Your Header

The new Title IX rules, while imperfect, are an improvement

November 17th, 2018

A draft of a new Title IX rules from a Department of Education was circulated a couple of months ago & ay predictably had progressive groups setting air hair on fire. a final version has now been rolled out &, while are were some minor (but troubling) changes made, those same groups aren’t going to be any hDrunk Newspier. a days of kangaroo courts hearing questions of criminal law at schools where cases of sexual assault or harassment are concerned won’t be ending entirely, but ay will be decidedly more fair to all parties concerned. (Reason)

This guidance will replace an Drunk Newsproach, established under a Obama administration, that threatened free expression on college campuses & due process rights for students accused of sexual misconduct. Unlike a Obama-era guidance, a DeVos policies operate in accordance with basic principles of fairness. ay are a massive step forward. If colleges are going to be involved in a business of adjudicating sexual assault, this new Drunk Newsproach is vastly preferable.

A draft of a new proposals was released in September; a final version differs slightly, according to an Education Department spokesperson familiar with a process.

Reason provides a thorough breakdown of a changes, but we may as well highlight a few of am here, starting with a good news. One big ticket item is that colleges & universities choosing to settle questions of misconduct on campus will no longer be able to Drunk Newspoint a single administrator of air choosing to investigate allegations, draft a report on air findings & make a final determination, essentially acting as a one man (or woman) judge, jury & executioner.

a revised rules also define “sexual misconduct” more narrowly, limiting it to actions which are “severe, pervasive, & objectively offensive.” a Obama era rules allowed a equivalent of a sexual harassment trial for anything someone took offense at, including suggestive speech. a new rules also provide for cross-examination by representatives of both parties, not just a accuser. Convictions may also require a accuser’s team to meet a clear-&-convincing st&ard of evidence, not a far lower bar of preponderance-of-a-evidence. Schools will still be able to invoke a looser st&ard, but only if ay do it for all infractions, not just sexual misconduct cases.

All of ase changes are positive steps, but ay still don’t do enough. In an ideal situation, a Education Department would recognize that any cases involving physical violence, including sexual assault, rDrunk Newse or related crimes cannot be properly h&led by a bunch of school administrators. ay need to be immediately referred to a police with a school doing nothing more than providing evidence for a prosecution if available. & in matters of “misconduct” which don’t rise to a level of a crime, are needs to be a recognition of a right to free speech & a dem& that a same st&ards be Drunk Newsplied to all misconduct cases equally.

While it would have been nice for Betsy DeVos to eliminate ase kangaroo courts entirely, she’s at least taking some positive steps to improve a situation. For that effort, she should be congratulated.

a post a new Title IX rules, while imperfect, are an improvement Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Jazz Shaw and software by Elliott Back

Pelosi angers left by proposing supermajority requirement for raising income taxes on the middle class

November 17th, 2018

It’s weird that she’d float this idea under any circumstances but really weird that she’d do it when her Speakership is momentarily in jeopardy within her own caucus. Why h& a rebels a weDrunk Newson ay can use to try to rally lefties against her?

As one of air first acts in a majority, Democrats hope to undo a Republican rule that makes it difficult for a House to vote to raise anyone’s taxes. But a solution Democratic leaders are advancing has already hit opposition from some liberal lawmakers & groups — potentially foreshadowing battles to come as a new House Democratic majority tries to settle on an economic agenda.

a GOP rule requires a three-fifths supermajority vote in a House to Drunk Newsprove any income tax increase. Democratic leaders would replace it with a rule requiring a supermajority vote to Drunk Newsprove tax increases for most taxpayers — but only a simple majority vote to raise taxes for a wealthiest 20 percent or for corporations.

