Archive for 2018

ONLY THE LONELY: One Teacher’s Brilliant Strategy to Stop Future School Shootings—and It’s Not About Guns.

Every Friday afternoon, she asks her students to take out a piece of paper and write down the names of four children with whom they’d like to sit the following week. The children know that these requests may or may not be honored. She also asks the students to nominate one student who they believe has been an exceptional classroom citizen that week. All ballots are privately submitted to her.

And every single Friday afternoon, after the students go home, she takes out those slips of paper, places them in front of her, and studies them. She looks for patterns.

Who is not getting requested by anyone else?

Who can’t think of anyone to request?

Who never gets noticed enough to be nominated?

Who had a million friends last week and none this week?

You see, Chase’s teacher is not looking for a new seating chart or “exceptional citizens.” Chase’s teacher is looking for lonely children. She’s looking for children who are struggling to connect with other children. She’s identifying the little ones who are falling through the cracks of the class’s social life. She is discovering whose gifts are going unnoticed by their peers. And she’s pinning down—right away—who’s being bullied and who is doing the bullying.

Read the whole thing.

DON SURBER: Why We Had The Parkland Massacre. “Stop suspending kids and stop arresting kids, and guess what? The percent of students suspended or arrested drops. Brilliant. Thus, law enforcement officials visited the shooter 30 times, knew the shooter was trouble, but did nothing because the statistic was all important.”

GRADUALLY, THEN SUDDENLY: How Newsweek Collapsed.

In fall 2017, a high-ranking editor at Newsweek was fired four days after filing a grievance to the magazine’s human resources department, complaining of gender discrimination and bullying, and proposing an agreement to leave the company. Her termination letter, which Slate viewed, did not mention the HR complaints. Instead, it laid out a laundry list of performance and conduct concerns.

Sources familiar with her dismissal differ on its legitimacy, but some of the language from her termination letter is striking in light of what has transpired at the magazine since. Her alleged sins included undermining the company’s attempt to enforce aggressive page-view quotas for reporters, insufficient commitment to search engine optimization, and rejecting story proposals for being “not Newsweek.” (At most publications, shooting down story ideas that don’t fit the editorial ethos is an essential part of editors’ jobs.) The letter also faulted her for making an “inflammatory allegation” in a conference call with other top editors. Her inflammatory allegation, according to the termination letter: that “the company had real problem(s) of morale and credibility.”

Just a few months later, that assessment reads as a dramatic understatement.

And:

Amid the turmoil, the magazine on Feb. 9 announced after an outside investigation that it was reinstating a top editor it had suspended just weeks earlier over sexual harassment allegations at his previous employer. That prompted a fresh exodus of female staffers.

Why are leftwing publications such cesspits of boys’-club misogyny?

I KEEP HEARING THAT TRUMP’S A PUTIN STOOGE, BUT WHEN DID OBAMA EVER BOMB A BUNCH OF RUSSIAN MERCENARIES?

Recordings have emerged in which Russian mercenaries subjected to a joint U.S. strike that killed dozens of their comrades describe the incident as “a total fuck-up.” . . .

n the first audio clip, a man says “one squadron fucking lost 200 people …right away, another one lost 10 people… and I don’t know about the third squadron but it got torn up pretty badly, too… So three squadrons took a beating.”

The man explains that American forces used artillery and helicopter gunships to repel the assault. “They were all shelling the holy fuck out of it and our guys didn’t have anything besides the assault rifles… nothing at all, I’m not even talking about shoulder-fired SAMs or anything like that… they tore us to pieces, put us through hell,” he says.

The speaker is also critical of the Russian government’s response to the incident, saying, “They beat our asses like we were little pieces of shit… but our fucking government will go in reverse now and nobody will respond or anything and nobody will punish anyone for this.” . . .

In the third clip, a man can be heard explaining the Russian convoy was a few hundred meters away from target when the American forces raised their flag and hit the Russians with a heavy artillery barrage, wiping out the first column instantly. “We got our fucking asses beat rough, the Yankees made their point,” he said. “What were they hoping for, that the Yankees are just going to fuck off?… It’s bullshit, some people can’t even be fucking ID’ed , too many people there.”

