Image 01 Image 03

March 2015

Yesterday, BuzzFeed News published a story about a freshman at Reed College, a small liberal arts school in Portland, Oregon. Nineteen-year-old Jeremiah True told BuzzFeed News he received a letter from his freshman humanities professor, Pancho Savery, banning him from the discussion portion of the class for the rest of the semester. Katie J.M. Baker reported for BuzzFeed News:
...“Please know that this was a difficult decision for me to make and one that I have never made before; nevertheless, in light of the serious stress you have caused your classmates, I feel that I have no other choice,” Savery wrote in the email, obtained by BuzzFeed News. ...True said he sparred with classmates over discussion topics related to ancient Greece and Rome, such as the “patriarchal” belief that logic is more important than emotion and his analysis of Lucretia’s rape. But it was his questioning of the widely shared and often debated statistic that 1 in 5 women in college are sexually assaulted — it doesn’t serve “actual rape victims” to “overinflate” numbers, he said — and his rejection of the term “rape culture” that led to him being banned, he said. “I am critical of the idea of a rape culture because it does not exist,” he wrote in a lengthy email to Savery explaining his perspectives that he has also posted online. “We live in a society that hates rape, but also hasn’t optimized the best way to handle rape. Changing the legal definition of rape is a slippery slope. If sexual assault becomes qualified as rape, what happens next? What else can we legally redefine to become rape? Why would we want to inflate the numbers of rape in our society?”
Today, new information revealed in an article published by Inside Higher Ed suggests BuzzFeed didn't get the whole story. Though it should be noted Professor Savery declined to provide comment to BuzzFeed, but was willing to discuss the matter with Insider Higher Ed.

Liz Mair resigned or was effectively fired by Scott Walker's SuperPAC from her role as communications strategist after some controversial tweets came to light in which she trashed the Iowa caucus process and arguably Iowans. That her policy positions also were more liberal than Walker's factored into the mix. I wrote about this yesterday in explaining why I was Not outraged over Scott Walker and Liz Mair. The reaction from much of the conservative media to Mair's apparent firing was a full-blown freak out stoked, in part, by personal and professional friendships with Mair. Hot Air's Quotes of the Day yesterday is a compilation of conservative media trashing Walker over Mair, with some gloating by liberal media over the in-fighting. Twitchy has more reaction under the headline, Conservatives react to Liz Mair resignation: Is Scott Walker ‘ready for prime time’? There is a consistent theme -- that Walker has shown he is untrustworthy because he didn't stand by Mair, that Walker is tough on the opposition but weak in defending friends, and that Walker has irreparably damaged his presidential candidate credentials in the process. The concern trolling is intense, like this at Mediaite:

Senator Marco Rubio gave one of the best speeches of his career yesterday when he took to the floor in defense of Israel while calling out its critics, including President Obama. Alyssa Canobbio of the Washington Free Beacon reported:
Rubio Delivers Blistering Speech on Obama’s Assault on Israel It has taken two days for Obama to call Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and congratulate him on his reelection. Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry have taken part in very sensitive talks with Iran about its nuclear program. Rubio began speaking on how Obama has always been among the first to call controversial leaders and congratulate them on winning their elections but has remained silent when it came to congratulating on the United States’ biggest ally in the Middle East. Rubio continued, making multiple points that the Obama administration has not stood with Israel.
Rubio cites a litany of examples of the unfair treatment of Israel by the Obama administration and its regional enemies such as Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. This video is 15 minutes long and well worth your time.

In case you missed the latest news, the final results of the Israeli elections are in, and here are the numbers: Likud (Netanyahu): 30 Zionist Union (Yitzchak Herzog): 24 Joint Arab List: 13 Yesh Atid (Yair Lapid): 11 Kulanu (Moshe Kachlon): 10 Bayit Yehudi (Naftali Bennett): 8 Shas (Sephardi haredim): 7 Yisrael Beitenu (Avigdor Liberman): 6 United Torah Judaism (Ashkenazi Haredim): 6 Meretz: 5 I'm sure many of you have been wondering what the average Israeli thinks of the general elections and the Likud's surprising win. The answer will depend on whom you ask. [caption id="attachment_120458" align="alignnone" width="480"]israeli-elections-cards [Israeli voting slips, with the parties' letter-codes rearranged to spell out: "The truth is, they're all liars.][/caption] As an avowed rightist I was both delighted and highly relieved at the result, though as a Naftali Bennett and Bayit Yehudi (Jewish Home) voter, I admit to some disappointment that the party lost several seats, going down from 12 to 8.