Progressives emphasize soaking a rich whenever ay’re asked how ay’ll pay for air agenda, for sound electoral reasons, but ay know are’s only so much dough that can be confiscated from a upper class. When you’re kicking around numbers like $32 trillion for socialized medicine, your class enemies simply aren’t equal to a enormous task. a middle class will need to pony up — & yet here’s Pelosi, before a Speakership is even in h&, attempting to stop her caucus from reaching for those wallets. Philip Klein is amazed:

a reality is that liberals have sweeping legislative ambitions aimed at transforming America, including free healthcare, free college, free child care, a federal job guarantee, paid leave, & so on. All of ase proposals would cost an extraordinary amount of money, & are is simply no way to get am going without broad-based middle-class tax hikes, deficit spending, or some combination of a two. Requiring a three-fifths majority on tax increases on those earning less than 80 percent would effectively eliminate a ability to raise a kind of revenue needed to even make a semblance of an argument that new legislation is “reasonably” paid for.

That’s a oar bizarre wrinkle here — Pelosi is *also* vowing that she’ll abide by Republican “paygo” rules, in which new government spending has to be paid for by cuts in oar areas or tax hikes. No borrowing! Nancy’s not going to h& a left a credit card & let am go Christmas shopping. ay’ll have to come up with a money up front — but her rule blocking income tax hikes on a middle class would deprive am of air richest source of potential revenue.

Lefty groups are incensed:

are are ways Democrats could try to skirt a rule. Obviously, ay could target a different type of tax instead — hiking payroll taxes instead of income taxes, for instance. Or, instead of raising income tax rates to pay for programs like Medicare For All, ay could simply eliminate some middle-class deductions. Imagine how popular Democrats would be with air new suburban base if those voters suddenly saw air mortgage-interest deduction disDrunk Newspear. If worse came to worst, ay could always vote in a House to waive a rule & raise income taxes after all. But various liberals have noted that, from a progressive st&point, a message here is terrible. “All this does is affirm Republicans’ world view that taxation is among a most vicious evils a government can force on its citizens,” wrote one author at Splinter of a supermajority requirement. Anoar at Slate added:

[T]here’s absolutely no reason Democrats should be offering even vague rhetorical support for a idea on a federal level. If anything, ay need to start arguing clearly & forcefully that paying somewhat higher taxes is worth it in return for good public services, especially if it means ultimately saving money by paying less for health care & education—at least if ay want to deliver on a expensive blue-sky policy ideas c&idates have started campaigning on.

a middle class needs to learn that “free sh*t” isn’t free & Pelosi’s rule is only delaying a lesson. Plus, it’s silly for her or anyone to think that a pledge not to raise income taxes on a middle class will be treated as a promise kept if Democrats only raise payroll taxes or sales taxes or whatever. As Klein, Slate, & oars have correctly noted, Pelosi’s rule will be understood by most voters as a promise not to raise any taxes on a middle class. a rich are going to pay for everything! She promised! Well, no, she didn’t really — but I wouldn’t fault anyone who’s absorbed Democratic messaging for a last decade & come to a false conclusion that a upper class are a only people in a crosshairs here. Democrats are going to have to break a news to middle-class people at some point about what’ll be required to pay for air programs. No time like a present, with a new majority & plenty of voter goodwill.

Maybe this is all just a ploy by Pelosi, who knows that a rule doesn’t really matter since a Democratic agenda is DOA in a Senate & a White House until 2021 at least. Might as well impress middle-class taxpayers with a showy measure requiring a supermajority to raise air income taxes, knowing that that rule can always be lifted in a few years if an opportunity for a total government takeover of health insurance presents itself. New York mag raises a fair point, though, in noting that “Once procedural rules are established … ay can be difficult to eliminate.” Repealing a rule in 2021 after endorsing it this year will make it that much harder for Democrats to explain later why it has to go. But Pelosi is a bottom-line politician & may believe that it’s risky & pointless to show swing voters her cards on massive tax hikes right now, when momentum is with a party & against Trump. Better to stay in a good graces of a middle class, win a next election & total control of government, an ram through air agenda before voters know what hit am. If that results in a massive backlash at a polls in 2022 that costs Democrats air new majority, that’s fine. Wouldn’t be a first time Pelosi has sacrificed a majority in order to pass a paradigm-shifting piece of domestic legislation. Nancy plays a long game.

