mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn
higher education
Trump Administration Could Shake Up Campus Sex Wars
Features Icon
Features
show comments
  • WigWag

    Nothing less than the elimination of the Department of Education will suffice. The only worthwhile thing the Department does is insure the interests of children with severe disabilities and that responsibility can easily be shifted to HHS.

    Other than that, the Department of Education is a complete and total waste of money.

    • Tom

      That, and maintain statistics.

    • Rick Caird

      I can’t remember when we amended the Constitution to give the Federal Government control over education. Which amendment was that? If there was no such amendment, what happened to Amendments 9 and 10?

  • Frank Natoli

    Hillary Clinton, reached out to several victims’ organizations during the election
    EVERY Democrat constituency is a victims’ organization.

  • Andrew Allison

    “cosmopolitan left-wing politics” is an oxymoron.

  • USNK2

    The O’Democratic Party has become a jobs program for far left lawyers who believe their work is solely measured by the volume of mind-boggling Rules to Be Obeyed.

    Should we wait for TAI to understand a greater sense of urgency is about to overtake the Federal Government than “A moderate or conservative appointee might not shred the agency’s past work, but he or she would be likely to tone down the rate at which the agency promulgates new rules.”

  • Blackbeard

    Eliminating this or that office in the civil rights bureaucracy could easily be reversed when the Democrats are back in power. What the Republicans need to do, which is what Obama did, is make changes that will be hard to reverse.

  • Stephen

    As I have said and written for a long time now: The DoE OCR delenda est.

  • FriendlyGoat

    One way to see this is that 42% of American women just announced that grab ’em by the ………..”works for me”.

    • Tom

      Given that the choice was between that and voting for someone who spent most of the 1990s covering for someone who did that, you might be overstating the issue.

      • FriendlyGoat

        I am absolutely not overstating the issue. The demographics of the election are what they are. In the protestant churches, the number of women who endorsed Trump (plus Gingrich and Giuliani who will soon be in high ranks) on this matter are far higher. It’s my understanding that 81% of “born-again Christians” went Trump on this matter and all matters. That’s a lot of church women who are fine with “grab ’em”, by the way,—–far, far higher than 42% in that particular subset.

        • Tom

          And it’s that kind of willful misunderstanding that explains why Clinton lost.

          • FriendlyGoat

            There is no misunderstanding except for any errors which might be buried in the post-election demographic vote analyses which are presented to us by those who do them. A lot of white men and women, a lot of so-called Christian men and women, enabled Donald Trump and they own his legacy—-whatever it turns out to be.

          • Tom

            Given that your terrible candidate won a majority of the vote in your party, and our terrible candidate did not…

          • FriendlyGoat

            Your candidate was not terrible. That’s why he won. What’s terrible is the mental and spiritual condition of your voters.

          • Tom

            Like yours are better.

          • Anthony

            FG, (permit the interruption) keep in mind commenting audience (the broad sample is simply not democratic/charitable). Lamenting, explaining, despairing, etc. at inadequacies of judgment (voters) only further determines them to prove you wrong (in error, subversives, left, socialist, you get the picture). So, relax enjoy that wife, farm, and dog. These political things will work themselves out (though you are right, many may be harmed – victims of their own choices).

            An observation: virtual media evokes strident, evocative, vengeful commentators – some relish inflicting pain (insults) on perceived opponent (a lady once told me “hurting people hurt people” – a thought). So, here you are! Relax, enjoy that wife, farm, and dog.

            One last thought here, in my experience on both sides of political divide, the great bulk of the 320,000,000 (citizens) are thoroughly muddy-minded about politics, swayed by feeling rather than reason – you have to wonder whether clear-headed thought or understanding applies. To that end, ” aside from party regulars, most voters, in the belief of politicians, vote punitively. What they are voting against, furthermore, is not ordinarily some disliked policy but, usually, some personal characteristic…In this way the common voter, calling upon other common voters to join with them, work off a good deal of their frustrated hostility. What their votes will do for them tax-wise they have no idea.” Something apropos given the season.

            By the way, I read your reply on another thread concerning “your lost” and thought your reply instructive. Also as a heads up, our incoming President received approximately 47-48% of popular vote. Clinton received a slightly higher percentage and with Johnson and Stein they have 52% of popular vote.

