THE SAME REACTION
I often remind readers that I’m not a lawyer (I don’t even play one of TV, like some of CNN’s “legal analysts.”) So I was gratified to see that Instapundit blogmaster Glenn Reynolds, who is a law professor, had the same reaction that I did to the hysteria and threats sparked by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg: that it’s proof the Supreme Court has become much too important.
We now have nine unelected judges, appointed for life, all from similar elite, Ivy League backgrounds, making political decisions that affect all Americans and that should be the sole province of the people and their elected representatives. No wonder people go insane when one of them has to be replaced.
Since Democrats are threatening to expand and pack the Court anyway, Prof. Reynolds has a novel suggestion that would really expand it, and in the process, make it much less powerful and important and far more representative of the entire country. I’ll let you click over to read it and tell me what you think in the comments.
THREE ARGUMENTS FOR RBG REPLACEMENT
Here’s why Sen. Ted Cruz was a champion debater in college: he lays out three unassailable arguments for why Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s replacement needs to be approved and seated by Election Day. And #3 is one the Democrats created themselves by threatening a massive lawsuit assault if Trump wins, which could put the election results into the hands of the Supreme Court, which couldn’t decide it with a 4-4 tie, so what will we need by Election Day? A ninth Justice. Thanks for making our argument for us, guys!
Next Saturday, the Rev. Franklin Graham will lead PrayerMarch 2020, from the Lincoln Memorial to the Capitol in Washington. This is not a partisan event, and participants are asked not to bring any political signs. The purpose is purely to ask God to heal our land.
Here’s more information about the event…
And here’s the event’s website, if you’d like to come to DC to participate, or join in from home via live-stream.
In a shocking but somehow unsurprising story, a professor at Marshall University in West Virginia is on suspension pending an investigation after allegedly telling students during an online class that she hoped all of Trump’s supporters would get the coronavirus and die before the election. I thought universities were supposed to create “safe spaces” for students. How safe would a Trump-supporting student feel in her class?
I say it’s unsurprising because this is the kind of nasty, dehumanizing, violent, radical left rhetoric that’s become all too common among university faculty who fancy themselves smarter and better than the rest of us. At least this one is still clinging to enough shards of self-awareness to say she’s sorry she’s “become the type of person” who wishes death on people who disagree with her politically.
That prompted this interesting blog post on how apparently intelligent and well-educated people who live in a bubble where only one view is ever expressed can let a steady diet of political hatred turn them into soulless tyrants with no regard for human life.
What is missing from these people’s lives that has left such a huge hole in their souls that they would prioritize ideology over human life? I think I know what it is, but she works in a university so I assume I wouldn’t be allowed to give her a Bible.
A TALE OF TWO NYC MURALS
While New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio was shutting down businesses but allowing protesters and rioters to fill the streets, he was also cutting the budget for police to protect New Yorkers but finding the money to paint “Black Lives Matter” on the street in front of Trump Tower and making police guard it from vandals 24/7.
Well, early Saturday morning, there was a block party in Brooklyn, and participants painted their own message to DeBlasio and Gov. Andrew Cuomo as a giant mural on the street. It took the Department of Transportation less than 24 hours to cover it up, proving that DeBlasio can actually get something done in the city.
(Warning, it’s a bluntly profane New York-style message, although the offensive word is blurred out.)
Funny that the Mayor believes so strongly in free speech when he’s protecting a message that he approves of, but one that’s critical of him was immediately covered up. I suspect it reflects the thoughts of many New Yorkers, even if a lot of them no longer live in New York.
CONGRATULATIONS PRINCETON, YOU DESERVE THIS
Leftists want us to take them very seriously, up until the point they’re held responsible for what they say or do, and then they become like Gene Wilder in “Young Frankenstein”: “I was JOKING! Don’t you know a JOKE when you hear one?!!”
One delicious example came last week when Princeton University President Christopher Eisgruber decided to engage in some fashionable virtue signaling by releasing an open letter declaring that "racism and the damage it does to people of color persist at Princeton" and that "racist assumptions" are "embedded in structures of the University itself." This came after hundreds of Princeton faculty members released an open letter claiming that "anti-Black racism has a visible bearing upon Princeton’s campus makeup."
So, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos (hooray!) sent a letter to Princeton, announcing a federal investigation into the school’s admitted racist practices. It points out that since Eisgruber became president in 2013, Princeton has received over $75 million in federal funds by repeatedly representing to the government that it was in compliance with the ban on racist practices required under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The letter orders Eisgruber and a corporate representative of the university to appear under oath for questioning, to answer written questions about these admitted acts of racism, and to produce records related to them and to the school’s sworn (possibly perjurious) declarations that they do not engage in racism when they applied for grants.
Seems to me, Princeton has two options:
1. Admit they are racist and return the $75 million-plus any penalties for misrepresenting themselves on federal forms. Or…
2. Admit their president was just talking through his hat and engaging in empty public self-flagellation because that’s what liberals are expected to do these days: virtue-signal about racism, even though they don’t really mean it.
Either way, Congratulations Secretary DeVos for finally forcing these pompous phonies to put up or shut up.
IN OTHER NEWS
In other “I’m a liberal, I don’t have to tell the truth or face consequence” news, former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy writes in National Review about all the justice system attorneys and officials claiming that the legal system is full of “systemic racism,” even though they run those systems in their states and cities. He says most of those he’s worked with are liberals who are proud of how professional and non-racist they are in doing their jobs, yet they reflexively ascribe racism to other people in the very same system. But when pressed, they can’t name a single example of a prosecution or conviction that hinged on the cops, attorneys or judge being racist.
ABOUT "CRITICAL RACE THEORY"
You’ve heard a lot about “critical race theory,” how it’s ripping America apart (by design), and how President Trump is trying to get it out of government and schools. But what, precisely, is “critical race theory”? If you’re a little fuzzy on the concept, this is a good primer that may help explain what it’s all about.
You’ll notice that buried under that pile of empty jargon and buzzwords is the same self-defeating message for every identity group: if you have problems or failures or just don’t like biological reality, it’s never your fault. All those things can be blamed on some evil “others” who are engaged in an invisible conspiracy to keep you down.
In truth, the real victims of a destructive conspiracy are the taxpayers who have to pay to disseminate this poison, the workers who are forced to suffer through it, the school kids who get it spoon-fed it into their heads, and anyone who doesn't take responsibility for improving his or her own life because it's easier to blame someone else.