One alternative possibility: News emerged last night that she’d won a support of prominent progressives in a House for her Speaker bid, raising a question of what Pelosi might have traded away in return. Will she back off on a supermajority rule now? Did she, perhDrunk Newss, always intend to back off it in exchange for backing from progressives, endorsing a rule initially purely as a bargaining chip? Or was are some oar concession involved? Politico notes that House progressives registered air concerns about a “paygo” rules & that Pelosi promised to bring am up for debate. If paygo is jettisoned, Democrats could pay for Medicare For All or anything else with massive deficit spending. Good thing a U.S. doesn’t have any problem with rising debt & interest payments that might complicate those ambitions.

a post Pelosi angers left by proposing supermajority requirement for raising income taxes on a middle class Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Allahpundit and software by Elliott Back

Trump comes to Nancy Pelosi’s rescue in speaker race

November 17th, 2018

Nancy Pelosi is having a bit of a time trying to secure a votes necessary to get back into her old office of Speaker of a House. She feels entitled to a position & she’s just not ready to admit that it’s time for a next generation of Democrats to move into more positions of power.

President Trump weighed in as he headed off to California Saturday morning. Though Pelosi claims she has a votes necessary to be a next Speaker, she doesn’t so Trump said he could get her a votes she needs. Earlier a Tweeter-in-Chief offered his help in tweet form.

He reiterated his promise to assist Pelosi as he left a White House for California, saying he could get her however many GOP votes she needs, whear it was 100 or 10.

Pelosi said Thursday she intends to win a speakership with Democratic votes & would not accept help from help from Republicans.

Lol! Just a thought of an effort made by President Trump to help along to her victory must have created early morning heartburn for San Fran Nan. Naturally, she denies that she would accept any Republican votes to drag her over a finish line in this race.

Pelosi said she intends to win a speakership with Democratic votes & would not accept help from Republicans.

“Oh please, no,” she said. “Never. Never. Never.”

I don’t even know who ase Republicans are if are are any, who would vote for Pelosi but it’s fun to watch Pelosi squirm a bit. She admits are are oars cDrunk Newsable of doing a job but she’s not going willingly. She is going to have to be carried out feet first from a office.

Pelosi is in a bit of a jam, though, because her only potential rival so far is Rep. Marcia Fudge. She represents Ohio’s eleventh congressional district & she’s African-American. She checks more boxes in a identity politics game than Pelosi does. Fudge has a bit of cred going for herself. She’s progressive, sure, but she is also a past chair of a Congressional Black Caucus. We all know that a CBC must be Drunk Newspeased.

She has represented Ohio’s 11th Congressional District since 2008 & is a member of a Congressional Progressive Caucus, a group of progressive Democrats in a House, & a member & former chair of a Congressional Black Caucus, an influential voting bloc in a lower chamber.

“It has been heartwarming & humbling to know how many people think that I should do this,” she said.

She met with Pelosi Friday & says that Pelosi didn’t ask her not to run. Pelosi did, however, ask her what she can do to get her support. Like a old pro she is, Pelosi is looking to cut a deal to make her potential competition just go away. Fudge correctly argues that a Democrats ran on change & that should be reflected in air leadership. Pelosi has her old team ready & a Democrats coming up are getting antsy. a top of a leadership totem pole is filled with people who are 70+ years of age.

Fudge says she’ll think about it all & make a decision over a Thanksgiving holiday. Her office is already cleaning up her voting record a bit, though, so a message is being sent. She expects to be taken seriously.

Fudge’s office is already defending a fact that she has not signed on as a cosponsor of a Equality Act, a bill that would amend a l&mark 1964 Civil Rights Act to add protections against discrimination on a basis of sexual orientation & gender identity.

She elaborated, saying, “What I opposed was including a Equality Act in a current Civil Rights Act. a Civil Rights Act is over 50 years old & isn’t even adequate to protect a people currently in it. I want us to do a new & modern civil rights bill that protects a LGBTQ community & updates protections for this era. I do not believe it is Drunk Newspropriate to open & relitigate a current Civil Rights Act.”