          • FriendlyGoat

            You are correct about wife and dog. Our dog is female. My wife jokes she is not sure to which I have most completely pledged my troth. Kidding here, but nearly not. Our retired household is not short on love between both the humans and the animals (also goats, geese, chickens in addition to marvelous dog.)

            You are also correct about audience, but it’s worth the observation, even to this group, that all women missed their opportunities by a small margin as a result of protestant church women being muddy-minded (your good words). They claim I am opining, even as I see myself as simply documenting the factual event of the week (year, decade).

          • Anthony

            Love truly a wonderful ballast – we need more as we have no way near enough (God Bless you). I was more stunned that 53% (I think that number share with me) of white woman voted against Hillary.

            Regarding week, year, decade ponder on this: “What is the case, then, is that a largely incapable public exercises its judgment in validating the selection of its legislators and officials, with the melancholy results for that ‘same’ public shown by the history of popular elections since before the Civil War.” Talk about documenting. Be well FG.

          • seattleoutcast

            I dunno. Being fiscally responsible is mentally and spiritually healthy, too. We’ll see though if Trump follows through.

            For many, being anti abortion is spiritually healthy, too.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Some people thought Reagan and Bushes were going to get Roe reversed, but it never happened. What we got was the significant growth in the power on the corporate side. We just did the same thing again, bigger.

          • Jim__L

            … and Clinton in 1994 pledged himself (and more recently, herself) to the Corporate side, too.

            As for Roe, we’re probably not going to get that reversed, although since about 80% of Americans believe that abortion should be banned after the first trimester, we’ll probably see that happen, and abortion fall off the radar screen of American politics.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Virtually no one on your actual side of Roe is satisfied with first-trimester abortion. If they were, they would have said so. Abortion is never going away as a political issue.

        • Jim__L

          FG, a couple of days ago I was speaking with a Silicon Valley Hillary supporter about this very subject. She was talking very gravely about how serious it was that so many people voted for Trump, that it must mean that tens of millions of Americans are OK with grabbing a woman by the ******, and how voting for someone who said that is just as bad as doing it themselves.

          I tried to reassure her by (very seriously) pointing out that if tens of millions of Americans were inclined to go around spontaneously grabbing women by the *****, we’d be living in a far different, (in my opinion far worse), country than we are.

          Her reaction surprised me — in spite of my characteristic seriousness (or perhaps because of it?), she actually stifled a grin at the concept.

          (Besides, for this particular woman, insisting that men never go around grabbing women there is a bit of a double-standard, a bit hypocritical on her part.)

          Human being are strange, contradictory, comical creatures, much of the time.

          • FriendlyGoat

            It’s not the literal grabbing, which doesn’t exist nearly as much as advertised among the boys. It’s the fact that men feel it quite okay to talk down to or about women this way, and their church women think it’s cute.

          • Jim__L

            The woman I was talking to was definitely not a “church woman”.

          • FriendlyGoat

            So what? The woman you were talking to probably did not vote for Trump. The church ladies evidently did, in big numbers.

          • Jim__L

            FG, I’m not sure what your point is here anymore.

            My point was that to “think it’s cute” is not unique to (or even common among) church ladies. Even Trump opponents can think “think it’s cute”, particularly under non-Trump circumstances — look at all the women who voted for Bill Clinton.

            Based on what I’ve heard and read of their opinions, “church ladies” who voted for Trump did so despite deep reservations about the personal failings he shares with men like Bill Clinton.

            Can you justify the idea that your insistence that you know best what these women are thinking — which is at odds with what they are actually saying — is somehow not a classic example of “man-splaining”?

          • FriendlyGoat

            Sure. 42% percent of women voted for the whole Trump package.
            A far, far higher percentage of protestant church women did. That is my point. It is not any kind of “splaining” of why they did so. It is an observation that they adopted a “works for me” approach to everything they knew about Donald Trump, including publicity of all of his remarks on all subjects taken together. Those happen to include the famous line with Billy Bush.

          • Jim__L

            FG, at this point it looks like you’re just looking for an excuse to dislike people you seem to dislike anyway, by attributing motives to them that are not based on evidence. (Actions being distinct from motives.)

