Something like “All totalitarianism starts with the impulse to protect”. Via his Facebook page, Mayor Ted Wheeler, Portland, OR, is withholding a city permit for a gathering (maybe 2) because he objects to the likely content. No word on when such a planned gathering would eventually be permitted; my guess is never. To paraphrase Tom Wolfe, the long shadow of fascism is always landing on the United States and has landed in Portland.
Someone vandalized a Black Lives Matter poster in Ithaca, NY. Given the recent histories of such hate incidents, I give the odds of the vandal being a BLM supporter vs opponent at fifty-fifty.
I hope no one tries taking free speech away from anyone because the 1st Amendment was written and approved by white males.
Full credit to him and I applaud. Source video at http://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2017/05/28/sweet-schadenfreude-left-comes-unglitterglued-after-cnn-admits-liberals-arent-that-tolerant-video/?utm_campaign=twitchywidget.
One of Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. Stephen Miller has bought a ticket to women’s only show of Wonder Woman. Abuse on Twitter follows, naturally. My hat is off to Mr. Miller and I hope he brings protection and colleagues ready to record the action in the theater (and I do not mean on the screen).
“CNN’s Dylan Byers refreshingly acknowledged early on Friday morning that the mainstream media has an implicit slant towards the left.” (found in mediaite.com). Other weblogs that I read scoff along the lines of ‘Well, duh’, and ‘Self-evident’. I prefer a more optimistic interpretation. I am sure that Mr. Byers accepts the MSM/Clinton/Obama narrative and expects it to triumph. He is also quoted in link as saying “Earlier in the segment, the CNN correspondent highlighted the apparent “conversation that’s happening among people who follow the news industry — which is, how can we bridge the, sort of, gap between all of those conservatives who don’t trust the media, and get them to start knowing that — you know, we’re acting in good faith, with good intentions?”” I read this as the proverbial Stage 3 in the mourning process: bargaining. “If we only listen to you, then will you agree we are correct?”
This time the Democratic Party will do really well, taking back the House or Senate, or increasing the leads they already have. Every 2 years! Here we go again: There will be a wave in 2018. Total victory. But somehow it does not work out that way very much, or in the magnitude predicted. Like this April 2018. DNC reports bad month fundraising.
Surprising, given the hostility to males on most campuses these days. But less surprising when you consider the guiding association. Muslim-interest. I bet the feminists can’t get their heads around this one; male=bad, but Muslim=good.
I am referring to this article by Ben Steverman. It has this vague you-have-to-spend-if-you-know-what’s-good-for-the-country feeling to it. I disagree. Here are some of my responses.
- “There’s a time in everyone’s life to save. There’s also a time when you’re supposed to spend. That time is commonly known as retirement.” The premise is established without proof. Yes, you spend, presumably net spending beyond income from Social Security, pension, IRA, etc. But now you are ‘supposed’ to spend.
- “Yet these retirees, or at least the affluent ones, aren’t spending it.” Overstated. More correctly, from how I read the rest of the article, “aren’t spending enough”. Which is an opinion.
- “Unsurprisingly, given the data, Americans are dying with more money than they used to, adding to the increasing inequality that flows from inherited wealth.” A new agenda. Not only is insufficient spending bad, but by the way you are making the USA a worse place by selfishly distributing money to the heir or heirs of your choice.
- “Other studies have found affluent older Americans hoarding money.” First it was saving, now it is hoarding, with connotations of selfishness.
- “Researchers looked at all the logical reasons why affluent retirees might be so tight-fisted, including the desire to leave an inheritance or worries about future medical needs.” Perjorative alert! First savings, then hoarding (with connotation of preserving), now tight-fisted (i.e., mean).
- ““We found that even in a worst-case scenario, they could have spent more,” said Texas Tech University Professor Christopher Browning, one of the study’s authors. “There have to be other explanations,” he said–reasons that aren’t rational.” The hidden assumption is a model that supposedly accurately describes what you need. Saving more than that model? “Aren’t rational”. Maybe the model is too optimistic?
- “One of those irrational reasons may be simple habit.” I will need an explanation how habit is now irrational. For wealthy retirees their money habits have served them well, ie, plenty saved for retirement. A good outcome. But now ‘irrational’? I disagree.
- ” Americans held $25.3 trillion as retirement assets,” and “If the bulk of that money never gets spent, that’s a big problem.” First retirees, or at least rich ones, are not spending fast enough. Now they may not be spending at all! Trust me, the money, or at least a good fraction of it, will be spent. I detect a whiff of “We have to coerce people to spend money at the velocity some planners, or model, dictates.” I reject this.
- “Even as retirees live longer, healthier lives, they’ve become more pessimistic about the economy, the stock market, and their own financial situation.” I find this a true Fox-Butterfield-is-that-you statement. Longer living means the accumulated assets have to last longer, so it is sensible, not contradictory, for retirees to become pessimistic, or at least less spend-worthy.
Final grade: C-.
The Washington Post calls for limits on free speech in universities, saying universities should make racist speech off-limits. Eugene Volokh annihilates their ignorance better than I could. I will re-iterate that the Post’s motto “Democracy dies in darkness” is not a warning, but their plan.