There is a lot we might say about this interview. Bannon is excellent and most thoughtful. Charlie Rose is clearly out of his league. Rose parrots the establishment/limosene liberal line and Bannon pushes back. Not too many people know how to do it, or have the talent to go on a main stream show, and completely defeat the liberal host.
The 60 Minutes video: https://www.cbsnews.com/embed/videos/steve-bannon/
A rather generous account of one professor leaving the American Political Science Association (APSA) because of its penchant for group think, and ideological conformity along a near exclusive leftist spectrum.
For good measure, I looked at the entire conference program to see whether the preponderance of panels on left-wing approaches to diversity in the teaching and education sections was to balance a lack of them elsewhere. I searched for panels on the holy trinity of identity politics: sexism/feminism, racism/white privilege, and sexual orientation/homo/transphobia. My best guess is that conference attendees will have a choice of 104 panels on these topics, in addition to the 4 in the teaching and learning sections. Just for laughs, I searched for panels on political, ideological, or viewpoint diversity. None.
There should be no wonder why higher education is decreasing in influence–the educational value parents and students know is not about real learning. It is about indoctrination and propaganda. Sadly.
Ben Domenech at the Federalist was back yesterday elaborating on his excellent thesis that Trump has pivoted to the Democrats because the congressional leadership is just as feckless as Obama was as president.
We ought not be surprised. Trump has been signaling he would do so (it’s a link to the WaPo, so just know it is a fake story overall, but notes the Trump admin said as far back as March, they might work with Dems if Republicans cannot pass legislation. The rest of the story is pure WaPo slop).
The problem with McConnell and Ryan is not that they are insufficiently ideological. It’s that they represent a party to which the president of their party (technically) does not belong, a theory of government that he explicitly ran against. There is no mandate for the “Better Way” agenda. There is no mandate for McConnell’s agenda – whatever that is. There is a mandate for something like Trump’s agenda – or big pieces of it. And he’s flexible about which pieces.
Congressional leadership thinks if they and Trump disagree, clearly Trump should give way and follow their lead. But why? He beat them, and they couldn’t beat him. The party didn’t go for any of the other candidates because they wanted him. Yet since his inauguration congressional Republicans have acted like they have an equal seat at the table. They don’t have that, and they don’t deserve it. And Trump should stop pretending they do.
It is more likely that Trump peels off the remainder of the Democrat base, making them Republicans. Trump will pivot in hopes he can get the Congressional leadership to play ball. If they don’t, then they will have to explain come 2018 why they are still unable to do anything.
Our friend Ben Domenech writes that Trump has made a shift to working with the Democrat Party because the Republicans are intransigent. This may be the case. But in the recent deal–disaster relief for debt ceiling–Trump has actually done very little. This may be a deal to get a better deal.
Congressional Republicans should wake up. Deal with Trump or face an electorate who wonders why you matter.
Another book has hit the market on why we should save the Liberal Arts. A review of that book is noted here. It is one of many books that praise the liberal arts for being so general and so practical as to be able to follow you throughout life and into any career.
Fair enough, but the problem is not that it is out of fashion, the problem is the colleges, curriculum, and finally, professors.
Colleges do not have a clear mission to be a liberal arts institution. This means that they have no idea why it is of value in the first place. Liberal education is just one of many tracks one can choose and still be successful–so the argument goes.
Curriculum: On nearly every campus is awful. It is a Golden Corral of choice and every choice is equal. Student are majoring in narrow specialties now that stroke the ego of the professor and give them some semblance of existence that justifies…their existence. It is so narrow as to hardly be marketable.
On another note, the notion of what liberal means is all this is lost. No longer do we teach students to think about the things most needed. We ridicule our heritage and philosophy, not to mention history. Try to find a required course in Ancient political thought, or British History? Good luck.
Related to the last point, students are generally not stupid. They know that most professors in higher ed today are out of touch and frankly, not able to teach them anything that matters. Indeed, most of today’s education is indoctrination, not examination. There are few generalists who have something to say that might be meaningful deeply to a person. Therefore, students skip the ever specialized departments and the professors and head for something that might teach them something.
