Sticks and Stones May Break My Bones, But Hate Speech Is Constitutional

 

Yik Yak, a controversial social media app, has colleges embroiled in debate as to the proper extents of speech on campuses. Yik Yak is a program that gives the user a “a live feed of what everyone’s saying around you.” On campuses around the country this can lead to predictable results when you combine adolescents, newly freed from the control of their parents, with the ability to spontaneously broadcast whatever they happen to be feeling in that moment within a 10-mile radius.

As noted by one writer at LSU, the results can often be what is popularly considered “hate speech.” Noting some of the truly terrible things that her fellow students feel free to share through the app, she writes:

Topless Woman Found in Headline Post

 

An anonymous tipster sent me an excellent suggestion. He thought the “How to Write a Great Post” list needed one more tip.  Looking at the examples he sent, I had to agree.

Hence: Rule #12: Create a clear, self-explanatory headline. Too many headlines are enigmas that require further investigation. Don’t make readers scan further to see if they are interested.

Member Post

 

My first memories of TV was watching Star Trek with my Father as a boy in England. In 2009, right before he passed away, I got my ailing Father out of the house to see the JJ Abrams reboot .  Not to get too emotional, but when Leonard Nimoy appeared in that movie, I wept. It […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

I Am, and Shall Always Be, Your Fan

 

nimoyYou can imagine James Doohan sitting in heaven, having a wee dram, and raising his head when he suddenly hears something. Everyone else is announced with bells, you know. This is a high, familiar white. DeForest Kelley rolls his eyes.

“Pointy-eared hobgoblin made it,” he says.

Yes, Reaganomics Sure Does Need a 21st Century Update

 

shutterstock_177028802“The GOP is Debating Whether Reaganomics Needs an Update” is a must-read piece by Washington Post reporter Jim Tankersley. One side answers the “What would Reagan do?” question by offering a nostalgic return to the 1980s Reagan agenda. Another prefers to apply the Reagan principles — a dynamic private sector, strong families and neighborhoods, upward mobility, work — to modern economic reality with different conservative policy results. Tankersley:

Leading Republicans are clashing over a signature issue the party has treated as gospel for nearly 40 years: the idea that sharply lower taxes and smaller government are enough by themselves to drive a more prosperous middle class — and win national elections. That simple philosophy has been the foundation of every GOP platform since the days of Ronald Reagan. Now, some of the party’s presidential hopefuls — along with some top conservative economists and strategists — are sending strong signals that they believe today’s beleaguered workers need more targeted help, even if growth speeds up.

For some context, here are a few then-and-now stats:

Member Post

 

Just what is the GOP doing? They are holding the farce that is CPAC. The Democrats are pushing through A takeover of the Internet, Banning AR-15’s by banning their ammo. (This is after they have stockpiled huge amounts of ammo for themselves).  Amnesty is a forgone conclusion. They are going to give Iran the bomb […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Member Post

 

Leonard Nimoy died today at age 83. Spock was easily my favorite character from the original series, and his role in Wrath of Khan stands out as my favorite of his performances.  It’s rather funny, though, as Nimoy once published a book I Am Not Spock, only to reconsider and publish, some 20 years later, […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Save The World; Eat Your Vegetables

 

imageI spent most of the day reading the newly-released Final Scientific Report of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC). This report will form the basis for the next 5-year revision of the U.S. Dietary Guidelines, due out later this year. The report is 571 pages long, and I won’t pretend to have read all of it, but I did read major portions. I did not do it for fun; it’s part of my job to know about this stuff.

I was particularly interested to see how the DGAC would handle the fact that, over the past five years, a critical mass of the public has become aware that public health experts have been, uh, “misrepresenting” the evidence for decades regarding dietary fat. There never was much, if any, real evidence that low-fat diets are good for you, or that saturated fat causes cardiac disease (despite the fact that both of these dogmas have been “settled science” since the 1970s.) But in recent years, several studies have been published that make it impossible to push low-fat diets any longer with a straight face, or low-saturated fat diets with much confidence. And much of the public is now aware of this new evidence.

So, I wondered, how would the DGAC handle this problem in a way that saves face?