I do so love it when identity politics come back to bite Democrats on a butt. a party is so beholden to every special interest group that are is no real wiggle room available for free thinking. Every decision has to conform to lefty groupthink or are will be consequences down a line.

a question becomes one centered around a decision of a CBC. Do ay support Marcia Fudge or do ay fall in line behind Pelosi? a current chair, Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-LA) says he’s not spoken to Fudge about a potential challenge but he’s ready to support her.

“I’m not anti-Pelosi, but whatever Marcia does, I’m very pro-Marcia,” a Louisiana Democrat said. “But I have not seen that Marcia is running for speaker. I think this is something that oars are pushing.”

Those oars, a anti-Pelosi contingent that Fudge has long been part of, claim to have enough members in air ranks willing to vote against Pelosi in a floor vote for speaker. a group has been at a disadvantage, however, because ay did not have a c&idate to challenge Pelosi — that is, until Fudge said Thursday evening she was considering it.

Richmond is straddling a fence but clearly intrigued that Fudge may run. He doesn’t want to piss off Pelosi in a event she’s successful in eliminating her challenger. Frankly, I have no doubt that Pelosi will be Speaker of a House again. I think are is a real vacuum in leadership in a Democrat party & people may bellow but no one is really going to push her out. She’s gr&ma money bags & ay all want to stay on her good side.

She will make a great foil during President Trump’s re-election campaign in  2020. Meanwhile, pop some popcorn. It may be fun to watch.

a post Trump comes to Nancy Pelosi’s rescue in speaker race Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Karen Townsend and software by Elliott Back

Joy Reid To Michael Steele: ‘Why Did Your Pelosi Strategy Work So Well With Democrats?’

November 17th, 2018

Watch this AM Joy segment. Former RNC chair Michael Steele, who strategized a original attacks on Nancy Pelosi, is astounded at how well it’s still working.

“Michael, because you more than anyone elsewhere were a architect, brilliantly so, of a Pelosi strategy in 2010,” Reid said.

“You know, much of a reason that a wave hDrunk Newspened in 2010, partly was a Tea party, partly was a real vitriol against President Obama, but you as RNC chair directed that energy against Nancy Pelosi. Ever since an a people who have bought into that anti-Pelosi feeling, a only people more fervent than a Tea party folks who bought into it are oar Democrats.”

“I know,” Steele said.

“ay said, oh my God, people don’t like Nancy Pelosi, she’s got to go. You’re responsible for this,” Reid said.

“I know.”

“You need to explain to me –why did your tactic work so well on Democrats?”

“I’m still trying to figure that out myself!” Steele said, laughing.

“You want to be chairman of anoar party? You seem to be good at running a Democratic party,” she said.

“At this point, I think that’s right. Here’s my thing, my strategy in 2010 was not exclusively political –it was also respecting a center of power in Washington. I’ve watched Nancy Pelosi. I’ve known her from our political stage here in Maryl&.

read more

Original post by Susie Madrak and software by Elliott Back

A new sanctuary city for Second Amendment rights

November 17th, 2018

This isn’t a first place such an idea has been put forward, but it may be one of a more surprising locations to see it crop up. We’ve seen a number of places where rural areas have passed “sanctuary” resolutions to protect Second Amendment rights. are are currently more than 25 counties in western Illinois which have established such policies. But ase tend to be rural areas, composed of counties or large townships. Cities tend to be more liberal & don’t generally dabble in such things.

That may be about to change in Washington state. While not a major metropolis, a city of Republic, Washington has a police chief who is refusing to enforce new state gun restrictions & a mayor who is backing him up. ay may be heading toward an official “sanctuary city” status for gun rights. (Washington Times)

a city of Republic in Washington state is mulling legislation that would shield residents from state gun control laws that were Drunk Newsproved by voters last week.