Yesterday, Illinois Democrat Dick Durbin took to the floor of the senate and accused the Republican caucus of institutional racism over the postponement of a vote confirming Loretta Lynch as the next attorney general. John McCain was not having it. Today, Senator McCain used his time on the floor to slice into Durbin---and to remind everyone that Democrats have a history of blocking Republican nominees (even the non-white ones!) Watch:

Officials in Austin, Texas are running defense over several acts of vandalism against businesses in the "gentrified" areas of the growing city. Yesterday morning, shop owners came in to find that their businesses had been branded with stickers bearing the Austin city seal proclaiming that the premises were "exclusively for white people." From the Austin Chronicle:
Among the businesses tagged with the stamps – presumably some kind of ironic protest against gentrification – were the Rare Trends clothing store, El Chilito Tacos y Café, Windmill Bicycles, and Sugar Mama's Bakeshop. In addition to the declaration, "exclusively for WHITE PEOPLE," the signs supposedly limit "a maximum of 5 colored customers" and allow only "colored BOH [back of house] staff accepted." Caroline Gray, Director of Sales and Marketing for Rare Trends, said she hadn't seen the sticker when she came in this morning, and was only made aware of it when the phone began ringing with complaints. A post had gone viral on Facebook, and at least some people believed the sticker literally, and that it had been posted by the business itself. "When we found out," Gray said, "we took it down and are keeping it for the police. We understand they are investigating, but we have no idea who did it."
The community was shocked. Business owners were mortified. Nobody really seemed to know who had put the stickers up; not one to miss out on an opportunity, however, local Democrat and state representative Dawnna Dukes immediately took to Facebook to condemn...the shop owners?

The distortion of Benjamin Netanyahu's pre-election statements on a two-state solution and Arab voting was a classic Obama and media distortion. If you take the actual text of Netanyahu said, he never ruled out a two-state solution and never discouraged Arab voting. But those were the headlines and the foaming-at-the mouth hyperbole, fomented by the Obama administration in numerous anonymous statements to the media. Schmuel Rosner has the analysis, from earlier today, Is Obama getting ready to throw Israel under a UN bus?:
Prime Minister Netanyahu has no "newly declared opposition to a Palestinian state". If the White House wants to use a badly framed statement by Netanyahu as an excuse for a change in American policy – if it wants, as the WH hinted, to "turn to the U.N. to help force a deal" with the Palestinians on Israel – it should not come as a great surprise. But Netanyahu's words are the excuse, not the reason, for the change. The reason is Netanyahu's victory and the administrations' vindictive mood toward him and toward the country that elected him.... Netanyahu said a couple of regrettable things in the last, desperate days of his brilliant campaign. ... The second statement was just a poor call for action for the right-wing voters. Netanyahu's record when it comes to policies aimed at integrating Arab Israelis into society is not bad. The first statement was merely an assessment of the situation. Netanyahu did not say that he opposes the two state solution – he said that under current circumstances he doesn't see a Palestinian State established in his coming term as Prime Minister. And he is probably right in this assessment.
The Times of Israel reports on an interview Netanyahu gave today, in which he explained that nothing had changed:

Though the War on Drugs rages on, Nevada pets might be catching a break. Earlier this week, Democratic Senator Tick Segerblom introduced legislation that would further decriminalize marijuana usage in the state of Nevada. Among SB372's many provisions is 'pot for pets.' Pot for pets would allow pet owners to obtain medicinal marijuana for their ailing fur babies with written veterinarian approval. The bill requires written veterinarian consent stating the animal has, "been diagnosed with a chronic or debilitating medical condition; the medical use of marijuana may mitigate the symptoms or effects of that condition; and the veterinarian has explained the possible risks and benefits of the medical use of marijuana for animals." According to the Associated Press, Segerblom indicated "he's concerned that some animals might have adverse reactions, but "you don't know until you try," he said." Last week the FDA issued warnings to firms selling pet cannabis products in Washington state; warnings local veterinarians say should be heeded.

