Category Archives: politics

The NLMSM Throws a Temper Tantrum

Posted on by
Reply

The AP has gotten its panties in a twist, and the rest of the NLMSM seems to be joining them.  President Donald Trump’s Press Secretary, Sean Spicer, is committing the unpardonable sin of not calling on the AP for the first question at his daily noon press briefing and Q&A.  Monday and Tuesday, Spicer called on a New York Post and a LifeZette reporter, respectively.  On Wednesday, it was The Washington Times‘ reporter who asked the first question.

And this, from the AP itself:

Spicer taking the first question from Stinson attracted notice because, before Trump, major news outlets were traditionally called upon to open White House press conferences and briefings.

Isn’t that precious?  The only notice it drew from the adults in the briefing room was that finally press outlets other than the self-important few were getting a chance to ask questions for their publications.

The only notice it drew from us Americans across the nation was, “How refreshing.”

Oh, and, the AP’s major news outlets consists in particular, as the record notes even if the AP won’t, of the AP.

Federal Education Fail

Posted on by
Reply

Reason enough to gut, if not dismantle altogether, the Department of Education is this bit of waste [emphasis in the original].  I disagree, though, that there was no effect.  Those $7 billion clearly had an effect of Arne Duncan’s cronies and those of his staffers in the upper reaches of the DoE.

Despite its gargantuan price tag, [School Improvement Grant program] SIG generated no academic gains for the students it was meant to help. Failing schools that received multi-year grants from the program to “turn around” ended up with results no better than similar schools that received zero dollars from the program. To be clear: billions spent had no effect.

From The Washington Post:

Test scores, graduation rates and college enrollment were no different in schools that received money through the School Improvement Grants program—the largest federal investment ever targeted to failing schools—than in schools that did not.

Suspiciously,

The Education Department did not track how the money was spent, other than to note which of the four strategies schools chose.

Andy Smarick, American Enterprise Institute resident fellow:

Think of what all that money could have been spent on instead.

Indeed.

The US Embassy to Israel

Posted on by
Reply

The fear that moving the US embassy to Jerusalem will have unforeseen consequences—or even foreseen: Palestinian terrorist violent opprobrium—is entirely justified. What isn’t justifiable is using this as an excuse to not make the move. The embassy should be moved, with due planning for protections against and responses to violence attempted against the newly located embassy and Jerusalem at large.

Any idea that the embassy move should be done only after a peace agreement has been made with the Palestinians and their acceptance of a part of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital also is ludicrous. Neither Hamas nor the Palestinian Authority will agree to such a thing.  Hamas does not and will not even agree to Israel’s right to exist, and the PA hasn’t sufficient control over its population—even did it agree with Israel’s right to exist—to make any agreements regarding Israel’s capital.

Move the embassy.

 

h/t Mosaic Magazine

Lies of the Democrats

Posted on by
Reply

Among other things that President Donald Trump did last Monday was sign an Executive Order preventing federal money from being provided to international NGOs that perform abortions or provide information about them and also preventing federal money from going to groups that lobby to legalize abortion or promote it as a family planning method.  Here’s what House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi had to say on the matter (David Smith, author of The Guardian piece at the link, who labeled Pelosi the Senate Minority Leader, might want to consult with Senator Chuck Schumer (D, NY).  He might also want to consult with House Speaker Paul Ryan, about whom Smith offered speculation concerning why Ryan didn’t bring the TPP treaty up for a vote, another bit of ignorance later in his piece):

Now, foreign non-governmental organisations will be forced to give women incomplete medical information, advice and care in order to participate in US-supported programs abroad.

Of course, Pelosi knows better.  NGOs are not forced to give “incomplete” information; they just don’t get to do it with American citizens’ tax dollars.

This, in addition to Schumer’s stated goal of being as obstructionist as he can in the Senate, is the level of Progressive-Democrat integrity to which we can look forward the next four years.  It’s sad, indeed, that that Party has sunk to such a level.

Definitely Not the People

Posted on by
Reply

The British Supreme Court has thrown a monkey wrench into Great Britain’s going out from the European Union, but in the process, it has thrown a double handful of sand into the gears of liberty in the birthplace of John Locke.

The Court has ruled (by an 8-3 margin; it certainly wasn’t wishy-washy in its attitude) that Parliament must agree to invoke Article 50 and trigger negotiation over terms of separation from the EU.  David Neuberger, President of the Supreme Court, reading the judgment:

The referendum is of great political significance, but the act of Parliament which established it did not say what should happen as a result, so any change in the law to give effect to the referendum must be made in the only way permitted by the UK Constitution, namely by an act of Parliament[.]

So much for consensual government, government by the people, the sovereignty of the people over their government.  The citizens of Great Britain cannot be permitted to change their own law, and never mind that no change was required in the present case, anyway, since the outcome of their referendum, saying as it did, “We want to leave the EU,” was quite clear as to what should happen from their vote.  The Court claimed this was not instructive.  The people did not say to Government, “Mother, may I?”

Naturally, Gina Miller, who’d brought the suit with intent to force Parliament into the decision, agreed, insisting (as paraphrased by the AP) that

[l]eaving the EU will change the fundamental rights of citizens and this can’t be done without a vote of lawmakers[.]

Nor can the people be permitted to define their rights for themselves and instruct their government as to those rights.  That’s for their rulers to do for them.

The people of Great Britain are not sovereign in their nation.  Government is sovereign, and the people are subordinate.