Daily Digest |  |
- Biden Tries to Shut Down News Coverage at the Border
- Is Islamic Terrorism Resurgent?
- Even wokeism isn’t an absolute defense for stupidity
- Judge Ho tells it like it is
- VIP Live On Tuesday
| Biden Tries to Shut Down News Coverage at the Border Posted: 28 Mar 2021 04:14 PM PDT (John Hinderaker) The Biden administration is desperately trying to prevent the American people from realizing the extent of the fiasco at our Southern border. Thus, loyal Democrat Chris Wallace this morning criticized Biden, pointing out that the Trump administration was more transparent. The Biden administration has repeatedly tried to prevent photos and videos of conditions at the border from reaching the American people. Late last week, a delegation of 18 senators visited the border, in particular the Donna, Texas facility that has been the center of the crisis. The Biden administration sent a political operative (as described by Senator Ted Cruz) to try to block Cruz from filming the Donna disaster:
    |
| Is Islamic Terrorism Resurgent? Posted: 28 Mar 2021 03:54 PM PDT (John Hinderaker) Islamic terrorism hasn’t been much in the news lately. My sense is that, while it obviously hasn’t gone away, it has receded in recent years. But a series of attacks during the last week raise, at least, the question whether Islamic terrorism is again rearing its head. Today is Palm Sunday, and in Indonesia two homicide bombers said to be followers of the Islamic State attacked a Catholic church:
The next story has been going on for several days, but somehow I missed it until yesterday. A group of around 100 armed, organized terrorists attacked the city of Palma in Mozambique, where a multi-billion dollar natural gas project is being developed. They apparently have held the town for several days, with Mozambique’s government evidently unable to dislodge them:
It seems striking that such a brazen and bloody terrorist attack has gotten relatively little press coverage. Then, of course, we have mass murderer Ahmad Al Issa in Boulder. It is not yet clear whether Issa’s ideology was radical Islam or garden-variety liberalism. Nor is it clear whether philosophy, in either case, was overwhelmed by mental illness. But there are reports that Issa was on the FBI’s radar as one who was sympathetic to ISIS, so it may be that his murders will ultimately be recorded as acts of Islamic terror. I still think the threat of Islamic terrorism has declined somewhat, but these attacks are a reminder that we can’t be complacent about the extent of the ongoing threat.   |
| Even wokeism isn’t an absolute defense for stupidity Posted: 28 Mar 2021 01:58 PM PDT (Paul Mirengoff) You have to be pretty stupid to opine publicly about the race/ethnicity of a mass shooter before his race/ethnicity is known. You have to be very stupid to base such an opinion on the obviously false claim that mass shooters are “always” of a particular race/ethnicity. And you have to be world-class stupid to risk your professional career on such an assertion. But that’s what Hemal Jhaveri, then the “diversity and inclusion editor at USA Today Sports,” did following last week’s mass shooting in Colorado. She tweeted, “It’s always an angry white man [who does this]. Always.” Unfortunately for Jhaveri’s career, the Colorado shooter was Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa, an Arab-American who was born in Syria. As anyone who pays attention knows, this guy is not the only man of Middle Eastern heritage to have gone on a shooting spree. Recall Omar Mateen, the Florida nightclub gunman and Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood killer. Jhaveri also overlooked Floyd Lee Corkins, a Black who tried to shoot up a Washington, D.C. think tank. USA Today fired Jhaveri. She promptly played the victim card, including pathetic moans about “microaggressions” she allegedly experience at USA Today. Doubling down on stupid, Jhaveri complained: “There is always the threat that tweets which challenge white supremacy will be weaponized by bad faith actors.” But Jhaveri’s problem wasn’t her “challenge to white supremacy.” I take it that USA Today paid her to regurgitate such “challenges.” Her problem was that the tweet about the Colorado shooting exposed her as a fool with a high degree of animosity towards white males. Because Jhaveri’s beat was “diversity and inclusion,” her firing was fully justified. If Jhaveri had been, say, an attorney in a law firm, it would have wrong to fire her (though her colleagues would be justified in wondering how the firm ever hired anyone this dumb). Firing her from most jobs for her tweet would have been cancel culturist. But Jhaveri’s job was, in essence, to write about race and ethnicity. I won’t say it was to write intelligently about these subjects because this beat typically is devoted to promoting the mindless “woke” narrative. Ironically, though, this sad reality made it all the more imperative that USA Today let Jhaveri go. By displaying her stupidity and anti-white male animus, she lost her viability as a race monger for a newspaper that claims to be serious. She needed to be replaced by someone equally woke who hasn’t beclowned herself. Those concerned with maintaining traditional standards of journalism couldn’t support employing a writer as biased and injudicious as Jhaveri. Those concerned with promoting wokeism couldn’t support employing someone whose cover was so badly blown.   |