At a speech to the City Club of Cleveland yesterday afternoon, President Obama summoned once again the hobgoblin of his presidency: Guantanamo Bay. During a Q&A session the President revealed that, if he could start his presidency over, with perfect hindsight, he would close Gitmo on day one. Who does he blame for this error in judgment? The bipartisan coalition to close the facility, of course!
“I thought we had enough consensus there that we could do it in a more deliberate fashion,” Obama added. “But the politics of it got tough, and people got scared by the rhetoric around it. Once that set in, then the path of least resistance was just to leave it open, even though it’s not who we are as a country and it’s used by terrorists around the world to help recruit jihadists.” Instead, Obama said, we’ve been forced to “chip away it” a little bit at a time, releasing a small number of detainees who could not be charged but leaving more than 100 still in captivity with no trials in sight.
Watch:

I don't know Liz Mair. I had heard her name before, and apparently she is friends with a lot of conservative bloggers who speak highly of her. Mair was hired by Scott Walker's nascent presidential PAC to handle communications. Then it came out that Mair trashed the Iowa caucuses and arguably some Iowa Republicans on Twitter. Then some people in the Iowa Republican Party started to make a stink about that, and it was written up in The Des Moines Register, and all of the sudden, Mair was a campaign issue. At the same time, Mair came under attack because of her more liberal policy preferences, particularly on immigration. Matt Boyle at Breitbart.com took it one step further, and questioned Mair's dual citizenship, a true WTF line of inquiry. As someone handling communications for a campaign, it's never good when you are the campaign issue because of what you have communicated, or for your own personal policy preferences. Mair resigned, it being unclear at this writing if she was effectively fired or if she recognized that her primary role had been compromised by her own actions and took the step herself:
Veteran Republican strategist Liz Mair told The Associated Press that she was leaving Walker's team just a day after she had been tapped to lead his online communication efforts, citing the distraction created by a series of recent Twitter posts about Iowa's presidential caucuses. "The tone of some of my tweets concerning Iowa was at odds with that which Gov. Walker has always encouraged in political discourse," Mair said in a statement announcing her immediate resignation. "I wish Gov. Walker and his team all the best."

Boko Haram is still burning its way through west central Africa, but a multistate coalition is slowly finding ways to fight back. Reports are just now surfacing that over the weekend, soldiers from Niger and Chad retook the city of Damasask from Islamic insurgent group Boko Haram. The push was part of a region-wide campaign to regain control of several areas in northern Nigeria.
An Associated Press photographer in the northeastern town said it was largely deserted of civilians. Four people, including an old man, came onto the street to wave at a convoy among 2,000 troops from Niger and Chad in the town. There were still signs of the town's occupation by the rebels. Their writings were scrawled on every wall and the groups' black and white flag still flew above some buildings. A group of Chadian troops transferred weapons confiscated from Boko Haram into a pick-up truck truck. They were then taken to helicopters for transport to Niger. The weapons included AK47 assault rifles and 50-calibre guns, rocket-propelled grenades and mortar shells.
Boko Haram killed 10,000 people last year, and now the UN has finally come forward with a plan for a resolution to endorse actions taken by the governments of Chad, Cameroon, Niger, Nigeria and Benin to further roll back the influence of Boko Haram. Using Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, the resolution would endorse military action for a period of 12 months to take "all necessary measures" against Boko Haram. It also asks for the establishment of a trust fund to help finance the military operation. Of course, there are disagreements:

Last night on Special Report with Bret Baier, Charles Krauthammer offered a frank assessment of how Obama views Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. From National Review:
Krauthammer’s Take: ‘It’s Clear that Obama Loathes Netanyahu More than Any Other World Leader’ “This was an election between Bibi and Obama — that was on the ballot,” he said on Wednesday’s Special Report. “He did everything he could to unseat him, but he failed.” Krauthammer criticized “the pettiness and the petulance” from the Obama administration regarding Netanyahu’s victory, which included a backhanded congratulatory statement and a delayed phone call from secretary of state John Kerry rather than President Obama. “I think the reaction of the administration is now reaching levels where it’s become unseemingly,” he said... “It’s clear that Obama loathes Netanyahu more than any other world leader, meaning more than the ayatollah in Iran or Putin in Russia.”
Watch the video:

In August 2013, we noted that Jews in Europe past their expiration date, based on the superb article You Only Live Twice by Michel Gurfinkiel in Mosaic Magazine:
There is no future left for Jewish communities in Europe. That’s the inescapable conclusion of You Only Live Twice by Michel Gurfinkiel in Mosaic Magazine. The lengthy article is a long trip down the death during World War II and then rebirth of Jewish communities in Europe, and how that rebirth is being snuffed out by renewed anti-Semitism from multiple directions, particularly leftist demonization of Israel and Islamist anti-Semitism. This Leftist-Islamist coalition, centered around hatred of Israel, is a topic we’ve explored here many times in connection with anti-Semitism in Malmö, Sweden, on British campuses, in the BDS movement, in the academic boycott movement, among other places. The fact is that while intellectually one can distinguish anti-Israeli fervor from anti-Semitism, in reality, on the streets of Malmö and Paris, and elsewhere in Europe, they are one and the same.
That was a year before the 2014 Gaza conflict, which so many blame for the rise of anti-Semitic violence in Europe. Anti-Semitism and violence directed at Jews in Europe are not about Gaza.

