Archive for January, 2012

K.C. JOHNSON: Will The New York Times Apologize to Patrick Witt? “The denouement of the Times‘ coverage of Duke lacrosse came when then-sports editor Tom Jolly apologized for the paper’s guilt-presuming, error-ridden articles on the case. Will the paper ever get around to giving former Yale quarterback Patrick Witt an apology? With a few days perspective, it’s become clear that the Times’ mishandling of the Witt story was, in two specific ways, even worse than originally believed.”

WALTER RUSSELL MEAD: The Once And Future Liberalism. “The blue model is breaking down so fast and so far that not even its supporters can ignore the disintegration and disaster it now presages. Liberal Democrats in states like Rhode Island and cities like Chicago are cutting pensions and benefits and laying off workers out of financial necessity rather than ideological zeal. The blue model can no longer pay its bills, and not even its friends can keep it alive. Our real choice, however, is not between blue or pre-blue. We can’t get back to the 1890s or 1920s any more than we can go back to the 1950s and 1960s. We may not yet be able to imagine what a post-blue future looks like, but that is what we will have to build. . . . There are a lot of reasons to be nostalgic for the old days (especially for the white males who were, far and away, the biggest beneficiaries of the old system), but there are also good reasons to bid the blue model good riddance.”

NICK GILLESPIE AND MATT WELCH: Learning From Kodak’s Demise: What the end of a blue-chip company can teach us about the 2012 election. “When given real choice, especially the choice to go elsewhere, consumers will drop even the most beloved of brands for options that enhance their experience and increase their autonomy. We have all witnessed and participated in this revolutionary transfer of loyalty away from those who tell us what we should buy or think and toward those who give us tools to think and act for ourselves. No corner of the economy, of cultural life, or even of our personal lives hasn’t felt the gale-force winds of this change. Except government.”

LEGACY OF TODAY’S CULTURE: Fear of Men?

SALENA ZITO: Populism Elusive For Dems. “The one theme (independents) have that is Jacksonian is to get the federal government off their backs and out of their pockets — hardly what Obama or Occupy have in mind.”

JAMES Q. WILSON: Angry About Inequality? Don’t Blame The Rich. “We could reduce income inequality by trying to curtail the financial returns of education and the number of women in the workforce — but who would want to do that? The real income problem in this country is not a question of who is rich, but rather of who is poor. Among the bottom fifth of income earners, many people, especially men, stay there their whole lives.”

IN FLORIDA, an epidemic of Mitt-Mania. “Attention young conservatives: Your grandma loves Mitt Romney. The phenomenal shift in the polls here in the Sunshine State — which has provoked much commentary and analysis about ‘strategy’ and ‘messaging’ — may in fact be little more complicated than that. And the massive crowd that turned out in downtown Naples today to hear and see Mitt was certainly evidence of how real Romney’s Florida surge is.”

Plus this: “If you set aside mere politics long enough to see the two Florida frontrunners as the average Republican voter sees them, it is hard to miss the contrast between Mitt — the tall, lean multimillionaire entrepreneur with dark hair and chiseled features — and Newt, the pudgy intellectual. Maybe you don’t judge presidential candidates by such standards, but it makes a lot of difference to Republican grandmas, and there are lots of Republican grandmas in Florida.”

ANTI-GUN SHERIFF CAUGHT IN GUN-CONTROL NET HE HELPED CAST:

Although San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi was a strong advocate of gun control while on the Board of Supervisors, he surrendered 3 handguns when police recently booked him on misdemeanor domestic violence charges,” KCBS reports. “If Mirkarimi were convicted on the domestic violence charge, he would not be able to carry a gun as sheriff,” reporter Joshua Sabatini claims.

True, but it would entail more than that. If convicted, “thanks” to the infamous Lautenberg Amendment, he would be a prohibited person under federal law, forbidden not only to carry a gun, but to own or even touch one—forever.

And a protective order is enough to disenfranchise him from his fundamental right to keep and bear arms prior to being convicted of anything.

While it appears corroborating information of a pattern of previous abusive behavior against female partners is emerging, along with documentation of his “well-known temper” and his own lawyer calling him “a bit of a tyrant,” it’s important to remember Mirkarimi is innocent until proven guilty, and also to keep in mind partners in failed relationships sometimes lash out motivated by revenge.

But even if convicted, a prohibition of a fundamental natural right over a misdemeanor is overkill.

True, but sauce for the goose. Michael Petrelis is calling for him to resign.

UPDATE: Reader Susan Harms emails:

EVEN THOUGH this seems like poetic justice, I cannot side against him — women have all the cards when it comes to claims of “violence”. A woman can do ANYTHING short of killing a man and when he acts in kind, she screams “he’s violent”. This is a war on men, and I cant take part.

Sadly, that’s fairly accurate. And as the Mary Winkler case shows, sometimes even murder generates a mere slap on the wrist after rather unconvincing claims of abuse.