            (Not that that’s uncommon on the Internet, and I’ve done it myself sometimes… I’m sure you feel free to call me on it when I do it.)

            You should really reconsider your thoughts here, you’re not being charitable or kind.

          • FriendlyGoat

            I am assessing realistically what just happened and who permitted and encouraged it to happen. I am not handicapping which of the dozens of possible issues tipped each voter. No need to reconsider anything. The evangelical community elected Donald Trump. No one else could have or did. The church women were somewhere near half of that effect presumably and the church men were the other half.

          • Jim__L

            That’s not really how you’re coming across above, FG. You’re coming across as if you believe that a Trump voter wholeheartedly wants to go running around grabbing women by the *****, or wholeheartedly supporting guys who do, and should be held responsible for any who do. I don’t think that’s the case, any more than I think that everyone with a security clearance should be deprived of that security clearance if they voted for Hillary.

            You don’t like churches, because the ones you’ve been to tend to be full of people who disagree with you politically. I get it. Everyone here gets it. I don’t think that’s being charitable, and in accusing church people of supporting Trump’s behavior, rather than supporting him in spite of his behavior (because Hillary’s side has been persecuting churchgoers, among other reasons), you’re simply reinforcing your own negative stereotype.

            I would have thought someone on the Left would be more sensitive to the process of forming stereotypes and becoming bigots, but self-awareness is a rare trait in human beings, who always want to believe that they’re the good guy.

            The Law says that we’re not the good guy, that we’re irredeemable without the Word. It’s a healthy perspective to have, to boost self-awareness.

          • FriendlyGoat

            It really doesn’t matter what you think of me or of my opinions. I would invite you to observe which things happen from your government and which things don’t in the coming months and years.

          • Jim__L

            Full Conservative? Have you been reading any of the #NeverTrump Conservatives?

          • FriendlyGoat

            Full conservative doesn’t mean you all agree with each other. Full conservative means you gave them the House, Senate, Presidency and Supreme Court all at once together with a bucket of statehouses. The result of this is not going to resemble the 13th Chapter of I Corinthians or Galations 5:22 and it’s a mystery to me why so many non-church people can see this a mile off and the interior of the church cannot.

        • seattleoutcast

          Glenn Beck freaked out about the evangelicals voting for Trump. He thought they were being hypocritical, too. Many of them said that Trump was their only hope for change in Washington and they overlooked his behavior, just like democrats overlooked Clinton. Remember NOW defending Clinton in the 90s?

          Practicality trumps Principle in many cases.

          • FriendlyGoat

            The tragic irony is that the immediate “change” in Washington is not a change to whether corporations run the world. It is a lock on it.

            As for Beck, he’s an enigma. I think he spent too much of a career supporting what he most recently (and too late) decided not to support.

      • f1b0nacc1

        Don’t bother with him…he is still trying to process the shock (grin)…..
        Many of who supported Trump did so with deep and abiding reservations. I didn’t like the man and still don’t. The alternative was worse however, and hence we will go forward with this. Only foolish children think it must be all good or all bad…

        • FriendlyGoat

          You never convinced me of any deep and abiding reservations. I had your number years ago. Doubletalk Incorporated.

          • f1b0nacc1

            You are so delightfully easy to troll!
            Believe what you wish, you still lose….

          • FriendlyGoat

            As I told Frank N here last night, I didn’t lose anything. People already having a hard time on several fronts lost a lot. Not me, personally. I’m a bystander.

          • f1b0nacc1

            And who knows, perhaps you will be right. I don’t care for the Trumpian excesses either (you don’t seem to understand this, but anon), but I suspect you are going to be somewhat surprised at what happens. The GOP got a lot more than the White House in this bundle…continued control of the House, Senate, Statehouses, and now likely control of the Supreme Court for a generation. After feeding the government steroids for years, those of you on the Left now get to confront your monster…I wonder if you will enjoy it?

          • FriendlyGoat

            I am not going to be at all surprised at what happens. I have been warning against the “monster” of conservatism for years, as I have always known what it is and what it does. What I am going to do is love my wife, pet my dog, putter in the rural, and eventually pass away.