In another of the clips, a man claims “there are about 215 fucking killed” on the Russian side.

“The Yankees made their point.” I don’t think it was “after the election I’ll have more flexibility,” either. But I’m pretty sure it was transmitted to Vladimir.

MY USA TODAY COLUMN IS ON OUR PERVASIVE INSTITUTIONAL ROT: Florida shooting yet another government failure to keep us safe: From the FBI to local law enforcement to the schools, every institution failed. We have more government than ever, but it isn’t working. “People are being asked to trust the government to keep them safe, when the government is patently unable to do so. And then, when the government fails, it engages in blame-shifting deflection. Why should people listen? Increasingly, they won’t.”

ROD KACKLEY: Texas Dem Thinks Tide is Turning to Defeat Ted Cruz. “Rep. O’Rourke raised $2.4 million compared to $1.9 million for Cruz in the last quarter, but the GOP incumbent had $7.3 million in the bank.”

THE DUES AND DON’TS OF UNION LIFE: The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Janus v. AFSCME today, the case that will decide whether government unions still have the right to force non-members to support their inherently political activities. My organization, CEI, has a video explaining what’s at stake:

You can learn more about the case here. Some of you might remember that I wrote about this sort of thing at length in my last book, Stealing You Blind.

PUT NOT YOUR FAITH IN PRINCES: EMS first responder shares harrowing account of how botched Florida shooting response was.

“Everything I was trained on mass casualty events says they did the wrong thing,” he explained. “You don’t wait for the scene to be cleared. You go in immediately armed. Retrieve the victims. You can’t leave the victims laying there.”

“We were asking to go in. Asking the scene commander to go in. Why are we all standing around? Why are we not having patients to treat? Why are we not going into the building and retrieving these kids? The response every time was law enforcement did not clear the scene and would not allow medical personnel to go in,” he added.

The EMS worker believes that if he and other medical responders were allowed to enter the building as soon as they arrived, they could have saved more lives. He explained he was willing to risk his life to save the lives of others and was very frustrated over the situation.

The EMS worker stressed that he believes law enforcement made the decision they thought was best at the time, but emphasized that he believes it was the wrong one.

“They should have been more aggressive about getting the victims out,” he said.

Indeed. It’s difficult to understand how, seeing the results of their own inaction, there haven’t been mass resignations at the Broward County Sheriff’s Office.

FIRE ESCAPES: Evocative, But Largely Useless:

More generally, the mythology of the fire escape probably makes it feel like a security crutch, even for people who never intend to use one. Given improvements in building codes, construction, and manufacturing practices, today a fire escape is more likely to cause harm than to prevent it. A place for a romantic rendezvous can quickly become a coroner’s scene.

Interesting.

THE FAYETTEVILLE OBSERVER: The U.S. Army addresses “the fitness crisis.”

A recent Heritage Foundation report found that, according to 2017 Pentagon data, “71 percent of young Americans between 17 and 24 are ineligible to serve in the United States military.” Nearly one-third of those young Americans are too overweight for military service.

“Put another way: Over 24 million of the 34 million people of that age group cannot join the armed forces — even if they wanted to,” said retired Lt. Gen. Thomas Spoehr and Bridget Handy, who authored the report, “The Looming National Security Crisis: Young Americans Unable to Serve in the Military.”

An article well worth reading.

THIRTY YEARS LATER: This month marks the 30th Anniversary of Hustler v. Falwell, one of SCOTUS’ most powerful free speech decisions. And yeah, as humor goes, the satire ad at center of the case still holds up pretty well.

JOSH ROGAN: An attack on North Korea would be massive – and massively stupid.

John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, whom Trump reportedly is considering to replace H.R. McMaster as national security adviser, supports preventive war through a massive strike, if sanctions fail. During an appearance last week at the Daniel Morgan Graduate School of National Security, he said the United States would have to simultaneously destroy all known North Korean nuclear and ballistic missile sites, submarine bases, and artillery, mortar and missile installments along the North’s border with South Korea.