However, even Mike Rowe has noted that we need more welders, plumbers, etc., as those jobs pay, and pay well. Most of the public has not gotten the message, hence why these jobs are now lucrative. There is a shortage. I would trust a hard working welder over a college grad from a 4 year institution any day.
Higher Ed has had a monopoly on what apparently students need, and then they drop them into a college where they can choose what they think they need. It is a vicious circle that will remain broken until higher education actually begins to teach something meaningful again.
Now comes Walter Russell Mead who is not as bullish on a nuclear Japan as we are. Mead is certainly right to be skeptical, but Japan is not the country it once was after 70 years of western reconstruction. It is a more or less pro-western/westernized country. Take a trip to Hawaii where one may tun into a plethora of Japanese tourists, ad you will notice how similar they are to the west in tastes and music/style/”values.”
While it does not come without risk, a capable ally who may also focus on their own defense from hostile neighbors would be a good thing both in policy and financially, for the U.S.
It appears that the New York Times has lied–I know, I know, such a shock–about Trump again. This time they literally made up and misrepresented Trump quotes, and Glenn Thrush is yet again a part of the scheme to misquote Trump.
I wish I could say this was an anomaly. But, I cannot, and hence the NYT remains a fake newspaper, especially given the “mistake” was so easily avoidable by, you know, actually watching his speeches.
There are not too few people who like that Nancy Pelosi found a moment of rationality as well as sanity and decided to condemn Antifa violence. Ace wrote that at least she did something that many Republicans yet still refuse to do. OK, there’s that I suppose. But it does not let Pelosi off the hook for encouraging the violence by slandering a peaceful group in the first place. She fanned the flames. She ought not get a pass for condemning Antifa, which, wait and see, she won’t continue to condemn pending her political expediency.
Because there is none, that’s why. There is a long and detailed explanation on why this is the case. The first is that the Democrats never took security measures to keep their data secure. It is astonishing we’d ever trust another Democrat to lead security as a result of their airless malfeasance:
Around this time the DNC hired cybersecurity consultants from Good Harbor Security Risk Management, which provided a list of recommendations for improving DNC cybersecurity. The DNC failed to take action on any of the consultants’ recommendations. Further, although Russian hackers were allegedly already in the DNC network at the time, Good Harbor did not discover any hackers in its review.
The private organization Crowdstrike, has most likely lied about Russia too, which the media could care less in reporting because they love the narrative as it skewers the Republicans, whom they loathe:
According to former FBI Director James Comey, the FBI made “multiple requests at different levels” to examine the DNC servers, but the DNC refused. Ultimately, the FBI reached an agreement with the DNC that, in Comey’s words, a “highly respected private company” would report to the FBI what it found in the DNC servers.CrowdStrike has also been wrong about Russian hacking in the past.
This is odd. Checking out the DNC servers, especially with an election and U.S. national security on the line, should be the FBI’s job. Next, CrowdStrike had incentives that might conflict with an honest assessment. Because CrowdStrike was being paid by the DNC, not taxpayers, it had a clear incentive to report whatever the DNC wanted it to report. The DNC had a political incentive to blame the hacking on Russia, which allowed the Clinton team to first falsely claim that the documents were heavily doctored or even wholly manufactured, then pivot to attacking Trump as a Putin stooge whenever WikiLeaks material came up.
Most important, CrowdStrike has a monetary incentive to find something big when skunking out hackers—the better to get its name in the public domain and go on to bigger and better contracts. In the words of Jeffrey Carr, a cybersecurity consultant who has lectured at the U.S. Army War College: “The only things that pay in the cybersecurity world are claims of attribution. Which foreign government attacked you? If you are critical of the attack, you make zero money. CrowdStrike is the poster child for companies that operate like this.”
The media knows all this, and yet still lied to the public about the questionable source material. Crowdstrike’s assertions have never been verified.
There is a lot more to digest, and we highly recommend this piece.