          • Jim__L

            FG, the monster is overwhelming power on the part of the Federal Government.

            When the Federal Government has the power to meddle overwhelmingly in all our affairs, all that we do — loving our families, our pets, our neighbors — all of that is diminished because the Federal monolith dominates the discourse.

            Reducing the Federal Government means everything that you do as an individual, or as a member of civil society, *means more*.

          • FriendlyGoat

            I know what you guys think the monster is. Slaves endured the under-whelming power of the federal government in this country for several hundred years. So did women. So did white workers. So did consumers of fraudulent products and services. So did the ecology and environment. So did the poor elderly. So did prisoners in state custody.

          • f1b0nacc1

            As usual, you have missed (or ignored) the point. Have fun, you will get plenty of opportunities for more practice….

          • FriendlyGoat

            Ignored, not missed.

          • BozoerRebbe

            “people with high school educations who voted for him ” The two most fervent Trump supporters I know are a physicist who got 1550 on the SAT and a computer scientist who was accepted by a university at age 12. Keep thinking that your leftist politics makes you smarter than people you think are rubes and keep losing elections, please. I voted for Trump reluctantly mostly because of the Supreme Court and a lawless executive branch but also in no small part because of the arrogance of lefties like you.

          • FriendlyGoat

            According to exit polls, people without college degrees went 67% for Trump and 28% for Clinton. That is not my editorializing. It is history. You and your scientist friends ABSOLUTELY could not have elected this American catastrophe without having approved the most egregious political lies of my 65-year-old lifetime told repeatedly to the least educated people in the country for sport.

            As for your claim of voting for Trump “reluctantly”, save that phony baloney for the poor schmucks you are so delighted to have hurt for a generation or more.

          • Anthony

            This was truly well said and somewhat altruistic from my view.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Thanks. It just seems to me like such an avalanche of cluelessness has overcome us.

          • Anthony

            No, no avalanche just rationalization and testosterone gloating perhaps. And, you’re welcome.

    • Jim__L

      Why are you man-splaining the position of 42% of American women?

      Do you think you might possibly be wrong about your conclusion there?

      • FriendlyGoat

        Of course not. The numbers don’t lie. It is what it is.

        • Jim__L

          The numbers are the numbers, of course.

          The assumption that you know the motivation behind the numbers? That’s man-splaining, pure and simple. Practically a dictionary definition of the term.

          • FriendlyGoat

            The motivations were all over the map. Some really think they are getting their old manufacturing jobs back. Some think we are going to blow up North Korea, Iran, Russia, China, ISIL and all the rest of radical Islam. Some think we are going to un-marry the gays. Some think that guest workers cannot take jobs. Some just want tax cuts. Some want the blacks of BLM put back “in their place”. Some just want to slap Hillary. Maybe twenty other things.

            But what was TOLERATED by all female Trump voters in the churches was Donald’s well-publicized comments about women from those with Billy Bush to those with Howard Stern to those about Rosie and Miss Universe—– to his personal marital history and that of his buddies, Newt and Rudy. Those church women have to ‘splain that to the daughters of the country both in and out of their churches. I don’t.

          • Jim__L

            And Bill Clinton’s behavior was tolerated by all the women who voted for him.

            There was no way, in 2016, to keep a man like that out of the White House.

            You’re right that other motivations came to the fore, because that option to keep a Donald Trump or a Bill Cliton out of the White House was moot.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Bill was not on the ballot this time.

          • Jim__L

            Yes, but a woman who not only accepted the “whole Bill package” as a husband, and also attacked women who had legitimate grievances against him similar to (and worse than) the grievances that you cite against Trump, was on the ballot.

            Why did you support such a woman, when you have such vitriol to throw at “church ladies” who (held their nose and) voted for Trump?

            And Bill would have ended up in the White House again, had Hillary won.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Women who hold their nose to vote for the policy package easily identifiable as against families and human rights all over the world are of very questionable judgment in my view. There is no “hold the nose about Trump’s antics while voting for the rest of it” excuse for what they did.