| Posted: 28 Mar 2021 10:35 AM PDT (Paul Mirengoff) Last week, the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on "The Importance of a Diverse Federal Judiciary." The title of the hearing shows that the Committee had already reached the conclusion that a “diverse” federal judiciary is quite important. It brings to mind the old Johnny Carson show gag in which Ed McMahon might ask: “How important is it, Johnny?” One of the Committee’s witnesses didn’t go along with the gag. Judge James Ho of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit included the following observations in his prepared remarks: Once everyone has had full and fair opportunity to be considered, you pick on the merits. Both the Constitution and the Civil Rights Act make clear that it is wrong to hire people based on race. That's the law for a wide range of jobs. But it would be especially wrong to select judges based on race. It is true that I am the only Asian American on my court. I'm also the only immigrant on my court. But I would never suggest that a wise Asian would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion than a white judge. That would be antithetical to our legal system, and poisonous to civil society. No one should ever assume that I'm more likely to favor Asians or immigrants or anyone else—or that my colleagues are less likely to. . . . I don't say this because I think race is no longer an issue in our country. I've received racist hate mail and racially disparaging remarks because of positions I've taken in my career. I've been treated differently because of who I'm married to. And I also remember, back in high school, my college admissions adviser telling me that my grades, SAT scores, and activities were all strong enough to get me into my top choice of schools—if I wasn't Asian. Now, I'm not saying any of this here to complain. Whatever negative experiences I've had, they pale in comparison to my many blessings living in this great country. I was not born an American. But I thank God every day that I will die an American. My point is just that I don't come to my views because I think racism is behind us. Rather, I come to my views precisely because racism is not behind us. The last thing we should do is divide people by race. The last thing we should do is suggest that the racists are right. We don't achieve equality of opportunity by denying it to anyone—we achieve it by securing it for everyone. So make no mistake: It would be profoundly offensive—and un-American—to tell the world that you're restricting a judgeship to members of only one race. It's offensive to people of other races. And it's offensive to people of that race—because you're suggesting that the only way they'll get the job is if you rig the rules in their favor. Judge Ho is a superstar. He was nominated to the Fifth Circuit by President Trump. Notwithstanding his stellar qualifications and his “diversity,” only three Democrats (Donnelly, Heitkamp, and McCaskill) voted to confirm him. None of the three is still in the Senate.   |
| Posted: 28 Mar 2021 06:55 AM PDT (John Hinderaker) We haven’t done a VIP Live show for a while. Maybe we were stunned into silence by the election, I don’t know. In any event, we are back, or will be as of 7 p.m. Central (5 Pacific, 8 Eastern) on Tuesday. We will kick around the issues of the day as well as taking questions and comments from VIPs. If you are a VIP member, you will get an email with a link to a live address where you can watch the event and submit comments and questions. If you are not already a VIP member, you can become one by clicking on the box in the upper right portion of our sidebar. Membership costs $4.80 per month or $48 per year, and gives you access to Power Line Live events, as well as other occasional benefits like videos of Steve’s lectures. You will eliminate most ads on our site. And, most important, by becoming a VIP you support our work. The URL to become a VIP is now: https://subscriptions.powerlineblog.com So if you are a VIP, please tune in Tuesday at 7:00 p.m. Central. If you aren’t, please consider subscribing.
  |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Power LinePower Line. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |
No comments:
Post a Comment