Remember when Pope Francis attacked free markets and Trump responded not by defending them, but by warning the Pontiff that Muslims could overrun Europe? More of the same Monday night.
George Will has a decidedly un-cheery look at conservatism, the Republican Party and Donald Trump. He touches on magic:
When Trump says “people are not making it on Social Security,” he implies that people should be able to “make it” on Social Security for a third or more of their lives, and that he, like Clinton, is for enriching this entitlement’s benefits. He will “save” the system by eliminating — wait for it — “waste, fraud, and abuse.” Trump is as parsimonious with specifics regarding health care (“Plans you don’t even know about will be devised because we’re going to come up with plans — health care plans — that will be so good”) as regarding foreign policy (“I would get China, and I would say, ‘Get in [North Korea], and straighten it out’”).
“Charismatic authority,” wrote Max Weber in 1915, seven years before Mussolini’s march on Rome, causes the governed to submit “because of their belief in the extraordinary quality of the specific person. ... Charismatic rule thus rests upon the belief in magical powers, revelations and hero worship.” A demagogue’s success requires a receptive demos, and Trump’s ascendancy reflects progressivism’s success in changing America’s social norms and national character by de-stigmatizing dependency.
Under his presidency, he says, government will have all the answers: “I am your voice. ... I alone can fix it.” The pronoun has unlimited antecedents: “I will give you everything. I will give you what you’ve been looking for for 50 years. I’m the only one.”
The beginning of conservative wisdom is recognition that there is an end to everything: Nothing lasts. If Trump wins, the GOP ends as a vehicle for conservatism. And a political idea without a political party is an orphan in an indifferent world.
Pessimism need not breed fatalism or passivity. It can define an agenda of regeneration, but only by being clear-eyed about the extent of degeneration, which a charlatan’s successful selling of his fabulousness exemplifies. Conservatism’s recovery from his piratical capture of the conservative party will require facing unflattering facts about a country that currently is indifferent to its founding.
Posted at 11:06 AM | Permalink
Posted at 10:19 AM | Permalink
The Cascade Mall shooting suspect, Arcan Cetin, may face an additional investigation related to his voting record and citizenship status.
Federal sources confirm to KING 5 that Cetin was not a U.S. citizen, meaning legally he cannot vote. However, state records show Cetin registered to vote in 2014 and participated in three election cycles, including the May presidential primary.
Object of fury number one is government:
While voters must attest to citizenship upon registering online or registering to vote at the Department of Licensing Office, Washington state doesn’t require proof of citizenship. Therefore elections officials say the state’s elections system operates, more or less, under an honor system.
The American electorate spends trillions, jails millions and makes war, but operates on the same principle as the take-a-penny/leave-a-penny dish at the checkout counter. Marvelous.
Object of fury number two is the media. Check that lead: Cetin “may face an additional investigation.” What’s left to investigate? Federal sources confirmed he’s not a citizen and records showed he registered and voted. The registration form requires attesting to citizenship. Case closed.
Also, why can’t we hear which primary he voted in? Maybe this:
A tweet of Cetin’s from January 2015 led some on social media to believe he was a supporter of Hillary Clinton’s. The message read, “We win I vote for Hillary Clinton.”
Posted at 10:11 AM | Permalink
Harvard students complain that the university’s endowment isn’t producing sufficient returns to keep the price of indoctrination low. This is the same university that paid Elizabeth Warren $430,000 per year to provide the intellectual foundation for people crapping on police cars. Also, students have over the years demanded divestment from South Africa, Israel, and most recently fossil fuels (at a cost of $108 million).
Whatever Harvard is paying its economics faculty is both too much and not enough.
Posted at 09:47 AM | Permalink
Libertyblog on the Cheryl Mills immunity deal:
[M]ethinks the Department of Justice, not the FBI itself, approves the grant of immunity.
