We've had a good run the past few days, but I regret to say Proverbs
12:17 isn't exactly profound:
17 An honest witness tells the truth,
but a false witness tells lies.
You wouldn't think that would need explanation. But some people are still confused.
Ema Gavrilovic writes at the College Fix about last month's
hullabaloo at the University Near Here:
disruption of conservative event may have violated university
policy. The event: a talk by Dave Rubin, sponsored by the UNH
chapter of Turning
Point USA. Local activists attempted to block access to the event,
then disrupted it in progress.
A University of New Hampshire professor who recently gloated about disrupting an event on campus featuring gay conservative personality Dave Rubin may have violated university policy by interfering in the event.
Joelle Ruby Ryan, a senior lecturer in the Women’s Studies department at the university, was one of the disrupters for Rubin’s lecture, hosted on May 1 this year. Ryan, posting on Twitter shortly after the event, said: “We did something right! Glad we were able to disrupt this man’s hate speech as much as possible. He is nothing but a provocateur and ‘civil discourse’ with him is impossible.”
We've previously noted that obstructive/disruptive students were in violaton of UNH's Code of Conduct. Eva has dug out language in USNH policy that (arguably) could apply to Joëlle's conduct as well.
Who knows what will happen? UNH, understandably, keeps disciplinary actions pretty close to its chest.
Irony Department: Official UNH Spokesmodels were quoted last month as proactively deploring students' choice of Cinco de Mayo costumery. But (as near as I can tell) none have gone on the record to even mildly criticize the thuggish anti-free speech behavior of the activists.
We have a point/counterpoint from NRO on the recent
Supreme Court decision about cake-baking. First up is Andrew C.
McCarthy, who contends:
Cakeshop Is a Setback for Liberty
Professor Steve Vladek is right: The decision is “remarkably narrow.” One cannot help but be struck by the majority’s reticence from the outset: “Whatever the outcome of some future controversy involving facts similar to these, the Commission’s actions here violated the Free Exercise Clause.” Mind you, this is from the pen of Anthony Kennedy, a judicial supremacist who ordinarily interrupts his liberty bender only to scold the People — formerly known as the sovereign — to pipe down and quit grousing once the Robed Nine have spoken.
On this one, though, Justice Kennedy assures the Left it can grouse away. This ruling, in grudging accommodation of religious conviction, will not necessarily bear on the outcome “of some future controversy involving facts similar to these.”
On the flip side, we have David French, who writes Against the Masterpiece Cakeshop Killjoys.
It may well be the case that the next time SCOTUS considers the issue, it will do so with a “cleaner” record and compel creative professionals to use their artistic talents to help celebrate an event they find profane and unholy. But I’m less convinced, and I’m feeling better about the free-speech argument today than I did yesterday. There are six reasons why:
First, Jack Phillips avoided disaster. As Winston Churchill said, “Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result.” Going into the oral argument, the smart money said that Phillips faced an uphill climb. I talked to multiple constitutional litigators who were desperately afraid of the case. They didn’t like Jack’s case, and — at the very least — they wanted to bring a different challenge at a different time, when Kennedy was off the Court. To turn what was predicted to be a likely loss on the case’s core question into a 7-2 victory upholding free exercise in the face of anti-Christian bigotry is a simply delightful result.
Click over for David's other five reasons.
I, for one, wish we lived in a country where the default position was that private capitalist acts between adults were based on mutual consent, and could be accepted or declined "for a good reason, bad reason, or for no reason at all."
That would leave piles of lawyers and grievance-mongers starving in the streets. But I'm sure there are downsides as well.
The Google LFOD news alert rang for Kristin Tate's article in The
beware: The 'blue wave' is already changing red states.
Democrats may pick up a significant number of congressional seats in November. Some former solid-red districts may tick a few shades bluer, especially with a wave of GOP retirements.
Sound apocalyptic? No. It’s simply that demographics are destiny. Waves of left-leaning voters are moving from blue areas like New York, Boston, Chicago and parts of California to red areas like New Hampshire, Texas, North Carolina. The ultimate end result? The voting patterns and policies that ruined Democratic-dominated regions will shift to traditionally Republican areas.
Domestic migration patterns have sparked significant changes in electoral politics. Bostonians and endearingly-monikered “Massholes” have already changed New Hampshire from blood-red in the Reagan era to part-pink. The “Live Free or Die” state boasts a low cost of living and no income tax, which continues to attract residents from across New England. From July 2016 to July 2017, the rate of population growth in the state increased 60 percent from the previous year. During that year, "the number of people moving in from other states was 4,700 higher" in New Hampshire than the number of people who moved out, the AP reports.
Some things I didn't know:
- As revealed in the first link, "masshole" was placed in the Oxford English Dictionary back in 2015. This escaped my notice at the time.
- I was also unaware that anyone considered it an endearing moniker.
bemoaned NH's lackluster population growth, but was unaware of the
most recent (one-year) spike in in-migration. For the record: latest
Bureau stats show NH with a 0.6% bump in population in 2017,
the highest in New England.
But among all states (plus DC), that put us in a solid … twenty-second place.
But speaking of those in-migrators: as we've previously mentioned,
one of them wants to be my CongressCritter. Maura Sullivan is
convered/lampooned at the Free Beacon:
Arrived New Hampshire Resident, Dem Candidate to Attend Fundraisers
Maura Sullivan, an Illinois native turned Washington, D.C. insider who is now running for Congress in New Hampshire, is attending two fundraisers in Illinois over the next few weeks alongside former President Barack Obama's senior strategist David Axelrod and other wealthy donors.
New Hampshire Public Radio (NHPR) reporter Lauren Chooljian sent out screenshots on Twitter of two invitations to the fundraisers Sullivan, a candidate in the state's 1st Congressional District, would be headlining, noting several of the names listed on the invitations were "familiar" in Illinois politics.
Unsurprisingly, her campaign has reported that 80% of her contributions came from out-of-state. This will work wonders for our trade deficit with Illinois!
The Babylon Bee passes on the news:
News Slams Jesus For Never Once Standing During National Anthem.
In a broadcast Monday evening, several Fox News commentators slammed Jesus Christ for never once having stood for the United States’ national anthem, whether before a sports game or otherwise.
Well, I'm disappointed. I also heard a rumor that He was Jewish, but I await confirmation on that.