There is an interesting discussion going on at Adrienne’s blog over what is causing Leftists to embrace such obviously insane policy positions. Michael Savage, a talk-radio provocateur, coined an expression a few years ago that “liberalism is a mental disorder.”
More accurately, we would suggest here that Leftist positions and behaviors are symptomatic of underlying psychological pathology. This is especially true among members of the Corporate Media. Everything from looking up to Satanist Sally Quinn as a role model to their repeated public tantrums and dissemination of the most ridiculous conspiracy theories, Media personnel are pretty clearly a mentally-unbalanced lot.
At the top levels of the Far Left: the Clintons, Podesta Brothers, and George Soros, for example; power and profit are the motivating factors. They’ve got good rackets going, fueled by payoffs from special interests and a compliant Media which aids and abets their criminal behaviors. But what about the rank-and-file Leftists?
Here. Adrienne’s Blog is here.
The media and the education establishment have advanced their shared agenda recently by egging on students to protest against our right to bear arms rather than attend class. The point is to portray these Astroturf protests as spontaneous expressions of the righteous rage of innocent youth. Actually, the protests were organized by the same professional ultraleft agitators who staged the pussy hat marches. Would educrats give students leave to cut classes for a cause that is not left-wing? A high school teacher in Rocklin, California who asked this question received a definitive answer when she was placed on administrative leave:
Moonbattery has the rest.
In January, news came out that Emory University received a $400 million gift from the Woodruff Foundation. All of it will go to healthcare and research. That’s $100 million more than Michael Bloomberg’s foundation gave to the school of public health at Johns Hopkins in September 2016. Emory’s school of public health is ranked only six spots behind Hopkins’ (no. 1), though it opened relatively recently in 1990. You can sense the energy when you walk into the building and mingle with the 1,300 or so master’s and doctoral students and 168 faculty members.
That part of the campus has an entirely different feel from the side where I teach my classes. The older areas where the liberal arts are housed have a nice, bucolic aspect—a grass quad, lovely but modest marble buildings dating back a century, and professors and students alone and in pairs, laden with books, passing in and out of the library.
First Things has the essay.
Some few courageous souls have not been taken in by Steven Pinker’s version of the Enlightenment. Today, in the New York Times Jennifer Szalai vigorously opposes Pinker’s Panglossian optimism. She is none too impressed by his seductive effort to grant his version of the Enlightenment credit for everything that is right with the world and denigrating the Counter Enlightenment as the cause of everything that is wrong. As Bill Gates, the world’s richest dupe, drools over Pinker’s seductive wiles, Szalai offers us a better, more balanced approach.
As she suggests, Pinker’s theory seems to be: Don’t worry; be happy. You will immediately understand that if you bask in happiness and ignore all dangers, you will run straight into a ditch. You will not see it coming. It will descend upon you like a black swan. After all, writers at the turn of the twentieth century were declaring that humanity had achieved a higher plane of existence, the kind that would end wars and famines and oppression. How did that one work out?
Stuart Schneiderman again, this time with Jennifer Szalai.
Like the Harper campaign insisted, he just isn’t ready.
In his address to the nation after the Planned Parenthood attack, Obama claimed: “I say this every time we’ve got one of these mass shootings: This just doesn’t happen in other countries.”
Senator Harry Reid made a similar statement on June 23rd: “The United States is the only advanced country where this type of mass violence occurs. Let’s do something. We can expand, for example, background checks. … We should support not giving guns to people who are mentally ill and felons.”
We prefer not to make purely cross-sectional comparisons, but this claim is simply not true. The data below looks at the period of time from the beginning of the Obama administration in January 2009 until the end of 2015. Mass public shootings – defined as four or more people killed in a public place, and not in the course of committing another crime, and not involving struggles over sovereignty. The focus on excluding shootings that do not involve other crimes (e.g., gang fights or robberies) has been used from the original research by Lott and Landes to more recently the FBI. We cover the period from the beginning of the Obama administration to the current date, from 2009 to the Charleston massacre (this matches the starting period for another recent study we did on US shootings and we chose that because that was the starting point that Bloomberg’s group had picked). The cases were complied doing a news search. The starting year was picked simply because it was the beginning of the Obama administration and it matched the time frame of a recent Bloomberg report (a report that we evaluated here). A comparison across the entire world is available here.
Read the rest here. Thanks to Instapundit.