Testifying before the House Judiciary Committee Wednesday, FBI Director James Comey revealed it wasn’t the FBI that granted longtime Clinton aide and attorney Cheryl Mills immunity during the criminal investigation of Secretary Clinton’s private email server. Instead, it was granted by prosecutors at the Department of Justice.
“Who authorized granting Cheryl Mills immunity?” Rep. John Sensenbrenner asked.
“It’s a decision made by the Department of Justice, I don’t know at what level inside,” Comey responded. “In our investigations, any kind of immunity comes from the prosecutors, not the investigators.”
Comey added he understood Mills’ immunity as a request pertaining to the production of her laptop during the investigation.
“The FBI doesn’t grant immunity to anybody, the Department of Justice is able to grant very different kinds of immunity,” Comey said. “If new and substantial evidence develops a witness lied [under immunity], of course the Department of Justice can pursue it. Nobody gets lifetime immunity.”
Last week Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz accused the FBI of handing out immunity in the case “like candy.” Comey said today the immunity granted in the case was “ordinary investigative process.”
Do you remember the press conference where Comey complained about DoJ granting immunity to the people who might have been pressured to rat out Herself? Neither do I ...
Posted at 02:16 PM | Permalink
If you’re an employee, calling a Hispanic co-worker “Miss Housekeeping” is a good way to get fired; if you’re a business owner it’s a good way to get sued. By the way, calling an overweight employee “Miss Piggy”—if her weight is critical to her job performance—is probably okay. Herself doesn’t get that.
Posted at 10:18 AM | Permalink
Trump may be alienating one of America’s largest (pun intended) voting blocs. Last night:
As far as the cyber, I agree to parts of what Secretary Clinton said. We should be better than anybody else, and perhaps we’re not. I don’t think anybody knows it was Russia that broke into the DNC. She’s saying Russia, Russia, Russia, but I don’t -- maybe it was. I mean, it could be Russia, but it could also be China. It could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, OK?
Not just a hacker, a fat hacker.
Later, after the debate, he elaborated on his conflict with a Miss Universe:
[S]he gained a massive amount of weight, and it was – it was a real problem.
Thirty percent of Americans are obese. Is this a fight Trump wants?
UPDATE: Not unrelated:
If Donald Trump were president, he would impose a tax on Oreos produced in Mexico, his campaign confirmed following Monday night’s presidential debate.
Posted at 10:36 AM | Permalink
John Podhoretz reviews Trump’s debate performance and concludes:
His supporters should be furious with him, and so should the public in general. By performing this incompetently, by refusing to prepare properly for this exchange, by not learning enough to put meat on the bones of his populist case against Clinton, he displayed nothing but contempt for the people who have brought him this far — and for the American people who are going to make this momentous decision on Nov. 8.
To be fair, his supporters showed nothing but contempt for our nation and its people, political traditions, and Constitution by nominating him. Karma’s a bitch.
Posted at 10:21 AM | Permalink
I would note that this practice is selective; the tweet ridiculing Heidi Cruz’s looks was still up last week, even while her husband endorsed Trump.
Posted at 09:48 AM | Permalink
Trump on his Iraq War support:
TRUMP: The record shows that I’m right. When I did an interview with Howard Stern, very lightly, first time anyone’s asked me that, I said, very lightly, I don’t know, maybe, who knows? Essentially. I then did an interview with Neil Cavuto. We talked about the economy is more important. I then spoke to Sean Hannity, which everybody refuses to call Sean Hannity. I had numerous conversations with Sean Hannity at Fox. And Sean Hannity said -- and he called me the other day -- and I spoke to him about it -- he said you were totally against the war, because he was for the war.
HOLT: Why is your judgment better than...
TRUMP: And when he -- excuse me. And that was before the war started. Sean Hannity said very strongly to me and other people -- he’s willing to say it, but nobody wants to call him. I was against the war. He said, you used to have fights with me, because Sean was in favor of the war.
