Another Asinine Bumper Sticker

Drove on the Beltway this morning, and saw another far Left bumper sticker which explains the continuing distaste that Americans have for the far Left: Republicans for Voldemort.

For those without small children or who've been comatose for the last decade, Voldemort (as I understand it) is the chief antagonist of J.K Rowling's Harry Potter, and represents unremitting evil. Ya gotta love the far Left! It's not enough to disagree with the policies of your opponents; you have to smear them as evil, though there are very few --- if any --- actually evil agendas which get any press in the American media. Except maybe for that of the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA).

'Course, didn't get as much of a laugh out of that as when I saw two bumper stickers juxtaposed on a vehicle traveling on Dale Boulevard in Prince William County, circa 1994 (during the Ollie North race for Senate). The first said "Virginia is for Lovers, Not Liars."

Just beneath it? A Commie-Bore ... er, "Clinton-Gore" sticker.

The sad thing? I doubt that the owner of the vehicle was even aware of the ironies. More's to pity.

More on Supreme Court Confirmation

Andrew McCarthy (no, not the one from "St. Elmo's Fire") has this piece on National Review Online, on the propriety of questioning Supreme Court nominees on their views on Roe v. Wade.

Gotta agree with McCarthy on this one. Granted: the GOP line is more out of a lack of testicular fortitude as to being anti-abortion than it is about a principled position. Indeed, I'm perfectly willing to accept a candidate who favors abortion as public policy, but who would reverse Roe and throw the matter back to the states, where it was until 1973 and where it belongs, since I'm willing to live with the resolution of this issue through the proper processes. The question is one of the proper role of judges in a democratic republic. Indeed, one can be pro-abortion but anti-Roe, as was the late, great legal scholar John Hart Ely.

Sadly, the pro-abortionists lack the honesty to seek their constitutional changes the honest way, and instead rely upon judges willing to contort the Constitution to achieve their policy ends. It's what happens when you can't win at the ballot box.

Turnabout is Fair Play

My Federalist Society brother Professor Stephen Calabresi gets it just about right in this piece in the Weekly Standard.

However, the normally accurate journal gets it wrong in Hugh Hewitt's piece on Supreme Court nominee John Roberts' sense of humor. Sadly, it is not the University of Michigan which gets credit for miseducating the target of Roberts' wit; it is my own alma mater, the Emory School of Law. Levitas only engaged in "additional study in law" at the University of Michigan.

Schumer may be brilliant (he apparently got 1600 on his SATs though he went straight into government and never had a real job), but he's a world-class demagogue.

Perfect front guy for the Democrat Senate minority.

The NEA on Home Schooling

Another fine example of the attitudes underlying why the Youngs are reticent to turn their children over to the government schools, or anyone affiliated with the NEA.

Update: Excuse me. Read about the author. The piece is a janitor's opinion on homeschooling.

Some Good News About the Boy Scouts

Finally, some common sense when it comes to the Boy Scouts of America.

That the far Left continues its war on the Boy Scouts demonstrates beyond question that they (the Boy Scouts) are doing something right.

Another Story in the Campus PC Wars

One of my favorite reads is John Leo's column in U.S. News & World Report, to which I've subscribed for more than a quarter-century, since my freshman year in high school. His coverage of the campus PC wars is invaluable.

Never saw much of it on the Hill (Hampden-Sydney College, a men's college founded in 1776), where the largest campus club was the College Republicans, and the only protest during the Vietnam era was over 24-hour visitation for female guests. My predecessors certainly had their priorities in order. A short summer stint in '85 at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, for a National Endowment for the Humanities fellowship, was my first exposure to a campus where conservatives were in the minority. Had lots of fun writing for the Badger Herald, Madison's version of the Dartmouth Review.

Didn't really see any of the PC wars until I got to Emory, for law school, and the law school Dean, through his assistant, attempted to prevent our new chapter of the Federalist Society from hosting then-Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission --- a guy by the name of Clarence Thomas --- from speaking during the Student Government Association's "Discrimination Awareness Week." Said something about Thomas not being "an appropriate guest" for the event. Their mistake? Putting their nonsensical decision in writing. Thomas spoke in the law school auditorium.

Today's Washington Times relates another outrage, over student playwright Chris Lee, a young man at Washington State University, who challenged the campus orthodoxy by authoring a review called the "Passion of the Musical." Incredibly earnest campus lefties exercised the "hecklers' veto" with the support of the University president. Apparently satirizing the far Left is verboten at WSU.

Although I wasn't there, I would guess that the song "I Would Do Anything for Love, But I Won't Act Black" was a show-stopper. BTW, playwright Lee, a 23-year-old senior theatre major, is black.

Maybe we should start a collection to send Virginia's own Rick Sincere to review Lee's next production.