            I have told you before how crazy I think the churches have become on the political scene, and by extension and result, the spiritual scene. The insularity and brainwashing in much of it is just incredible. Since men are noted for being nuts, the hope was a sense for universal kindness and fair play from the women. In a huge irony, the women of no spiritual training delivered and the women who are supposed to know Jesus turned to the Giuliani, Gingrich, Joe Arpaio mindsets. Sad for history everywhere on this planet.

          • Jim__L

            How is abortion a kindness? How does the example of staying married to a creep like Bill show what a “good wife” is supposed to be? How is an immigration and trade policy that destroys wages in this country, in favor of families? How is a policy that encourages women to neglect their families for their careers, pro-family? Or even pro-human?

            Hillary does not deliver in any way, shape, or form.

            FG, these are not “brainwashed” people to any degree. These are people whose point of view differs from yours. Absolute and unquestioning adherence to any party line — in your case, the Democrats — is more a sign of “brainwashing” than simply disagreeing with you on some subjects.

            Step back, take a deep breath, and consider for a moment that you might be wrong. Read your Bible. (The Old Testament as well as the one or two sentences of the New that you seem to be familiar with.)

            Take some input, FG. You need it very, very badly.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Jim, you own the policy future, lock, stock and barrel. I’m going to be watching what it produces. You are too, whether you want to or not. Some things are inescapable.

          • Jim__L

            Insofar as they were inescapable as soon as the nominations were decided — because the alternative was a corrupt, dynastic, felonious, incompetent disciple of a fundamentally flawed ideology — I am at peace with Tuesday’s result.

            I will continue to be critical of Trump’s excesses (and there surely will be many), and work to ameliorate those as I can.

            Most of all, for the sake of integrity and honor, I will keep my judgement my own, instead of subordinating it to that of a party platform.

            I wish you could do the same.

          • Jim__L

            By the way, Trump performed better among women than Romney did.

            Trump performed better among minorities than Romney did, too.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Indeed—–which says something unfortunate about women, particularly white women, more particularly church women. Their hoped-for appreciation for kindness is now documented as absent.

          • Jim__L

            Again, with the man-splaining. You obviously have no idea what their motivations were, period.

            My point was that the hoped-for trend in the electorate — “Democrats will always win going into the future, because minorities will be ever-more numerous, and Republicans will never win minorities” is holed below the waterline by the fact that minorities are increasingly voting Republican — even if someone like Trump is the Republican candidate.

            The fact is, minority identity politics is a dead end, because human beings are individuals and not identities. Sure, you get the occasional person who’s completely brainwashed to absolute subservience to a party line, but that’s (thankfully!) relatively rare — individuals, of whatever color or sex, can typically think for themselves.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Remember, Roe is standing. It is all OTHER family issues and fairness issues which are now headed south——far, far south.

            Why am I repeating? Because you didn’t respond to the substance, as usual. Elections have consequences and what you are celebrating is having implemented a USA and world tragedy by a collection of deceptions. You bought it. Your women bought it. You’re gloating from a dark place, Jim.

          • Anthony

            “The campaign for a single candidacy can be mighty and ovefunded and highly staffed, but it’s no substitute for the infrastructure of a sustainably built movement with interlocking parts (Time to start building).” Something in reference to your “dark place” thought: prospect.org/article/trump/victory-exposes-weakness-liberal-political-infrastructure

          • Jim__L

            I’m not gloating at all, FG. I’m relieved that the felon isn’t going to be our president, and I’m unhappy that the demagogue *is*.

            The fact that the Supreme Court is unlikely to be packed with Leftists is a relief. I’m very happy that the Clinton machine is on its way to being dismantled, as its cronies and its victims no longer have anything to hope from their promises or to fear from their threats. While it would be best if Common Courtesy made a comeback, I have to be satisfied that a twisted and heavily weaponized version of it — Political Correctness — is likely to have its federal support eliminated.

            So, no gloating here. A mix of relief and trepidation, sure. Would I have been happier if the more straight-arrow Pence had won? Sure, but not a whole lot — I (and a lot of other Americans) found his utter spinelessness in the face of activist pressure on RFRA to be absolutely disgusting.

            Anyway, I would be having more fun if I were gloating, and I’m not having all that much fun here. I’m sure you’re not either.

