[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them here . Or by Twitter @AaronWorthing.] As usual, you are positively encouraged to engage in sockpuppetry on this thread. The usual rules apply. Please be sure to switch back to your regular handle when commenting on other threads. I have made that mistake myself. And remember, the worst sin you can commit on this thread is not being funny. ——————— And for this week’s Friday frivolity, I was reading this post at the the PJ Tatler when a passage caught my eye. The author was telling about famed lawyer Christian Adams’ visit to Tulane Law School in Louisiana, and the subject turned to the practice in many states of stripping felon of their right to vote: During the question-and-answer period , Christian was confronted by a student who was upset that there had been no meaningful discussion of what he claimed was the biggest group of disenfranchised voters – felons. It turns out that the upset student, Bruce Reilly, a first-year at Tulane, had a very personal reason for asking the question: he had pled guilty to second-degree murder and robbery and served 12 years in prison. When he was 20 years old, Reilly beat and stabbed to death a 58-year old English professor at Community College of Rhode island, capping off his crime by stealing the professor’s car, wallet, and credit cards. In short, he is a felon (the term ex-felon should be reserved for those with a full pardon, not those who have merely served the prison portion of their sentences). Which made me immediately stop and go, “huh?” Now the article goes on to point out how absurd it was that Mr. Reilly was getting an NAACP scholarship given that his felony conviction will undoubtedly prevent him becoming a lawyer. In case you didn’t know, every lawyer has to pass a character and fitness review, and felonies almost automatically result in disqualification. And that is an interesting point and all, but I am getting hung up on something else. More fundamentally than that, shouldn’t he be disqualified from being a student, at any school? I don’t mean merely because he committed a felony, but particularly because he killed a professor? Shouldn’t that be an automatic disqualifier? You kill one of us, we don’t let you come to our school… I mean if you were his teacher, knowing that, would you be willing to give him an F? And do you think the average professorial type is going to be that courageous? [Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]
See the original post:
Sockpuppet Friday—the Grade Inflation Edition!
My further thoughts on J. Christian Adams’ book Injustice, which paints the Obama/Holder Justice Department and especially the Civil Rights Division as a place of reckless lawlessness.
Go here to read the rest:
Holder Should Not Hold On
Although I mentioned it in passing, I have not directly commented on the reports from Andrew Breitbart and J. Christian Adams that there seemed to be mutually reinforcing interplay between Barack Obama and leaders of the New Black Panthers at events in Selma, Alabama in 2007. I had not yet done so in large part because the story seemed to require a discussion full of nuance and context that I have not yet this week found enough time to provide. Well, I no longer need to do so. Instead, I associate myself completely with this analysis by Andrew McCarthy at NRO, which nails the issue perfectly. Sorry to steal the “money” passages (please do read McCarthy’s whole post!), but the main thrust of McCarthy’s argument is encapsulated here: Obama’s interplay with the Panthers in Selma might have been happenstance to which Obama was indifferent; it might have been happenstance that he exploited to what he believed at the time was his advantage; or it might have been a predetermined collaboration. We just don’t know, because Obama was not vetted like other candidates are vetted. The result is ambiguity. When there is ambiguity, you have to look at everything else you know in order to try to interpret the event in question. When it comes to Selma, the everything else we know prominently includes the subsequent, strange dismissal of the NBPP case and the adoption of an enforcement policy in which DOJ refrains from using the civil rights laws to protect white victims from black transgressors. I also think it highly interesting that Loretta King, who was at the center of the Panther case dismissals , the hiring scandal at DoJ , the absurd DoJ position of trying to impose racial quotas on the Fire Department of New York, and the obnoxious DoJ stance disallowing the black majority of Kinston, North Carolina from holding nonpartisan municipal elections — wow, what a horrid resume, not even mentioning her ethics being sanctioned by federal courts! — has, according to reports, quietly resigned from DoJ just as Adams’ book is coming out. Methinks there just might be some illegal activity being swept under the rug here; methinks that House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith should investigate.
See the rest here:
Don’t Blink: Panthers
Here’s a story I wanted to get in my article today on Christian Adams, but it interrupted the flow too much, so I’ll put it in this blog post. Sometime more than a month into my covering the dismissal of the New Black Panther case, I decided to take the bull by the horns and call Adams directly at the Justice Department to see if he would talk on the record. As soon as I identified myself, he said, “You’ll have to go to Schmaler for that.” Schmaler? Huh? It turns out that the chief spokesman for the Justice Department is Tracy Schmaler (I had spoken to an assistant press person before), and Adams was adamant that he couldn’t talk to the press and that I must talk to Ms. Schmaler. So I called and asked for her by name. What a trip. I don’t think I was on with her for more than about 20 seconds, still well within my typical, almost overly polite introduction of self and topic which I’m known for using upon first introduction, when she began absolutely berating me for the WashTimes coverage of the case and for daring to ask any more questions. Within another minute, probably less, “berating” had turned into “yelling.” And I hadn’t even asked a tough question yet! Obviously, “go[ing] to Schmaler” would never be worth a thing. The only couple of other times I even tried, the experience was only slightly less unpleasant. And when I tried calling Adams back another time (still to no avail), I opened the conversation by telling him that him sending me to Schmaler had been such a waste of time that he shouldn’t try to pawn me off on her again. He laughed heartily, before again politely declining my request for him to talk about the case. So, a year later, when Christian Adams finally went public with his testimony to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, I paid attention when he left the room and followed him as he and his lawyer left the building by a back exit. Indeed, I walked along beside him for blocks, all the way to a garage where he had his car parked, before he would say much of anything. “Look,” I said, “you’re public now. Now there’s no reason not to go into some more details.” Adams smiled. It was a sort of mischievous smile, a very quick one, before adopting a poker face and saying: “I’m sorry, but you’ll have to go to Schmaler for that.” Then he burst out laughing. And then, finally, he answered a few questions…..
See the original post:
A Funny "Injustice" Story
President Obama will fly to Texas for a jobs bill rally and two Dallas fundraisers, and then hit up St. Louis for two more fundraisers on the way back ( Politico ) New poll: Herman Cain tied with Rick Perry behind Mitt Romney in GOP field ( Washington Post ) New emails reveal greater White House knowledge of Solyndra’s risks ( New York Times ) Apple will launch the iPhone5 today ( Chicago Tribune ) The GAO will present evidence in the Senate today that Medicare is subsidizing prescription drug abuse