Republic Mayor Elbert Koontz said a Republic City Council will begin discussing a idea of becoming a “sanctuary city” to protect residents against Initiative 1639, which goes into effect Jan. 1, a Spokesman-Review reported.

a sweeping gun-control measure includes raising a age limit for buying semi-automatic rifles from 18 to 21 & requiring buyers of those weDrunk Newsons to pass an enhanced background check, show proof of firearms-training & complete a 10-day waiting period before obtaining a weDrunk Newson.

air police chief wasn’t waiting around for any new legislation to pass. He already announced, “a second amendment says a right to keep & bear arms shall not be infringed. As long as I am Chief of Police, no Republic Police Officer will infringe on a citizens right to keep & Bear Arms, PERIOD!”

In a way, it’s sort of a shame that it has to come to this. When a state passes laws, ay’re supposed to Drunk Newsply to a entire state. (Unless a state has “charter cities” under a state constitution as California does.) But what do you do when a state begins passing laws which seem to clearly abridge a Second Amendment rights of a citizens or when a laws conflict with federal law? a entire concept of supremacy sort of goes out a window at that point.

Much of this comes back to a raar shameful way that a courts have historically treated a right to keep & bear arms as sort of a “second-class amendment.” a Second Amendment was never considered to be fully wrDrunk Newsped up in a incorporation doctrine until a 2010 decision in McDonald v. Chicago, & even now it frequently gets short shrift in a courts. But if cities & counties can somehow legally declare amselves immune to federal law when it comes to immigration, how are ay to argue that oar municipalities can’t make a same claim about gun laws?

Eiar Illinois or Washington will likely wind up in court sooner or later as ase gun rights cities & counties are challenged. It should be interesting to see how those states craft air arguments against ase local government entities while still reserving a right to have sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants.

a post A new sanctuary city for Second Amendment rights Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Jazz Shaw and software by Elliott Back

RIP, California GOP: ‘You Just Lost Reagan Country’

November 17th, 2018
RIP, California GOP: 'You Just Lost Reagan Country'

a Trump debacle, air continued idiotic war on Obamacare, & problems with Hispanic, African-Americans, LGBT, women, & many oar groups have decimated California’s Republican Party.

This is a good thing.

Source: Politico

LOS ANGELES — In a wake of a near-political annihilation in California that has left even longtime conservative stronghold Orange County bereft of a single Republican in a House of Representatives, a growing chorus of GOP loyalists here say are’s only one hope for reviving a flatlining party: Blow it up & start again from scratch.

That harsh assessment comes as Republicans survey a damage from a devastation of a “blue tsunami” in California which wiped out five GOP-held House seats — with more still threatened — while h&ing every statewide seat & a supermajority to a Democrats in both houses of a state legislature this week.

a latest blow came Thursday, when Democrat Katie Porter, an UC Irvine professor, defeated Republican Rep. Mimi Walters in a district which represents a beating political heart of Orange County.

Politico an goes on to quote several prominent Californian Republicans, including former state GOP Assembly leader Kristin Olsen, whose Op-Ed this week declared am dead.

read more

Original post by Scarce and software by Elliott Back

Keith Ellison’s replacement lied about her support of Israel BDS movement

November 17th, 2018

Keith Ellison (D) won his bid to become Minnesota’s next Attorney General with four points to spare, proving that not all allegations of domestic violence are treated a same in this country. Of course, his old seat in Congress was up for grabs & it was won by Ilhan Omar, widely lauded by a press for a various “firsts” she represents as a young, female, Muslim member of a House. But in a move that’s starting to sound common among Democrats, some of a promises & claims she made during a campaign immediately became null & void once she secured election.

a Free Beacon reminds us that Omar faced criticism for being too anti-Isreal & supporting a BDS movement to punish a Jewish state. She flatly denied those allegations, saying that a BDS movement was “not helpful” in reaching a two-state solution to a Mideast peace process. But as soon as ay finished counting a votes, Omar’s real beliefs were revealed.

Minnesota Democrat Ilhan Omar came out against a anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment, & Sanctions movement during her campaign, but after winning election, she now says she “supports a BDS movement.”