This might be the most deliciously awkward thing I've ever witnessed on cable news. Although Lawrence O'Donnell pretending to be a Boston southie and challenging Tag Romney to a fight is still at the top of that list. Yesterday, MSNBC's Chris Hayes discussed Starbucks' disastrous social justice campaign -- 'Race Together.' Meant to encourage baristas to engage customers in conversations about race, 'Race Together' received an overwhelming amount of criticism from both the left and right. Hayes brought guests Nancy Giles of CBS Sunday Morning, and culture commentator and DJ, Jay Smooth to share their thoughts on Starbucks' latest social endeavor. Smooth is the founder of the longest running hip-hop radio show in New York City. "I agree, the intentions seem noble and I want to keep an open mind," said Smooth talking about 'Race Together', "but I think there's this strange fixation on "conversation" when it comes to race that you don't see with other issues that we want to take seriously. I think it's telling that when Howard Schultz wanted to help veterans, he didn't just tell people to have conversations about how much they like veterans, he committed to a plan of action to help veterans... He talked about being inspired by what happened in Ferguson and other places, but if you look at the DOJ report on Ferguson, it does not describe issues that can be addressed by increasing the number of chats in coffee shops. We're talking about institutional, systemic issues." Conversation ensued, then Hayes played a previously recorded clip of Smooth discussing the best way to discuss race. After watching the clip, Nancy Giles turns to Smooth, begins gyrating her shoulders and says, "I can't help but tease Jay about the kinda like, brotha way he was trying to talk, like "hey" with the rap music in the background and like, down with people."

It looks like the "luck of the Irish" continues today. Last week, I reported the US House of Representatives was poised to vote on H.R. 1030, the Secret Science Reform Act of 2015. The purpose of this legislation is “to prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from proposing, finalizing, or disseminating regulations or assessments based upon science that is not transparent or reproducible.” The measure passed, along with another one that would put an additional check on the EPA:
The House has passed two Republican-backed bills that would place new restrictions on the Environmental Protection Agency. A bill approved Wednesday would require the EPA to disclose scientific data behind proposed regulations, while a measure passed Tuesday would prohibit the agency from appointing registered lobbyists to the EPA's Science Advisory Board. Both were approved largely along party lines. The scientific data bill was approved 241-175, while the advisory board measure was approved 236-181. Republicans said the bills would increase transparency at the EPA and make it more accountable to the public. "Right now, the EPA is trying to impose harmful regulations based on scientific studies that no one can check — not the public, not independent scientists, not even the United States Congress,' said House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. "It's called 'secret science' and it's wrong." If the EPA or any other agency proposes a rule that adds costs to businesses or infringes on private property, "the people have every right to know why," McCarthy said.

So much for The Most Open and Transparent Administration in the History of the World©." Analysis by the Associated Press shows that last year the Obama Administration set a new record for either denying access to or censoring government documents when responding to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. From the AP:
The government's new figures, published Tuesday, covered all requests to 100 federal agencies during fiscal 2014 under the Freedom of Information law, which is heralded globally as a model for transparent government. They showed that despite disappointments and failed promises by the White House to make meaningful improvements in the way it releases records, the law was more popular than ever. Citizens, journalists, businesses and others made a record 714,231 requests for information. The U.S. spent a record $434 million trying to keep up. It also spent about $28 million on lawyers' fees to keep records secret. The new figures showed the government responded to 647,142 requests, a 4 percent decrease over the previous year. It more than ever censored materials it turned over or fully denied access to them, in 250,581 cases or 39 percent of all requests. Sometimes, the government censored only a few words or an employee's phone number, but other times it completely marked out nearly every paragraph on pages. On 215,584 other occasions, the government said it couldn't find records, a person refused to pay for copies or the government determined the request to be unreasonable or improper.
In 1 in 3 cases, the Administration admitted when challenged that denials of open records requests were improper under the law. Officials also took longer than previous Administrations to process requests, replied saying they had lost or could not find the requested material, and, according to the AP, "refused a record number of times to turn over files quickly that might be especially newsworthy." This report hit just two days after the White House made the call to remove its Office of Information from underneath the FOIA umbrella.