A New Cigar Bar in Little Rock

As some know, cigars are the only vice my wife allows me (she gets very picky about womanizing, drinking to excess, gambling, etc.). So, in the public interest for those with a similar vice, I am pleased to link to the ever-vigilant John McCaslin, who notes the impending opening of a new cigar bar in Little Rock, very near the Clinton Museum and Adult Bookstore:

Monica's on Clinton.

The mind reels at the possibilities.

The Stupid Party, Redux

The split in the AFL-CIO? Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of guys.

Don't be fooled, however. Without real reform, both the AFL-CIO and the renegade unions --- the Teamsters and SEIU --- will remain bastions of the far Left. And in a few years, they'll all kiss and make up, and all will be forgiven, if not forgotten. This is a separation, not a divorce.

After all, this is at least the second time that the Teamsters have left the AFL-CIO. And the Carpenters union left in March 2000.

Of course, then you begin to see stories like this one, in which some Republicans stark talking about the opportunity for the GOP in far Left dissension.

One can only hope that Republicans won't sacrifice fundamental principles --- like support for the proposition that every one should be free to join, or refrain entirely from supporting, a labor union without pain or penalty to their employment --- in pursuit of the filthy lucre and/or political machine of organized labor.

Those who are willing to sacrifice that principle, or who never had it in the first place, demonstrate the best reason why Samuel Francis sometimes described the GOP as "the Stupid Party."

National Review on PlameGate

National Review has some great articles in its most recent fortnightly edition on the continuing far Left efforts to smear Karl Rove. Don't know if they're available in the online edition without a subscription, but Rob Long has a great parody that is.

Virginia Education Association Endorses Democrat Ticket

Easing suspense that has been building all summer, the Virginia Education Association announces its endorsements for the upcoming statewide elections.

Anyone surprised?

An Activist Court

Given that my practice has a significant component before the Supremes, don't expect a lot of commentary here on John Roberts' nomination to succeed Sandra Day O'Connor. Discretion being the better part of valor, etc. (yeah, I know; "Since when do you demonstrate discretion, Young?").

However, I think there's no lack of discretion in commenting upon some of the nonsense I've seen around.

For instance, at least one individual on the far Left has figured out that an "activist" court is not something that Americans and/or Virginians want, and therefore, has decided to redefine the term to suggest that reversal of an activist decision like Roe v. Wade is what would be "activist," and that the hallmark of a "true conservative" is one who would re-affirm it. No less an authority than Karen Raschke, president and chief executive officer of the Virginia League for Planned Parenthood Inc., is now telling conservatives how to be conservative.

Does the far Left really labor under the misapprehension that they have the authority to tell conservatives how to be conservative? It's either arrogance or a dependence upon the woeful ignorance of conservatives. Or maybe it's just an appeal to so-called "moderates" who want to pretend to be "conservatives" while feeling the love of the far Left.

But some people have no excuse. Yesterday, in the Potomac News, one of the replacement columnists, Cornell Brooks, was trying to imply the old far Lefty saw that those who condemn judicial activism must be closet racists, because, after all, Brown v. Board of Education was an "activist" decision.

Sorry, Cornell, but that dog won't hunt, and you (as a Yale-trained lawyer) should know better. Brown was an originalist decision in its result that overturned the activist decision, which was Plessy v. Ferguson (1897), which had held that "separate but equal" was constitutional. Brown was activist only in the lack of quality in its reasoning, which relied upon social science data rather than the unambiguous words of the Civil War amendments.

Once again, the far Left demonstrates the dishonest lengths to which it will go to corrupt the Constitution, political debate, and the political process.

The NEA Agenda

Tip of the hat to MR JMS at Too Conservative. A good discussion of the NEA agenda, courtesy of Senator Cuccinelli. Required reading for those so-called "moderates" who confuse the teachers' union with an organization interested in educating the children.

Reminds me why, every time I see one of those bumper stickers that says "We teach the children," I thank God I can afford to send mine to private school.

Of course, it should also cause one to question why: (1) some Republicans try to cozy up to this far-Left organization; and (2) some Republicans won't support school choice.

They just don't get it.

James Montgomery Doohan --- RIP

Like many conservatives I know, I'm a science fiction fan from way back. And doubtless one of the most enduring science fiction adventures of our time is the "Star Trek" franchise (I've read that, around the Paramount lot, they call it "the Franchise").

Growing up as a kid in Central Pennsylvania, I can remember watching "Star Trek" reruns every afternoon at 4, as soon as I got back home from school. For those of a certain generation --- I vividly remember watching in awe as a man first set foot on the moon, 36 years ago yesterday, when I was but a five-year-old --- the adventures of Captain Kirk, Mr. Spock, Dr. McCoy, Scotty, Uhuru, Sulu, and Chekov were our first taste of the possibilities existing outside of our narrow, insular world. That the crew of the Enterprise also represented enduring values of friendship, loyalty, family, humor in the face of adversity was an optimistic commentary on the human condition, a hopeful vision of our future.

