Wednesday, December 16, 2015

Review of some Washington Post Opinions which bugged me



Mr. Ignatius gets my "There you go again award" for typical clap trap by an anti-Republican "pundit".

We heard no outrage about the proposal of Mr. Rubio and Mr. Paul which outlawed visas from "30 Muslim countries with active jihadist populations.” This, of course includes non-Muslims which are no threats to us.  Where is the logic to that, and why have these PC versions of Trump's proposals not been denounced?

If you exclude sufficient number of nations you get to the same result as Trumps more specific Muslim exclusion, but you affect millions of totally uninvolved people.

India has over 180 M Muslims, if you exclude it, you are excluding 800+M non-Muslim Indians. Aljazeera

What claptrap this PC approach produces.

 


Ruth Marcus is true to her bias: "The fault lines are predictable: Three liberal justices (Justice Elena Kagan is recused because she was involved in the case as solicitor general) support affirmative action; four conservatives loathe it; and Justice Anthony M. Kennedy is torn between his dislike of affirmative action and his aversion to societal upheaval."

Wouldn't it be nice if we talked about the justices view of the constitution, not their politics? Is Mr. Kennedy averse to affirmative action, or does he just believe it to be unconstitutional? Why do "Feelings" need to be involved in Scalia's understanding of the Constitution.

This lack of respect for the persons trusted with interpreting the applicability of the Constitution to difficult cases is painful, but all too common to hear.
--------------------------------------------------
 Eugene Robinson Washington Post: Would Cruz be any better than Trump

I find nothing radical in calling a fellow Senator a liar. Aren't both of them politicians? 

By the Way Mitch and the rest of the Rep Party leaders promised lots of things (getting rid of Obama Care, defunding NPR and Planned Parenthood, restraining the president financially, etc. ) and did none of these things. So aren't they all liars? The specific case dealt with closing the Government over Obama Care. Mitch was clearly a liar in that area.

Lastly, when Reid can call Scalia a bigot, where do you get the effrontery of questioning the language of another Senator?

When Mrs. Clinton can only think Republicans when she thinks of enemies, Cruz's belief that we are dooming the country through government controls and Obama Care (1/6th of the economy) is understandable.

Iday

8:52 AM PST

The GOP has courted Donald Trump for years, every candidate had to take the requested photoshoot with Donald Trump. He was courted because he question the legitimacy of President birthright. The uglier Trump's comments, the better the GOP liked him.
Ted Cruz was promoted as the new up and coming future leader of the GOP. He
was the number one speaker on their banquet circuit. Cruz fell out of favor because
he wanted to rule the roost both the House and the Senate.
The GOP picked the caliber of their candidates , now they should be happy with their
choices.

rogsonl

8:59 AM PST

No. Cruz lost favor because he meant what he said. Among politicians, standing of principle will make you the most hated person in the group.
No one in the group running for president is in Mrs. Clinton's league. By that I mean as liar, ineffectual, self serving, or venal.

 

I may not be for him, but clearly Robinson is trying to insult and deny credence to the Republican Front Runners.

No comments: