TRUMP OFFERS ELISE STEFANIK U.N. AMBASSADORSHIP:
President-elect Donald Trump has reportedly offered Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) the position of U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations.
“I am honored to nominate Chairwoman Elise Stefanik to serve in my Cabinet as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations,” Trump said in a statement. “Elise is an incredibly strong, tough, and smart America First fighter.”
Stefanik, who is the chair of the House Republican Conference, made noise earlier this year when her intense questioning during hearings on anti-Semitism on college campuses forced two Ivy League presidents to resign their posts.
As Roger Kimball wrote last December: The disgraceful, ducking, diving, dodging college presidents.
It was a clarifying moment, wasn’t it? The presidents of MIT, Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania testifying for the House Education Committee about the wave of rabid antisemitism on their campuses. Representative Elise Stefanik of New York asked the same question of UPenn’s Liz Magill, MIT’s Sally Kornbluth and Harvard’s Claudine Gay. Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate your campus’s rule of conduct, yes or no? That was the question.
You might think it was a pretty simple question. Stefanik, exhibiting a mixture of incredulity and barely contained rage, stressed: “This should be be the easiest question to answer,” as one president after the next emitted a pained I-can’t-believe-this-unenlightened-pol-is-asking-me-me-the-president-of-Harvard/MIT/Penn-this-stupid-question.” Each in turn reverted to a script they must have worked out with their handlers/lawyers. “It all depends on the context.”
“Context.” It was the weasel word of the moment. We’re all champions of free speech, don’t you know, so we wouldn’t dream of intruding upon our flock’s exercise of that sacrosanct right in pursuit of their dream of self-congratulatory moral perfection — unless, of course, that dream involves some prohibited attitude, criticizing St. Anthony Fauci, for example, or St. George Floyd, or, heaven forfend, supporting Donald Trump or expressing skepticism about the 2020 election or January 6. Then, of course, it’s open-season on “free expression.”
I almost felt sorry for those three women. Almost. There they were, emanating the self-righteous demeanor they had perfected over years, and, bang, an angry congresswoman exploded that cheap facade in minutes. The upshot was not obvious to them immediately. But the world’s outrage at those moral pygmies instantly washed over the PR offices of those obscenely rich bastions of self-entitlement. “Uh, oh: the girls really stepped in it this time.” That was the universal reaction.
Back in January, I wrote Mitchell and Webb should update their “Are we the baddies?” sketch, with the other Nazi replying, “Well Fritz, to be honest, it depends on the context.”
I’m looking forward to Stefanik generating similar results from an even more wretched hive of scum and villainy starting next year.