Now another of the original crew has died, and it's hard not to feel like we've lost a member of the family, perhaps the eccentric but beloved great-uncle. Jimmy Doohan was clearly not among the greats of his acting generation, but he nevertheless created an enduring character of depth and emotion in a supporting role, and like too few actors who are unfortunately typecast, embraced his role as a cultural icon. It's not surprising to learn that he landed on Juno Beach at Normandy on D-Day; his character among a cast that aspired to represent the better of our human nature would have been right at home in the vanguard of the liberation of Europe from the Nazi tyranny.

RIP

An Interesting Article On The De-Christianization of the Church

The Weekly Standard has run an interesting article on the United Church of Christ, the most politically-correct among the "main-line" Protestant churches. Recall that this was the church which last year caused a stir by runing pro-sin commercials, suggesting that other, more conservative denominations were turning away racial minorities, the disabled, and homosexuals. The implication was that the UCC, unlike other churches, was inclusive and tolerant.

Of course, what the UCC is inclusive and tolerant of is sin. Sure, none of us are perfect. And none of us has perfect knowledge of God and His will.

But I'm pretty sure that, while God recognizes and forgives us our imperfection, He is somewhat less tolerant of those who reject even the notion of right and wrong, good and evil, and sin. After all, I seem to recall something in the New Testament about someone who advised a fallen woman to "Go forth and sin no more" (emphasis added).

Defend Karl Rove!

The far Left is so much fun!

They defended for nearly a decade the Great Prevaricator, who was so much of a pathological liar that he lied even when the truth would suffice. Remember Travelgate, when he fired, and then smeared, employees that he could fire for any reason, or no reason? It's little wonder that they spend so much time attacking the Administration for "lies." I've no psychological training, but I believe the professionals call it "projection": attributing your own shortcomings to your enemies.

Now, having failed to take down House Majority Leader Tom Delay, they're trying to relive those halcyon days of yore, when in 1986, they went after President Reagan for an ill-advised, yet perfectly permissible, policy decision to appease the Mullahs in Teheran. Probably a sound tactic, that, if your opponents let it work. Recall that the result was the first Senate Democrat majority in six years, one that lasted until 1994.

This time, the target is presidential advisor-in-chief Karl Rove.

Democrats have good reason to go after Rove. After all, they credit him with making George W. Bush "presidential." I guess they figure that, if they can only get Rove, Bush will become an easy target. You know, the old "[Every Republican President] is a moron" ploy. In the far Left cloudcuckooland inhabited by today's Democrat mainstream, getting Rove is getting Bush.

While I suspect that the President is not the cretin portrayed by Democrats, though, the whole targeting of Rove is little more than the latest scandal-mongering by a party devoid of ideas, one becoming ever-more devoid of electoral victories. And their targeting of Rove for his revelation of the lies of Joe Wilson is another example of their despicable hypocrisy.

The Wall Street Journal gets it right here, where it demonstrates that Rove is the kind of whistleblower that the Dems defend... so long as the whistle is being blown on conservatives, or other defenders of America and traditional values.

The President should defend his advisor. Aside from being the right thing to do, in demonstrating that loyalty is a traditional conservative virtue, no less a personage than Clinton defender Lanny Davis has made it clear that Rove did nothing illegal, which is the ultimate determinant of Bush's course.

As the facts have come out, it has become clear that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, was not an undercover operative, nor had she been one for nine years when Rove revealed whatever it was that he revealed. Indeed, all facts indicate that Rove didn't even use her name, another element of the "crime" of which he has been accused by partisan Democrats and other assorted far Lefties, violation of the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act. Indeed, if it weren't for the fact that Plame happens to work at the CIA as an analyst, and once may have been an undercover operative, it is clear that the entire Democrat fantasy would fall apart.

Wilson and his wife have both been discredited, the former, by the Senate Intelligence Committee report on the whole affair; the latter, by her embrace of the celebrity accompanying the whole contretemps. In fact, the primary victim in this whole affair (aside from the truth) is the New York Times reporter who is sitting in jail because she refuses to reveal her source in the matter. And as tempting as it is to engage in a little schaudenfreunde over the fact that a New York Times reporter is in jail, it is disturbing that she is in her current fix over what is essentially a political witch hunt by partisan Democrats. Or is it just more than a little ironic?

At this point, it is or should be abundantly clear that Rove committed no crime. In fact, it was a public service.