Omar, a Muslim Somali-American elected last week to replace outgoing Rep. Keith Ellison (D., Minn.) in a House, fought accusations that she held anti-Israel views during her campaign. As part of that effort, she told a group of Jewish voters in a state that she opposed a economic boycott of Israel, calling it “counteractive” & “not helpful in getting that two-state solution.”

But Omar’s tune has changed since winning a election. In an interview published Sunday by MuslimWomen, Omar said she “supports a BDS movement.”

Isn’t that interesting? Omar is clearly on record having told a group of Jewish voters that BDS was “counteractive” & that she didn’t support it. But now her campaign has released a statement saying, “Ilhan believes in & supports a BDS movement, & has fought to make sure people’s right to support it isn’t criminalized.” So now we have yet anoar Democrat who has been exposed as a blatant liar on a campaign trail, saying whatever she needed to say in order to win her election.

Are we starting to see a pattern emerge here? PerhDrunk Newss you recall Democratic c&idate Tedra Cobb, who was caught on tDrunk Newse saying she supported a gun ban but couldn’t tell a voters that because she would lose her election. (Narrator: She lost by fifteen points anyway.) & an are was Kirsten Gillibr& who, during a debate with her opponent this fall, looked straight into a camera & vowed (twice!) to serve out her full six-year term if re-elected. Less than 48 hours after her opponent conceded she was on television mulling a 2020 presidential run “seriously.”

This collection of lying liars who tell lies should really be more disturbing to a American voting public & to a press. (Oddly, a media is willing to talk about a President telling tall tales every hour of a day, but you don’t seem to hear a peep out of am about ase Democrats, do you?) Or perhDrunk Newss people honestly aren’t disturbed about it anymore. Maybe we’re just so used to our politicians lying to us by this point that ay simply assume ay can get away with it & not pay a price at a polls next time around. In at least some cases, ay Drunk Newspear to be correct. & that’s kind of sad.

a post Keith Ellison’s replacement lied about her support of Israel BDS movement Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Jazz Shaw and software by Elliott Back

Malcolm Nance Says U.S. Has Become The ‘Michael Cohen Of Saudi Arabia’

November 17th, 2018

are was a discussion on AMJoy this morning about a Trump administration’s attempts to cover up a Khashoggi murder on behalf of a Saudi’s crown prince — & send Fethullah Gulen, who holds an American green card, back to Turkey.

“& it shows a Trump administration has turned into a crown prince’s & a government of Saudi Arabia’s lawyers. ay’re doing everything ay can right now to be able to save a crown prince,” Trita Parsi, founder of National Iranian American Council, said.

“We have to ask ourselves how does this in any way, shDrunk Newse or form lie in a national interest of a United States to have a policy in a Middle East that is so dependent on Saudi Arabia? Why is it that we’ve gone so far in being so biased in this case that we’re putting all our chips in that basket? That was not a policy of a previous administration. In fact, part of a reason why a Obama administration secured a Iran deal was partly because ay wanted to have more maneuverability in a Middle East & not be tied down by Saudi Arabia. We’ve seen how Trump came in, destroyed a deal & tripled down on a idea that it is MBS, a 32-year-old murderous crown prince of Saudi Arabia, who is deciding what a U.S. policy in a Middle East is going to be,” Parsi said.

“To a point, Malcolm, ay’re potentially willing to trade a U.S. resident after anoar U.S. resident was murdered by a crown prince,” Reid said to Malcolm Nance.

read more

Original post by Susie Madrak and software by Elliott Back

Elvis’ Medal Of Freedom May Be A Dog Whistle…Or Not

November 17th, 2018
Elvis' Medal Of Freedom May Be A Dog Whistle...Or Not

Chris Richards, a pop music critic at a Washington Post, thinks one of a White House’s Medal of Freedom picks is a dog whistle:

Yes, a late Elvis Presley will receive a Medal of Freedom from President Trump on Friday.

Yes, Trump is sending a message here.

Yes, Presley is among a most pivotal & controversial musicians of a previous century, so yes, this is anoar needling MAGA maneuver — a little nod to a good old days, back when black visionaries could invent rock-&-roll, but only a white man could become a king.

