Feeds:
Posts
Comments

In an interview yesterday by Laura Ingraham (h/t Don Surber), former federal prosecutor Joseph diGenova predicted that because of the e-mail scandal which has enveloped her, Hillary Clinton is “not going to be able to complete her campaign,” because either:

(1) the Department of Justice will charge Hillary with a crime; or

(2) the Attorney General will refuse to charge Hillary, triggering a massive revolt by officials at the FBI, and in the military and intelligence communities, and a scandal on par with the Watergate coverup. Continue Reading »

cheer.png

On Dec. 4, 2015, the Packers’ offensive line gave Aaron Rodgers the time he needed to make history. Continue Reading »

Contrary to what the liberal media claim, Donald Trump never mocked anyone for being disabled. But liberal icon John Lennon did. Here’s the proof.

Thanks to Blake Neff of the Daily Caller, the world knows the name of “Shrieking Girl” — the Yale student caught on video on Nov. 5 screaming profanities at the professor in charge of her college (Silliman College) for his refusal to apologize for failing to protect her from offensive Halloween costumes. Her name is Jerelyn Luther. Continue Reading »

Perhaps file this under “wild imagination,” but consider the following (and what it may reveal about Dr. Ben Carson’s probity and judgment if this series of events is more than coincidence): Continue Reading »

Glenn Reynolds -- Blogfather cropped

Prof. Glenn Reynolds, aka “Instapundit”

Rush Limbaugh gave a shout-out to Glenn Reynolds yesterday, praising his most recent USA Today column, which asks whether college students are too spoiled and immature to vote, so that perhaps we should raise the voting age to 25. here’s a clip (transcript below):

Transcript (copied from Rush’s site):

RUSH: Glenn Reynolds is a law professor at the University of Tennessee. He writes a column at USA Today, and he’s got a piece today which basically says — based on what we’re learning here — that if these college students are too spoiled to even tolerate debate, why in the world do we let them vote? How in the world can people who are afraid to hear anything they disagree with? I mean, literally afraid! How can we let ’em vote? How can students too spoiled, too childlike, too narcissistic, too unwilling to tolerate opposing points of view…?

How can we let them vote? How can they even assess opposing political arguments? How can they determine what they agree or disagree with? They can’t. So raise the voting age to 25. He said, “This isn’t the behavior of people who are capable of weighing opposing ideas, or of changing their minds when they are confronted with evidence that suggests that they are wrong. It’s the behavior of spoiled children — a characterization that . . . underscores . . . they are too young to be responsible for their actions. And spoiled children shouldn’t vote.”

That’s an interesting proposition. It’d never happen. But I like the point that it makes.

Charlie Sykes

Charlie Sykes

Charlie Sykes (FB, Twitter), one of Wisconsin’s most influential conservative journalists (founder of Right Wisconsin) featured a segment on Wisconsin state legislator Rep. Christine Sinicki (D — Milwaukee) in his Oct. 21 talk-radio show (on Milwaukee’s WTMJ).

Charlie’s analysis of Rep. Sinicki’s performance a day earlier on the floor of the Assembly, during debate over revisions to the “John Doe” criminal investigative procedures, provides a bracing reminder of just how low the standards are for election to office in liberal-dominated Milwaukee. (Matt Kittle apparently was the first journalist to mention Sinicki’s performance, in this Oct. 20 post summarizing the “John Doe” debate). Continue Reading »