The Emperor's New Clothes

Interesting post today on the Drudge Report about MoveOn.org's effort to sanitize itself. Since Drudge frequently changes his flash reports, the text is below:

REVEALED: INSIDE A MOVEON SUPREME COURT HOUSE PARTY; TAKE 'BUSH LIAR' T-SHIRTS OFF
Sun Jul 10 2005 20:29:27 ET
**Exclusive**

Over the weekend, the liberal activist group MOVEON.ORG hosted over house parties across the nation to stop President Bush from nominating a “radical right judge” -- and the DRUDGE REPORT obtained an exclusive invite to one of their hottest parties!

Charles Fazio of Alexandria, VA was the host of one of the most widely attended MOVEON parties in the Washington, DC area. The DRUDGE REPORT has learned because of Fazio’s registration success, his party was chosen to be a finalist on the WASHINGTON POST’s list of house party events the paper would cover.

In a desperate bid to sanitize his gathering and control how its attendees would be perceived by the POST, the MOVEON host emailed talking points to his guests. A copy of those talking points was obtained by the DRUDGE REPORT.

Fazio warned his guests: “Its very important that if you talk to the reporter, you stay on message. Remember, it is quite possible that our event will be the one the POST uses to represent the entire MoveOnPac effort this weekend.”

The key message for the event: “The momentum is finally shifting away from extremism. We will not accept a extremist nominee. This is not about conservatism vs liberalism or Republicans vs Democrats, this is all about extremism vs moderation and we're on the side of moderation.”

The MOVEON host reminded his guests: “We don't want to come across as leftist, liberal activists. We want to come across as we are- regular folks who are finally saying enough is enough to the extremists; that we're not falling for their extremist rhetoric anymore and we're finally going to expend the effort necessary to get our country back.”

Fazio: “Please stay on message and just know that ANYTHING you say can be taken out of context and used against the effort.”

One last suggestion from Fazio to his liberal MOVEON party-goers: “Oh, because a photographer will be here, might I suggest we put away our ‘Bush is a Liar’ t-shirts. Let's look like they do.”

Developing...

Amazing. The far Left, like most radical groups, has finally recognized that the truth hurts: Americans don't like far Left extremists. So it attempts to smear mainstream thinkers (i.e., those who look to the text of the Constitution rather than the editorial pages of the New York Times and the Washington Post as their source for constitutional decisionmaking) are "extreme."

'Course, that's as far as the truth goes. Rather than discard their far Left, anti-constitutional ideology, the MoveOn types want to hide it. More dishonesty from the Loony Left.

More on the Kelo Decision

Thomas Sowell's typically brilliant take on the Supreme Court's Kelo atrocity.

Interesting Item on Jay Timmons

John McCaslin's "Inside the Beltway" column has this item on the impending move of George Allen's right-hand guy, Jay Timmons, in September. This is the second move for Timmons, who left the National Republican Senatorial Committee after the successful 2004 campaign.

The question: Is this another move to distance Timmons from Allen because of the impact Timmons' rumored "lifestyle" issues might have upon the religious conservatives who form the backbone of the GOP base? Or is it simply an effort by Timmons to get some broader seasoning before being brought back for Allen's 2008 presidential bid? Some other reason (maybe just to make some real money)?

I tend to think the second reason. Like others, Timmons has never advanced the far-Left agenda associated with his "lifestyle" issues, and therefore, I have never known any religious conservatives who hold them against him, or Allen. Contrary to the MSM caricature, religious conservatives in my experience have more of a "live and let live" attitude towards such individuals, so long as they don't demand that society and its mores change to accommodate their perversion.

But I hardly believe that this is the end of the Allen/Timmons political axis.

2012 Summer Olympics

Is there anyone else who couldn't care less about the location of the 2012 Summer Olympic Games?

'Cept for the fact that France lost its bid to host them?

Conservative Blogger Hacked

Great report here about the hacking of Protest Warrior, a great website for those who are more than a little amused of the exploits of the Eugene Delgaudio variety (he of the "Teddy Kennedy Scuba Diving Team" fame).

Ya gotta love the left. As Nat Henthoff once observed, "Free speech for me, but not for thee."

And you thought I had it bad....

I grew up a Steelers fan in the glory days of the 70s, and remain one today, sixteen years in the land of the Burgundy and Gold to the contrary notwithstanding.

But this is too much...

Breaking New! -- O'Connor Retires

The link is here.

First thoughts: the pressure on Bush to appoint another woman will be enormous.

Justice O'Connor has been undependable on abortion, and sympathetic to the notion that American constitutional law should be informed by international standards. Bush should nominate someone who will be more dependably conservative.

Justice O'Connor's recent dissent in the Kelo decision earned her some measure of respect among conservatives. However, one could make the case that the respect was not particularly deserved, not so much for the substance of her decision, as for the fact that the majority decision was so radical that it pushed his moderate Justice into dissent.