And I understand that side, also, not very much, because we should have never been there. But nobody called Sean Hannity. And then they did an article in a major magazine, shortly after the war started. I think in ‘04. But they did an article which had me totally against the war in Iraq.
And one of your compatriots said, you know, whether it was before or right after, Trump was definitely -- because if you read this article, there’s no doubt. But if somebody -- and I’ll ask the press -- if somebody would call up Sean Hannity, this was before the war started. He and I used to have arguments about the war. I said, it’s a terrible and a stupid thing. It’s going to destabilize the Middle East. And that’s exactly what it’s done. It’s been a disaster.
Ahh, but the strawberries that’s ... that’s where I had them. They laughed at me and made jokes but I proved beyond the shadow of a doubt and with... geometric logic ... that a duplicate key to the wardroom icebox DID exist, and I’d have produced that key if they hadn’t of pulled the Caine out of action.
Posted at 09:38 AM | Permalink
That was Jose Fernandez, who escaped Cuba and lived his dream playing major league baseball here. It wasn’t directed at Colin Kaepernick, but it might as well have been. RIP.
Posted at 04:07 PM | Permalink
I’m with Kevin Williamson:
I have invented a new drinking game for the upcoming Clinton–Trump presidential debate. It works like this: You stand in the stairwell of a very tall building. Every time somebody says something stupid or dishonest, you walk up a flight of stairs. At the end, you jump out of the nearest window, and people drink at your wake.
There are no winners.
Unfortunately, there will be a winner in November.
Well, we’ll get a president in November, but there won’t be any winners then either, just the promise of future decline or outright catastrophe.
Posted at 02:24 PM | Permalink
Hillary Clinton roared out to a huge lead after the Democratic convention, but has steadily lost that lead in August and September. They’re the same candidates as six weeks ago. The arguments for her, tepid they may be, are still there: She’s the experienced one. She’s the one who knows the details of policy. The Clintons have been synonymous with the Democratic party’s governance since 1992. The arguments against him are still there.
So what’s changed? Events. The FBI released its Clinton e-mail investigation notes, showing there was plenty of evidence to press charges, and that Clinton claimed she couldn’t remember whether she had been briefed on key security issues. She suffered a short-lived but seemingly serious health issue at Ground Zero. Bombs detonated in New York and New Jersey. North Korea held another nuclear test. Charlotte erupted in riots. Cincinnati had 174 overdoses in six days, and more than 1,000 in a two-month span in Hamilton County, Ohio.
Posted at 12:43 PM | Permalink
Not Trump this time. From a story about the potential health implications of some LED streetlights:
Mark Hartman, Phoenix’s chief sustainability officer, said the city might go with a mix of the intense lights for major intersections and ballpark areas that need very bright light and a softer light for residential areas. He said the city would consider the health arguments, although he, too, mentioned the glow from computers and televisions. “Nobody says don’t watch television or use your computer after 9 p.m. because of blue lights,” he said.
Unless you count some folks at my alma mater:
In today’s gadget-obsessed world, sleep experts often say that for a better night’s rest, Americans should click the “off” buttons on their smartphones and tablets before tucking in for the night. Electronic devices stimulate brain activity, they say, disrupting your ability to drift off to sleep. But according to the National Sleep Foundation, more than 90 percent of Americans regularly use a computer or electronic device of some kind in the hour before bed.
Increasingly, researchers are finding that artificial light from some devices at night may tinker with brain chemicals that promote sleep. Researchers at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute showed that exposure to light from computer tablets significantly lowered levels of the hormone melatonin, which regulates our internal clocks and plays a role in the sleep cycle.
In the study, published in the journal Applied Ergonomics, the researchers had volunteers read, play games and watch movies on an iPad, iPad 2 or PC tablet for various amounts of time while measuring the amount of light their eyes received. They found that two hours of exposure to a bright tablet screen at night reduced melatonin levels by about 22 percent.
Posted at 11:48 AM | Permalink