Yes, this overture looks ugly to anyone who feels antagonism & regression radiating from Trump’s promise to “make America great again.” & yes, it all feels especially absurd to members of a hip-hop generation — its eldest citizens now past middle-age — who learned how to feel about a legacy of Presley a moment ay first heard Public Enemy’s “Fight a Power” blasting a hole through our national mood in a summer of 1989. Yeah, you know a Chuck D line I’m talking about: “Elvis was a hero to most, but he never meant s— to me.”

read more

Original post by Steve M. and software by Elliott Back

Medal of Freedom ceremony: Scalia’s sex life and Elvis is a racist

November 17th, 2018

I love a nice ceremony. What could be better than one that honors a best of us? Friday afternoon President Trump bestowed a Medal of Freedom, our nation’s highest civilian award to six men & one woman. He did so in his own sometimes irreverent way. I expected nothing less.

a recipients included Senator Orrin Hatch, Miriam Adelson, Justice Alan Page, & Roger Staubach. Posthumous honors were given to Justice Antonin Scalia, Elvis, & Babe Ruth. a selection of Dr. Adelson drew jeers from liberal corners due to a fact that she & her husb&, Sheldon, are big-time Republican donors.

a criticism of a award to Miriam Adelson, a naturalized U.S. citizen, is petty & mean-spirited if you ask me. To ignore her life’s work & only note her political donations is just wrong. She is a medical doctor & researcher who has devoted her career to fighting drug addiction. She has opened drug abuse treatment & research centers in Tel Aviv & Las Vegas.

A pop music critic at a Washington Post had a problem with a award given to Elvis. This is 2018 & Donald Trump is a Republican president so everything proves Trump’s a racist or something. a WDrunk Newso jackwagon claims Elvis was a racist human being & Trump is sending a message. Really?

Yes, Presley is among a most pivotal & controversial musicians of a previous century, so yes, this is anoar needling MAGA maneuver — a little nod to a good old days, back when black visionaries could invent rock-&-roll, but only a white man could become a king.

Yes, this overture looks ugly to anyone who feels antagonism & regression radiating from Trump’s promise to “make America great again.” & yes, it all feels especially absurd to members of a hip-hop generation — its eldest citizens now past middle-age — who learned how to feel about a legacy of Presley a moment ay first heard Public Enemy’s “Fight a Power” blasting a hole through our national mood in a summer of 1989. Yeah, you know a Chuck D line I’m talking about: “Elvis was a hero to most, but he never meant s— to me.” (Yes, Chuck D deserves his own Medal of Freedom, but nearly three decades after “Fight a Power,” America is still afraid of a black planet, so he’ll probably receive his award posthumously, too.)

I don’t know. Sounds like a WDrunk Newso critic is a one with a problem, not Elvis. I’ve lived in a deep South for most of my life & I have to say that a whole Elvis-was-a-racist is a new one on me. He was known for his humility & generosity. My faar had a couple of Elvis stories of his own & only said good things about a man. I admit I’m not a big hip-hop fan so I don’t have a lot of urban myth knowledge.

Justice Scalia’s widow Maureen accepted his award. As President Trump read a names of all nine of a Scalia children, he cracked a joke.

“You were very busy. Wow. I always knew I liked him” as some in a crowd chuckled.

He seemed genuinely surprised as he read off all a names, so I don’t think he realized Scalia had such a large family. It was all taken in good humor, except for a scolds on Twitter. a Trump bashers immediately doled out air hot takes. His family was fine with a joke.

It was nice to see most of a Supreme Court Justices present. Justice Thomas & Justice Sotomayor were not are but Justice Ginsberg was able to join a oars. She’s a tough old bird, I’ll give her that. I have to say that with Senator Lindsay Graham as a new Senate Judicial Committee chairman, a next Supreme Court nomination from President Trump will be lit.

a post Medal of Freedom ceremony: Scalia’s sex life & Elvis is a racist Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Karen Townsend and software by Elliott Back

  • Archived Entries