Archive for 2022

GOOD ADVICE THAT WILL LIKELY BE IGNORED: Ruy Teixeira: Time for the Democrats’ Chesa Boudin Moment!
If Not Now, When? If Not Him, Who?

The crushing recall of San Francisco’s stridently progressive District Attorney, Chesa Boudin, crystallizes just how much trouble Democrats are in on the crime issue. When voters in San Francisco—San Francisco!—throw a progressive Democrat out of office for failing to provide public safety, you know Democrats have an urgent need to assure voters that they are in fact determined to crack down on crime and to dissociate the party from approaches that fail to do so.

This is a wave that has been building for some time. In the aftermath of George Floyd’s murder and the nationwide movement sparked by it, the climate for police reform was highly favorable. But Democrats blew the opportunity by allowing the party to be associated with unpopular movement slogans like “defund the police” that did not appear to take public safety concerns very seriously.

At the same time, Democrats became associated with a wave of progressive public prosecutors who seemed quite hesitant about keeping criminals off the street, even as a spike in violent crimes like murders and carjacking sweeps the nation. This was twinned to a climate of tolerance and non-prosecution for lesser crimes that degraded the quality of life in many cities under Democratic control. San Francisco became practically a poster child for the latter problem under Chesa Boudin’s “leadership”.

So the voters kicked him out by a wide 60 percent to 40 percent margin. According to one analysis, about 40 percent of the votes for recall came from majority white areas of the city while 60 percent came from majority nonwhite areas. Based on the neighborhood pattern of voting and pre-election polling data, it seems clear that Asian voter support for the recall was particularly strong.

Nonwhite support for cashiering Boudin shouldn’t be surprising. The most enthusiastic supporters of a Boudin-style approach to policing tend to be white college-educated liberals. Nonwhite and working class voters approach the issue of crime quite differently.

I’ve been pointing this out for quite some time, but it’s not as if anyone listens to me.

Plus: “Normie voters hate crime and want something done about it. They’re not particularly impressed by disembodied talk about the availability of guns that does not include enforcing the law against the criminals who actually use these guns. Nor do they respond well to assurances that progressive approaches to law enforcement that include less law enforcement will—eventually—work even as crime surges and the quality of life deteriorates. Boudin tried exactly that line of argument and it didn’t work.”

KRUISER’S MORNING BRIEFING: The ‘Trump 2024’ Tease Needs Go On Until the Last Minute. “I’ve written that Trump needs to you-know-what or get off the pot but now I’m doing a 180. I like him keeping everyone hanging. It makes the Democrats scramble.”

MEGHAN MURPHY: Why I left the left.

I wanted the left to change. That’s why I stuck around for so long. I wanted to be a voice of dissent in the movement and to push for something better. I warned that this kind of censorious, cowardly silencing and refusal to have any critical debate about ideas would lead to the left’s failure. But progressives only doubled down – clinging ever-more tightly to ideologies and mantras that are irrational and regressive, and censoring anyone who dared challenge them.

The left, seemingly along with most feminists, has now decided it no longer knows what a woman is, and that anyone who claims to know must be silenced.

At a certain point, we have to stop pretending this is just about a few bad apples. We have to stop hanging on, imagining this group will come around. It is time to deal with reality, not wishful thinking: this is the left now, whether we like it or not.

Plus: “The left is no longer a movement for justice and freedom from oppression, it is a movement for bullying and totalitarian control.”

Murphy won’t have really taken the red pill until she realizes that it always was a movement for bullying and totalitarian control.

THE NEW YORK POST’S COVER PULLS NO PUNCHES:

And Democrats, who have been throwing the word “incitement” around for the past several years, are in no position to complain.

PJ MEDIA VIP ROUNDUP: Don’t forget that VODKAPUNDIT promo code if you’ve been thinking of joining us.

Matt Margolis: Here’s Another Woke Reboot You Don’t Have to Watch. “It looks well-produced, and I was briefly intrigued. But that was short-lived, because Amazon Studios made no effort to hide the series’ woke agenda.”

Kruiser: Liz Cheney Looks Like She Knows She Sold Her Soul. “Should she manage to get reelected (I covered how that might happen here), she’ll be the epitome of Republican in Name Only.”

Yours Truly: Passwords Are Going to Die. PassKeys Will Kill Them. “PassKeys — a coming industry-wide standard — can’t be hacked, phished, or guessed. In fact, users can’t even see their own PassKeys.”

DEAL OF THE DAY: Portable Neck Fan. #CommissionEarned

JOHN SOLOMON: Internal Capitol Police review found sweeping intelligence, security failures on Pelosi’s watch. “Identifying 53 areas of failure needing corrective action, the June 4, 2021 report, obtained by Just the News, produces a far more stark portrait of leadership failures than those offered by Democrat-led investigations, making abundantly clear that the Capitol Police under House Speaker Nancy Pelosi were ill-equipped to defend one of America’s most symbolic and high-value institutions two decades after the Sept. 11 attacks.”

WHEN THE PRONOUN POLICE COME FOR EIGHT-GRADERS:

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 was enacted long before Congress could have imagined today’s progressive dogma that grammar should reflect, through pronouns, the most advanced thinking about gender fluidity. Title IX’s operative language says no person “shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination” in education.

This language has been reasonably taken to encompass sexual violence, unwanted touching and such “unwelcome conduct” as persistent spoken sexual innuendo, stalking, etc. Now, however, the Wisconsin district, which is perhaps proud of its progressive improvising, has made this category of conduct elastic enough to encompass mispronouning. The district’s behavior is trickle-down lawlessness that stems from the arrogance and cynicism of the U.S. Education Department.

Making a mockery of Title IX illustrates what some progressive theorists call “dynamic statutory interpretation,” meaning law enforcement entirely untethered from congressional intent — actually, from law. In 2014, Catherine Lhamon, an Education Department assistant secretary for civil rights, sent an explanation of a 2011 “Dear Colleague” letter to people who are in no sense “colleagues” of federal bureaucrats: college administrators. She directed them to comply with 66 pages of “guidance” on sexual harassment policies. Many of the policies produced campus kangaroo courts in which persons — almost always young men — accused of sexual misbehavior are routinely denied due process.

Nationwide, accusers are identified, in the language of prejudgment, as “survivors.” The accused are denied the right to question their accusers and can be convicted on a mere “preponderance of the evidence,” not evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. By one recent count, there are more than 700 due-process lawsuits from victims of make-believe courts on campuses, seeking justice in real courts.

R. Shep Melnick, a Boston College professor and co-chair of the Harvard Program on Constitutional Government notes this: Lhamon breezily says she resorted to explicating the “Dear Colleague” letter, thereby evading the Administrative Procedure Act’s rule-making requirements, because the 66 pages were, in her words, merely “an explanation of what Title IX means.” Sixty-six pages of “explanations” that, if not adhered to, can result in federal compliance investigations and termination of the institutions’ federal funding.

In 2014, Lamar Alexander, the Tennessee Republican who was a former university president and the senator most conversant with higher education, asked Lhamon who gave her the power to issue detailed, effectively mandatory “explanations.” With smug hauteur, she said: “You did when I was confirmed.”

President Biden has brought her back.

Tar and feathers are indicated, but abolishing the Department of Education would suffice.

WE’RE LIVING ON THEM:  Nerves.