Member Post

 

When watching a woman about my age sip her drink through a straw, it occurred to me that the action made her look like a little girl. Sipping on a straw will make anyone look like a kid for a few seconds. Do you agree?  What other simple behaviors and objects can make a mature […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Pope Francis Is a Radical; But Not in the Way We Think

 

On the day the College of Cardinals elected Pope Francis, many Catholics felt their guts tighten. Jorge Mario Bergolio’s theological beliefs were largely unknown. His roots in South America triggered anxiety, it being the birth place of Liberation Theology with its Marxist philosophy and focus on worldly salvation. Of even greater concern was his Jesuit (Society of Jesus) background. The Society of Jesus has been a problem almost from its inception, and was even suppressed by Pope Clement XIV in 1767, though the reasons are complicated. Jesuit Universities are a hotbed of Marxism with a Catholic flavor; a good many Jesuit professors hold capitalism in utter contempt. (One of my Jesuit professors even told me that Marx was a prophet, but that he never sought disciples. That is the very definition of idiocy). There was great anxiety that Francis would also weaken the Church’s position on abortion and gay marriage.

It took Francis only a few weeks to confirm many of these suspicions. First, he gave the America interview in which he seemed to suggest that Catholic opponents of abortion were motivated by strict adherence to the law of the Church, rather than by a spirit of mercy. I was infuriated at what I took to be a caricature of the pro-life movement. I knew from personal experience that pro-life Catholics love the innocent, and make enormous sacrifices of their time, money, and talents, not just on behalf of babies, but also of mothers who abort and thus ruin much of their lives.

Member Post

 

Random musings from a grumpy Catholic (me) on some of the news about the Church. I’ll begin with some rather pointed musings from a grumpy Cardinal in Germany. Grumpy because the Synod on the Family did not meet German expectations on the receiving of Communion by divorced and remarried Catholics and I suspect the receiving of […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Christie’s Tragic Flaw

 

shutterstock_133013534A hint can be taken from this paragraph from a report on the Governor’s appearance at CPAC by Tom Shattuck in the Boston Herald:

It was obvious to those of us in attendance in the hall at the Conservative Political Action Conference that Christie was not only comfortable jousting with the interviewer but he also seemed to take the most personal pleasure when questions were combative or included a colorful epithet about himself. It was also clear that he was giving America a choice: You can vote for the squishy candidate who is preordained by the Washington, D.C., elite or you can back a tough, passionate advocate who will dispense with decorum to stand by his principles at the drop of a dime.

Let me put my own emphasis on something: “…his principles” or …his principles“? It’s a subtle difference, but I contend that it’s more the former than the latter, and it’s a theme that runs through everything Chris Christie.

What Conservatives Could Learn From Lawyers

 

shutterstock_121503352I flirted with a law career for about a semester, but quickly discovered that, while I can comprehend the language used, I cannot tolerate the general lack of common sense. Lawyers, especially prosecutors, do know something, however, that conservatives could really use when it comes to dealing with liberals: when quizzing someone in public, stick to questions whose answers you already know.

That principle would have been extremely useful for Idaho Representative Vito Barbieri. If you haven’t caught the headlines about him, this idiot decided it would be a good idea to ask if a woman could swallow a camera to find out “something” about an unborn child she might be carrying. I apologize for pointing out this stupidity, but it is sadly just one in a long list of stupid things said or asked by conservative men in government hoping to pass legislation that will control what women do with their bodies. Yes, I am using the liberal terminology here for a very good reason. When “stupid” is all that the conservative side has to offer, it should face the liberal ridicule it deserves.

When it comes to the pro-life movement, there are piles of examples like this and, for a conservative woman that is ambivalent at best on the issue, it’s painful. Throw in the fact that this conservative woman spent the better part of 20 years crafting messages for politicians, and it’s downright excruciating. First of all, any legislator on either the state or federal level who wants to tackle this issue needs to be sure to have done some real research before they speak publicly. When you make a fool of yourself by not knowing the answers before the questions are asked, you hurt not only your own credibility, but also the movement. Recall how Wendy Davis rocketed to fame: fighting a law that protects women in Texas from ending up with someone like Kermit Gosnell treating them. How is that “pro-woman”?

Member Post

 

I now understand what the menu items, Main Feed, My Feed, and Member Feed are for.  But what seems to be missing is a non-CPAC feed, which could filter out all the posts and comments that have anything to do with CPAC.   Ricochet also needs a Politics Feed, in which all the stuff having to […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.