January 26, 2013 - 12:44 am
- Pro-Life Prohibition, by Janice Fiamengo. The disappearance of the abortion debate in Canada.
- What Can Be Done to Reduce Post-Hospital Syndrome? By Theodore Dalrymple. A fifth of patients treated under Medicare, 2.6 million individuals, return to the hospital for further treatment within 30 days.
- Making Sense of the 2013 Obama Doctrine, by Michael Ledeen. Is the president an imperialist with a little foot, or just an old-fashioned appeaser?
- Court Slaps Down Obama’s Recess Appointment Overreach, by Andrew C. McCarthy. Not all time-outs are created equal.
- Will the Gun-Grabbers Create a ‘No Buy List’ Using Your Prescription Records? By Paula Bolyard. Who decides if you are too crazy to have your second amendment rights protected?
- What Difference Does It Make that Clinton Doesn’t Care Why Terrorists Killed Americans? By Barry Rubin. This difference: her statement reflects why Obama’s policies will result in more Americans murdered.
- Tweets Of The Day Open Thread With Bonus Pic Of An Ocelot Judging You, by Stephen Kruiser. Dress code forthcoming…
Regarding the move to change Electoral College allocation to a per district basis–I am in favor. The idea that it is going to dilute the vites of densely populated areas is non-sensical–Congressional districts are the same size.
No, the Left fears it because it would take away the magnification of votes those densely populated urban areas cast, when they add in the votes of those they slightly outnumber who vote opposite. California is the perfect case study–its non-costal areas in particular might as well be considered colonies with no votes, for all the effectiveness those inner areas are able to achieve on both the national and state levels. They have no effective say in anything. With this system, they will.
Now, by “diluting the votes of densely populated areas”, opponents could mean that New York and California would not be able to rule dictatorily over the rest of the nation.
Precisely.