Tag Archives: responsibilities

Precious Self-Importance

Posted on by
Reply

The media has it.

And its arrogance is wrong.

According to CNN’s Chris Cuomo, possessing the stolen John Podesta emails is a crime — unless you’re a member of the media.

“Remember, it’s illegal to possess these stolen documents,” Mr Cuomo said on air. “It’s different for the media, so everything you learn about this, you’re learning from us.”

Because we’re the Cool Kids.

It’s hard to believe that these folks, for whom words are their stock in trade, and for whom the 1st Amendment is central to their trade, don’t know this.  What does that say about media integrity?

Holding out for Perfection

Posted on by
Reply

William McGurn, of The Wall Street Journal, had some thoughts on this as it concerns NeverTrumpers [emphasis added].

Give the Never Trumpers their due: most do not shy away from the implication that anyone who would vote for Mr Trump is as low and base as he is. Their problem is that the argument doesn’t seem to be having much traction with Republican voters. …

One reason may be that the argument about morally corrupt GOP voters is not really an argument. More precisely, it’s an argument Republicans typically hear from the left. Instead of weighing the prosaic facts—i.e., the practical ramifications of having Mrs Clinton sitting in the Oval Office versus Mr Trump—how much easier it is to try to end all discussion by pronouncing the GOP nominee repellent.

Because forming a rational argument on the matter is as repugnant to NeverTrumpers as it is to Progressives like Clinton and Obama (and Reid and Schumer and Pelosi) and to Democrats generally.

This will only get NeverTrumpers Clinton as president.

It’s hard to believe these folks—grown, adult, rational human beings all—don’t know that.  Maybe NeverTrumpers just don’t care one way or the other.  Maybe they’re just abdicating their responsibility by hiding behind their demand for purity rather than doing what’s least damaging.  Or what’s possible.

State Department and Quid Pro Quo

Posted on by
Reply

Another thought on State’s quid pro quo offer to the FBI occurs to me based on an exchange between Fox News‘ Catherine Herridge and State Department spokesman Mark Toner concerning the FBI’s 302 (interview summary form) containing the apparent offer.  The relevant part of the exchange began with Herridge calling out Toner on his denial of certain facts.

“[Redacted] indicated he had been contacted by PATRICK KENNEDY, Undersecretary of State, who had asked his assistance in altering the email’s classification in exchange for a ‘quid pro quo.’ “[Redacted] advised that in exchange for marking the email unclassified, STATE would reciprocate by allowing the FBI to place more Agents in countries where they are presently forbidden.”

“I mean, this conflicts directly with what you’re saying today,” Herridge said after reading it aloud.

“I’m sorry,” Toner said, smiling. “I could speak to the fact that 302s are simply interviews conducted by the FBI.”

“So you’re saying the FBI agent either got it wrong or is lying in this 302?” Herridge asked.

“I can’t speak to what his or her intentions were, saying these kinds of things, but clearly expressing a personal opinion about what happened,” Toner said. “Any, really, assertion that this was somehow tit for tat or quid pro quo, exchange in that manner, really, frankly is insulting.”

No, Toner, what’s insulting is your cynical, Alinsky-esque refusal to answer the question and your attempt at deflecting by insulting the questioner.

Vetting Refugees

Posted on by
Reply

Democratic Party Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton in 2013 told the Jewish United Fund of Metropolitan Chicago at their Vanguard Luncheon that Jordan, which was (and still is) in its crisis of handling refugees from the Syrian civil war, that had no hope of effectively understanding who those refugees were and which among them actually were jihadist terrorists.

[Jordan has] hundreds of thousands of refugees and they can’t possibly vet all those refugees so they don’t know if, you know, jihadists are coming in along with legitimate refugees.

But she wants to increase the number of Syrian refugees allowed into the US by some 500%, even though our own ability to vet them is no better than Jordan’s: the initial data on these folks just doesn’t exist.

This is something Clinton either has not thought through, or she doesn’t care and is just saying sweet words in order to garner votes.

With her words, though, Clinton did echo Republican Party Presidential candidate Donald Trump’s call for “extreme vetting” of those we let into the US from terrorist-held territory and from terrorist-supporting nations:

We also have to be vigilant in screening and vetting refugees from Syria, guided by the best judgment of our security and diplomatic professionals.

Can we trust her?

Trigger Warning

Posted on by
Reply

American University’s student government president Devontae Torriente, in a move all too typical of our colleges and universities, wants everything taught at the school to come with a trigger warning.

The fact of the matter is, trigger warnings are necessary in order to make our academic spaces accessible to all students, especially those who have experienced trauma[.]

Sure.  Because the dear ones are unable to overcome their hurt feelings and learn to think.

Here’s trigger warning for all prospective pupils and students: American colleges and universities are rife with offensive, macroaggressive “trigger warnings” that various course materials require consideration of differing views, and these same colleges and universities have (not “may have”) “safe spaces” restricting freely spoken thoughts that encompass the entirety of the campus.

These are extremely offensive and depressing aggressions against those students who are there to learn, via the subject matter of their majors, how to think critically and rationally, how to consider opposing and even uncomfortable ideas, and how to get ahead in a real world that is indifferent to precious feelings.

Here’s an alternative action for these fragile ones: stay home in your domestic safe spaces.  The fact of the matter is the world is not a safe space, and work spaces in the world don’t come with trigger warnings.