organization was crushed in the Bush administration's surge. But Barack Obama's precipitous withdrawal, which led to the rise of ISIS and the Syrian civil war and humanitarian crisis, squandered all of the heroic sacrifices made to secure the Iraqi people. McCain's attempt to whitewash his legacy is pathetic.
Sure, he's a genuine war hero. He shouldn't ever be attacked for his service. But his service shouldn't exempt him from criticism of his mistakes, and absolving his mistakes is the central goal of "For Whom the Bell Tolls."
I've been boycotting Starbucks for a while. The company's closing 8,000 stores today for "unconscious bias training," which sounds like a joke to me and won't change my mind. In fact, it makes me even less likely to go there for a cup of coffee: too left wing.
Philip Roth’s Best Book: Gary Shteyngart, Richard Ford, Ron Chernow, Lorrie Moore, Stephen King, Michael Lewis, Joseph O’Neill on their favorite Roth books. https://t.co/Xixsh8NeYc
— Michiko Kakutani (@michikokakutani) May 25, 2018
The death of Philip Roth this week led to near instantaneous debate about which of his books was his best. There was the transgressive Roth; the epic, historical Roth; the personal, memoiristic Roth; the postmodernist playful Roth. His genius has been an inspiration and a prod to a few generations of writers now. And it usually comes down to the individual book, that one book, which first opened their mouths in awe.
In that spirit, we asked a number of great, contemporary novelists, critics and historians, to make their own case for Roth’s greatest book. It’s silly to have to choose, of course, but for those only now coming to his work, consider these good places to start.
These two are grand sweeping epics, covering centuries. Start with Saylor as you jump into this fiction literature on Ancient Rome. Saylor and then Colleen McCullough.
Danica Patrick's race car is painted in a lustrous neon green one last time, a hue that ensures its "look at me" quality even when the car is a 230-mph blur.
The color is apropos of Patrick and her racing career, which she's ending Sunday with a final attempt to win the Indianapolis 500, the race that initially made her famous in 2005.
From that race forward, Patrick — often driving the shiny green car favored by her and her longtime main sponsor, the web services firm GoDaddy Inc. — has been the driver everyone watched, analyzed and endlessly debated.
That was due not only to her on-track achievements as a female in a male-dominated sport, but also to her relentless self-promotion, which together earned her the one-name celebrity of being simply "Danica."
"I can't think of a better way to end my racing career than at Indianapolis for the 500," the 36-year-old Patrick said in an interview. "I can't think of a more cool way to be done.
"I mean, to finish up at a place that has so many good memories for me, and at the biggest race of the year for Indy cars and arguably the biggest race of the year, period," she said.
Patrick achieved several firsts as a woman in the IndyCar and NASCAR racing series, and in doing so became a role model for countless young women and their parents who admired her feats, tough persona and unflagging determination.
No less than seven-time NASCAR champion Jimmie Johnson tweeted earlier this year: "Thank you @danicapatrick for being a strong role model to the little girls in my life," referring to his two young daughters.
Patrick's fame also was burnished by her blunt, outspoken manner, her savvy marketing of her personal "brand" that earned her millions of dollars in endorsements, and by the outsized media attention she always received.
Patrick's overall record on the track was middling; she had one victory in 13 years of big-league racing. That fueled the debate about whether she deserved the attention she received and made the Roscoe, Ill., native one of the most polarizing figures in sports.
"I don't know that we've seen someone who is so popular when not performing as well," said Greg Goldring, senior director of sports and entertainment at the Marketing Arm, a marketing agency.
Her impact on motor racing will be argued long after the 102nd running of the iconic race, one of the biggest one-day sporting events in the world. Patrick is adamant that she's not going to just circle the track as more than 250,000 spectators and millions more on television look on.