            We have an election with the candidates we have, not the candidates we wish we had. I’m sorry if this one has driven you off the deep end, to the point of losing your grip on what people’s motivations actually are. Take a deep breath, pay attention to what people are actually saying. You’ll feel better.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Remember, Roe is standing. It is all OTHER family issues and fairness issues which are now headed south—–far, far south.

            It’s not the “deep end”, Jim, its just a dark sadness that incessant and comprehensive lying won the church, won what once was the best and brightest country on earth, won the license to roll back and belittle human rights everywhere. By a tiny margin in this election, the party of by FAR the most egregious lying in its policy talk is going to practice “winner take all” politics in spades—-to the detriment of people for decades going forward.

            I’ve lived a long time. I know what happened here. I know what is going to happen. By the end of the next year or two, you will too.

          • Anthony

            FG, you’re saddening me and I truly understand (some of the self-serving contortions of logic (rationalization) witnessed would be down right laughable if recognition of contortionist’s actions were assumed understood! But as not, the contortions reflex poorly on the muddied-mind vis-a-vis ostensible democratic politics). May I suggest giving it (trying to make sense out of nonsense) a rest my friend.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Jim is a church guy who for some reason has wanted to drive me nuts here for a period of years. Our conversations are usually precipitated by replies to me vs. mine to him. He is stuck in a mindset that Christians are under assault because of the Obergefell decision and that the overall church needs “religious liberty” to reduce America to the politics of bathrooms and wedding cake bakers. His side just succeeded in doing exactly that with the consequence of shifting America to a very flippant political posture on human rights in this country and all countries.

            A half hour ago on “60 Minutes”, Donald Trump just told the world he considers same-sex marriage a done and settled deal at the Supreme Court and he is fine with that. While Jim and the “evangelicals” just worked themselves into a complete froth on this issue as a vote driver—–which, turns out, the new president sees as moot and inconsequential——— they managed to elect INSTEAD the permanent starvation of the federal budget for anything important in this country via the gargantuan high-end tax cuts which will be done in a matter of months. Jim and the evangelicals do not see the bait and switch in this political outcome. I do.

            Those tax cuts don’t create living-wage jobs. It’s the opposite over time. Then there is a corporate-leaning Supreme Court for years or decades, a hostility to anything like the United Nations, an abandonment of the world on climate change, a de-emphasis on women’s issues worldwide, a haughty new “America First” message to all people in all other countries, and the likely severe reduction of health insurance standards for all citizens.

            These are not minor matters and they are not fixable “next time”. Please pardon me, a former church guy who knows what Jesus is about, for being sad about where the protestant church “went”. Check immediately above for Jim, who somehow thinks debating Mrs. Clinton’s virtues or lack thereof is still relevant. The “lock her up” was the lying. They won on it, Anthony. I have to call it dark because it is dark.

          • Anthony

            FG, your last paragraph is what I meant when I said “I truly understand”. You attempted to be be both polite and indirect when you told respondent “I’ve lived a long time” – some may get it, FG, but many prefer the comfort of self-serving bias (in all it’s configurations). Talking Church and living Church you have insight to that immanence and you have demonstrated it over course of years here at TAI (and I thank you for it, kind of like WRM in that regard). By the way, there is nothing in your four paragraphs I find in error – though I missed 60 minutes tonight and would have appreciated watching interview. Remember it’s darkest before the light – Morning comes my friend.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Thanks always for kind words. The 60 Minutes interview was sort of what I would call “fluffy”—–but that’s all they can do with someone already elected. The same-sex marriage thing really stuck out to me, though, because I know how big of a secret driver that was in the churches. Even though they mostly baited themselves on that one, as opposed to Trump baiting them on “that” one, they ain’t getting what they wanted. Meanwhile the C of C steam roller is rolling at lightning speed with negative consequences which I expect to surpass those of Reagan.

            So, enough bitching. Time to pet the dog and kiss the wife.

          • Anthony

            Love can be a wonderful tonic. a vo-tre san-te (to your health).

          • Jim__L

            FG, have you not seen the articles about how churches should have their tax-exempt status revoked for not toeing the Politically Correct government line? Churches ARE under attack.