The Kim regime would soon collapse, Bolton predicted, which would then require the deployment of American and South Korean troops inside North Korea to secure the nuclear sites. China could, in advance, be offered a chance to participate, to protect its interests and minimize the adverse effects, Bolton said.

“My argument to China would be, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way,” Bolton said. “I would like to find a way to convince the Chinese to do this with us, to have a controlled collapse of the North Korean regime.”

Bolton acknowledged that we can’t be sure of where Kim is hiding all his weapons and that there would be massive humanitarian consequences. But he calculated that the risks of Kim threatening the world with nuclear weapons or selling them to others outweigh the potential costs.

But a true accounting of those costs would also include the likelihood that the U.S.-South Korea alliance would be shattered, along with the regional stability the United States spent 70 years trying to build. The global economy would be thrown into disarray; America would be on the hook for untold billions in reconstruction and refugee assistance. China would then move to replace the United States as the responsible regional leader.

The risks of a preventative war might prove too high, but China must be made to understand that the risks of North Korean proliferation might include nuclear weapons for Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan.

MY USA TODAY COLUMN IS ON OUR PERVASIVE INSTITUTIONAL ROT: Florida shooting yet another government failure to keep us safe: From the FBI to local law enforcement to the schools, every institution failed. We have more government than ever, but it isn’t working. “People are being asked to trust the government to keep them safe, when the government is patently unable to do so. And then, when the government fails, it engages in blame-shifting deflection. Why should people listen? Increasingly, they won’t.”

DON’T GET COCKY, KID: Politico: Trump Is Winning.

Donald Trump is on track to win re-election to the presidency of the United States.

Yes, despite Russiagate, despite shitholegate and despite whatever gate he blunders through next. Despite approval ratings that would make Nixon weep. Despite his mind-numbing political misjudgments—defending accused pedophiles, for example—and the endless, unnecessary daily drama. Trump is winning. It is actually happening, people. And if there are those who want to stop it—and there are of course millions—they need to know what they are up against. It’s a lot more than they overconfidently think. . . .

Second, consider Trump’s record as president. He actually has something to run on. He’s cut taxes. He’s rolled back regulations. He’s put ISIS on its heels. The economy and the stock market are humming along again, despite recent turmoil. Any other Republican incumbent running on that record of relative peace and prosperity—just as Eisenhower and Reagan did—would be in pretty good shape for re-election. Trump, as loathed as he is, might not cruise to reelection on an electoral landslide like those predecessors. But if jobs continue to be created and the economy continues to hum, whether he deserves the credit or not, enough voters might just hold their nose again and vote for him.

Maybe Trump isn’t all that loathed. After all, he’s ahead of where Obama was at the same point in his term, and nobody in the press was calling Obama “loathed.”

Related: One major difference between 2010 and 2018: Trump’s signature tax bill is much more popular than Obama’s signature health bill.

STOP ME IF YOU THINK YOU’VE HEARD THIS ONE BEFORE: Many lenders are loosening requirements for prospective home buyers.

Among the main changes to mortgage loans in the past year or two are the availability of low down-payment loans, a loosening of the debt-to-income ratio requirements and easing of rules about how student loan payments are calculated.

“Our challenge is always to increase access to sustainable credit,” said Jonathan Lawless, vice president of customer solutions for the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) in Washington.

Since mid-2016, there has been marginal easing in every aspect of mortgage loans, said Jonathan Corr, chief executive of Ellie Mae in Pleasanton, Calif.

“We’ve seen a very slight drop in the credit scores of approved loans, a slight increase in the debt-to-income ratios and an increase in loan-to-value, which means people are taking advantage of low down-payment loan programs,” Corr said.

The story claims that “today’s borrowers still need to prove they can handle the loan,” but ten years ago banks helped subprime borrowers skate past similar requirements with a wink and a nudge.