Tag Archives: responsibilities

On Whose Side Is He?

Posted on by
1

[Steve] Bannon has been recruiting and promoting challengers to GOP incumbents and the party’s preferred candidates in next year’s midterm elections.

And

…it could also imperil Republican majorities in the House and Senate.

Indeed.  He’s trying to get farther right candidates nominated in place of incumbents, but he’s likely to drag the party too far right to suit a center-right population of Americans, force serious candidates to expend resources on frivolous primaries (rather than primaries involving serious Conservative candidates), even get candidates like Christine O’Donnell, Todd Akin, or Sharron Angle nominated—which in their time cost the Republicans entirely winnable Senate seats..

He could do more good for the Republican Party, and frankly for our Republic, by doing these things within the Progressive-Democratic Party to ensure incumbents spend their resources on primaries and are dragged farther left, even get Left-wing extremists nominated onto the Progressive-Democratic tickets in the general elections.

Of course Bannon knows all of this full well.  Hence my question.  Is he really willing to risk the Senate and lose the chance for a Republican President and Senate to get more Conservative jurists appointed to the Supreme Court and to our lower Federal courts?

Or, another question: is this just sour grapes run amok because Bannon can’t be a White House player anymore?

One More Reason

Posted on by
Reply

…for charter and voucher schools, this time provided by the Biloxi (public) School District.  They’ve banned Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird from its 8th grade classrooms.  Why?

…some of the book’s language “makes people uncomfortable.”

Never mind that proper education must make people uncomfortable because it challenges their preconceived notions, it makes them think, it makes them think for themselves.  It even confronts students with uncomfortable aspects of our history, like Atticus Finch explaining to his daughter, Scout, the term “nigger-lover.”  Or Tom Robinson referring to himself, ironically, as a nigger.

No, we have to raise precious little snowflakes unable to take care of themselves in adulthood.

Never mind, either, that the Web site associated with the district says that

To Kill A Mockingbird teaches students that compassion and empathy don’t depend upon race or education.

Instead, the school has ducked the question:

School board Vice President Kenny Holloway says other books can teach the same lessons.

No, very few do, and those that do don’t do it nearly as well.

Protests

Posted on by
Reply

Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says that NFL players should voice their concerns about racial injustice without “alienating” people.

Whatever the players were trying to do in drawing attention to these issues, it’s gone another way now in that people have stopped listening to each other.

Indeed, the players’ “protest” could go no other way since their path centered on attacking our nation’s flag and anthem and insulting those who fought for what these symbolize.

The best form of protest against racial injustice, or any other form of injustice, is to succeed, loudly and publicly, despite the bigotry.  Like folks like Condoleezza Rice; Muhammad Ali; Martin Luther King, Jr; Jackie Robinson; and a potful of others, including old, dead guys like Martin Luther, Galileo, et al., have done.

The second best form of protest is to protest the injustice itself rather than going off message to protest via something else in an effort to cutesify the message.

Civil War

Posted on by
1

Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy demanded that Catalonia “clarify” its position following its referendum on independence from Spain following Catalonian President Carles Puigdemont’s declaration of Catalonian independence and his immediate suspension of that in favor of a period of negotiation with Madrid.

However, Rajoy’s pretended confusion says volumes about him without adding a syllable to the subject’s discussion.  His pretense is nothing but an attempt to obfuscate and distract from his deliberate decision to use violence to suppress a referendum when he could have peacefully arrested the referendum leaders in the aftermath of its defeat at the polls.

Rajoy’s preference for violence and its import are confirmed by Rajoy’s subsequent step.

[T]he Spanish government triggered the first step toward invoking Article 155 in the name of preserving the unity of the nation.

Article 155 of the Spanish constitution—a brief provision modeled on a similar measure in Germany’s constitution—allows the central government to suspend some of the powers of a region under specific conditions.

This is just a naked exercise in power and not at all a willingness to accept—or even begin discussing acceptance of—Puigdemont’s olive branch.

Madrid, by acting in ways that would force a civil war seems more interested in that than in any peaceful resolution.  Indeed, Rajoy is seeking to preempt peace.

This is about Rajoy’s ego and his demand for power and the abject surrender of his enemies.

Progressive-Democrats and Harvey Weinstein

Posted on by
1

I’m not going to comment on Weinstein’s guilt or innocence—after all, all we know is what the press has chosen to publish on that particular: women’s accusations and other Weinstein associates’ professions ignorance of his behavior (while lately claiming to be appalled after the Left disputed their ignorance).  I’m a throwback—innocent until proven guilty at trial, not guilt by woman’s accusation.

What interests me in this case is the status of Weinstein’s donations to Progressive-Democrat candidates for office.

Some have kept the money and are staying quiet about it: the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Senatorial and Congressional Campaign Committees, and Hillary Clinton, for instance.  Some have returned the money to Weinstein or to his donating organization and chosen not to wallow in their martyrdom about it.

However, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D, NY), Senator Elizabeth Warren (D, MA), Senator Cory Booker (D, NJ), Senator Al Franken (D, MN), Senator Martin Heinrich (D, MN), Richard Blumenthal (D, CT), and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D, NY) have chosen to give money equivalent to the donation amounts they received from Weinstein to charity.

Notice that: they’re not returning the money.  No, they’re touting their alleged generosity in this scandal by making tax deductible donations with this tainted money.  They’re pocketing some of that Weinstein money and making us pay, with our tax money, for the “donations.”

Hmm….