            You’re blind, and willfully so, because you don’t like many churchgoers because they disagree with you — I would guess about your single-issue tax stance, although you seem to be married to all of the Democrats’ other platform issues too in a way that raises real questions about your capacity for independent judgement.

            Hillary would have continued the persecution. Trump, at least, is opposed to Political Correctness. If that was the best we could do once the candidates were chosen, that was the best we could do.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Churches absolutely should have their tax-exempt status revoked for politicking in favor of or against particular political candidates , which is the actual subject of the Johnson Amendment, not anything related to a “government line”. Such focus in congregations is neither ministry nor charity and it actually damaging to both ministry and charity anyway. OF COURSE you have the freedom of speech to do it. But there is no reason for your corporation to have a tax exemption and there is no reason for the contributions to it to be deductible while you insist on that being your principal focus.

            Meanwhile, what you call “the best we could do” is now the actual religious leader of your entire related community. There is no way the pastors and religious spokesmen who suggested a Trump presidency can now say “oops, we missed the Holy Spirit on that one”—-no matter what he does.

            That’s why those pastors and religious leaders are as captured in cult soup as the military officers who serve under Dear Leader in DPRK.

          • Jim__L

            Advocating for a candidate (which I have never heard any of my pastors do, by the way, even in private) is not the issue here.

            The issue here is whether churches are given grief for advocating for a moral position — and that’s something many Democrats are panting for.

            Do you seriously think that Holy Spirit was with Hillary??? That’s quite clearly insane, as is the insistence that Trump is any kind of religious leader.

            FG, you’ve got religion and politics so totally confused in that head of yours I’m not sure you’re capable of rational thought on the subject.

          • FriendlyGoat

            Yes, compared to what you will soon get (and not get) from you’re beloved Republicanism in a ruling block, of course Hillary was on the side of Holy Spirit thinking.

            The thing about me and religious thinking is that I learned young what it is when practiced for real in the name of Jesus and I have not abandoned that at all. Giuliani, Gingrich and Bannon are not my idea of spiritual leaders.

          • Jim__L

            FG… sometimes NO ONE is on the side of the Holy Spirit.

            That was certainly the case in 2016’s general presidential election.

          • FriendlyGoat

            A country with NO ONE on the side of the Holy Spirit is in a bit of a mess.

          • Jim__L

            Well…. yeah.

          • Jim__L

            You tried to stand up to a liar with a CLINTON as your champion?

            What were you thinking???

    • seattleoutcast

      FG, respectfully, I think you are overgeneralizing, and that’s okay since your candidate didn’t win. I didn’t want Hillary to win because I knew she was a part of the Wall Street cartel. She supported those horrible trade agreements and would be all for spending more money on things we can’t afford right now. Interest rates have to go up eventually and that means more of our revenue will have to go for interest payments on a twenty trillion dollar debt. I don’t want our descendants spitting on our graves.

      Hillary is in bed with the large corporations, the very ones that we both hate. I also know many people who were terrified of her partial birth abortion stance–many people voted against her for that reason. She needs to understand that abortion as women’s rights is as old as the ERA, and just as gone.

      • FriendlyGoat

        I made my generalization about what 42% of women tacitly approved about “grab ’em” because of the exact subject of the TAI article. In general on other subjects, I think women lost on about everything but Roe. The real likelihood of a complete reversal of Roe is distant, IMHO.

        As for trade agreements, we WILL have some. If TPP and TTIP are dead, others will be negotiated with fewer labor and environmental protections in all countries. If we don’t do it, China will. The Obama negotiations will likely be seen as “as good as available for people”. Business itself is not stopping or even slowing down.

        McConnell and Ryan will soon tell you exactly what GOP priorities are. They have nothing to do with excluding a “Wall Street Cartel” from anything. Jamie Dimon is possibly or probably going to be Treasury Secretary.

        • seattleoutcast

          I despise the chamber of crony capitalism (work with me here.) You might be right about Trump, but at least there’s a chance as opposed to Hillary, whom we knew was already part of the cartel.

          • FriendlyGoat

            I would like to “work with you”. Your concerns were as flat-out defeated as mine were. The alignment of GOP Congress, President and Courts means corporations won. We can re-visit this if Trump blocks any Chamber of (Crony) Commerce initiative or his Supreme Court decides any significant case against the Cartel.

          • Angel Martin

            “We can re-visit this if Trump blocks any Chamber of (Crony) Commerce initiative”

            Trump has already killed the TPP. That was the biggest thing they had in the pipeline.

            FG just refuses to give up his caricature of Trump as a CoC/Fortune500 frontman, despite all evidence to the contrary.

          • FriendlyGoat

            You will discover in the next year that there will be zero evidence Trump is not the CoC/Fortune 500 frontman. Those types of priorities piling out of the GOP Congress are going to be the first things to happen. They are centered on reducing taxes of the Fortune 500 and getting rid of regulations not favored by the Fortune 500. Watch what “gets done” and what does not.

          • Angel Martin

            I don’t have to wait. The TPP is already “done”.

    • Angel Martin

      “One way to see this is that 42% of American women just announced that grab ’em by the ………..”works for me”.”

      That doesn’t make any more sense than saying that every Clinton voter approves of Clinton’s handling of her server and emails.

      • FriendlyGoat

        The “way to see THIS” in my sentence was keyed to the exact subject of the TAI article here.

  • Fat_Man

    The entire political correctness campaign of the Department of Education is based on readings of the laws that are at best fanciful. Furthermore they were promulgated without any compliance with the Administrative Procedures Act.

    The new administration should revoke those interpretations and issue new ones that actually state existing law. Although the revocation should be immediate. Furthermore, they should also make it clear that the constitutional requirement of due process is not in the least affected by any statute or regulation.

  • Fat_Man

    I also think that Legislatures, State and Federal, need to step in. They need to adopt a Bill of Rights for students at all public colleges and universities and at any private schools that accept Federal or State funds. The law should include at least the following:

    First Amendment: Freedom of speech and of the press; the right to peaceably assemble.
    Second Amendment: Right to keep and bear arms subject only to general State laws.
    Fourth Amendment: No unreasonable searches or seizures.
    Fifth Amendment: Due process, high burden of proof, no self incrimination.
    Sixth Amendment: The right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial tribunal;
    The right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation;
    The right to hear the witnesses against him in person and to cross-examine them;
    The right to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and
    The right to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

    The Federal and State courts must be given jurisdiction over violations of these rights, and college administrators must be personally liable for violations of these rights. The law must state that the rights conferred shall be interpreted in the same way that federal and State constitutional rights are interpreted. Students whose rights are violated must receive damages and attorney’s fees, both for the court case and for any college disciplinary proceedings.

  • http://thevailspot.blogspot.com/ Rich Vail

    I have a better idea…why not ELIMINATE the DeptEd all together?

  • baumann

    All they have to do is write a letter to colleges interpreting Title IX in somewhat less stretched and rigid ways than did the letter from the Obama administration. That probably would have a real effect on campuses, where, for instance, faculty are now required to report even fourth hand gossip to the Title IX administrators and some universities have developed systems of anonymous denunciation.

  • bflat879

    The Department of Education should be gutted. Trump could do this by not appointing a cabinet member for the Department and then not putting any funding in for the Department of education. Republicans should be able to agree on this, especially if they take the present funding, cut that level by the expense of the bureaucracy and send the remaining money back to the states. We do not need a top down education system where progressives, when they have the power, start ramming down their indoctrination courses to the states. Common Core is just one example, but it should be a grave enough example to get this done.

  • Disappeared4x

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/921fa4b4a1b5f58fe8c454bc1a6c99c14f7f14d85aeeea536b6c9c65496fd735.jpg

    In this Esquire interview, the Word in question is spelled perfectly. This is why I thought Trump was only repeating what a movie star (or athlete ) had told Trump. This interview includes Clint (CE) and Scott Eastwood (SE):

    http://www.esquire.com/entertainment/a46893/double-trouble-clint-and-scott-eastwood/

    ESQ: Clint, do you still describe yourself as a libertarian?

    CE: I don’t know what I am. I’m a little of everything.

    ESQ: Politically, you’re the Anti-P**** party?

    SE: That’s right. No candy-asses.

    CE: Yeah, I’m anti–the p**** generation. Not to be confused
    with pussy.

    SE: All of us are pro-p****.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2016 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service