Search Results

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS THEY WOULDN’T HAVE STANDARDS AT ALL: This is Louis Farrakhan’s pinned tweet. He has over 300K followers. Why did Twitter ban, say, Tommy Robinson, but Farrakhan is left alone?

IF THEY DIDN’T HAVE DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL:  Trump May Lose Star on Walk of Fame, But Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey Won’t.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Mark Levin: Interrupt Obama and reporters are racist, interrupt Trump and they’re heroes.

Hall of Fame conservative radio host Mark Levin is blowing the whistle on what he sees as a double standard over the Trump administration’s move last week to bar a CNN White House reporter from an event after she shouted several questions at the president inside the Oval Office.

On his top-ranked radio show, Levin mocked media that has “circled the wagons” around CNN’s Kaitlan Collins who asked Trump, sitting with European Union Commission head Jean-Claude Juncker, about tapes the cable network had of the president allegedly talking with his former lawyer about payments to a Playboy model.

The White House claimed the questions were rude and came after the press pool was asked to leave the Oval Office. As a result, they barred her from a subsequent event, prompting most media including Fox to defend Collins.

C-SPAN pulled out this section of the scrum showing that the event was over when Collins started asking her questions. Juncker appears to be chuckling at the scene as aides try to get reporters to leave.

Levin raised the double standard and the handling of conservative press by the former Obama administration and how when they were targeted the liberal media didn’t rally for them.

He noted, for example, that three reporters from conservative outlets that endorsed Sen. John McCain’s presidential bid in 2008 were refused entry on the Obama campaign plane. “So he gets rid of the conservatives, gets rid of them, and by the way Glamour magazine and others were allowed to stay on the plane,” said Levin, the latest member of the Radio Hall of Fame.

That’s different, because shut up racist.

IT’S AS IF FEMINISM IS MORE ABOUT PAYBACKS THAN JUSTICE: Labor backbencher Emma Husar has been accused of telling a male staff member to do her dishes so he could learn about “white male privilege”, Sky News reports.

The revelation comes as former Labor senator Sam Dastyari claimed Ms Husar was a victim of sexist “double standards”, downplaying extensive allegations from several of her former staff of workplace bullying and misconduct in her Western Sydney electorate office.

Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton has called on Labor leader Bill Shorten to explain whether or not Ms Husar had been misusing taxpayers’ money to employ staff.

It’s different when we do it, because shut up, bigot.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS… The peaceniks of the media suddenly deplore dialogue.

On Monday night, MSNBC assembled a panel of spiteful Trump critics to throw a wet blanket over the summit. The doves turned into hawks and spent much of the evening trying to peck at Trump. Most of the people on the panel are apologists for this or that communist thug—just go back and look at MSNBC’s fawning coverage of Fidel Castro’s death—but on Monday night they played hardliners. Rachel Maddow, furrowing her brow as usual, objected to Trump even holding a summit. She has finally found a communist leader she thinks America should ostracize. When Obama met with the Castro brothers, she burbled with enthusiasm. But she covered this moment of historic diplomacy like a funeral, shuddering at the thought of North Korea joining the “community” of nations.

MSNBC saw the summit as just one more occasion for obsessive anti-Trump fault-finding. The disgraced Brian Williams is still hanging around for some reason and looked like he wanted to give the summit the kind of newsy, anchormanish treatment of old, but he couldn’t pull it off in the company of jabbering Trump haters, for whom wild opining is all that counts. Plus, Williams is too reduced a figure for the cocksure Maddow to give any equal time. But Williams’s ego still asserts itself from time to time. On Monday night he fed it by asking one of the sham historians on the panel an arcane, look-at-what-I-know style question about the USS Pueblo, a ship the North Koreans captured in 1968.

The utterly contemptible Nicole Wallace, whose smugness and nastiness are beyond caricature, drove much of the shrill coverage. She was at her whiny, know-it-all worst, droning on about Trump’s lack of “preparation” and so forth. But Trump seemed perfectly at ease, getting a stiff Kim Jong Un to crack a smile. Trump had said it would only take “a minute” for him to sense if the relationship between the two countries could improve. By that measure, the summit appeared to start promisingly. Normally such friendly gestures between an American leader and an adversary would warm the hearts of liberals. Not this time. The MSNBC panel looked on coldly and muttered suspiciously about Trump’s body language.

That’s weak tea, and they know it.

A TALE OF THREE MEDIA MOMENTS:

Épater la bourgeoisie or épater le (or les) bourgeois is a French phrase that became a rallying cry for the French Decadent poets of the late 19th century including Charles Baudelaire and Arthur Rimbaud. It means to shock the bourgeoisie.

Wikipedia.

● Shot:

But executives at ABC and its parent company, the Disney Corporation, never had any interest in being perceived as “the Trump-friendly network” and in fact probably resented that the success of the Roseanne revival was driven, at least in part, by the character’s support for Trump. If Roseanne Barr was rational — and she pretty obviously isn’t — she would be aware that the suits were looking for any excuse they could to cut ties. (By the way, it didn’t matter if the show was way less political than its reputation suggested; that was the big headline coming out of the show’s return.)

Barr may have felt she was irreplaceable, but she really wasn’t. Roseanne got higher ratings and attracted 10 to 18 million viewers, but also cost more than the average television show; John Goodman and Barr were each making reportedly $250,000 per episode. “Kantar Media has estimated the show’s initial run of nine episodes over eight nights netted $45 million in ad revenue.” That’s nice, but for Disney, it’s a drop in the bucket. A generic sitcom with no-name actors will get half the ratings and cost a quarter of the price.

Former President Barack Obama and Michelle are still revered and beloved in most corners of Hollywood; when Barr said one of their best friends, Valerie Jarrett, looks like a character from Planet of the Apes, just what did Barr think was going to happen? Did she think the Obamas and all of their allies were just going to shrug it off, let it pass without response? You might hate the Obamas but give them credit for standing up for one of their own — or for having cultivated a reputation to the point where they may not have even needed to pick up the phone. Everyone at ABC and Disney understood that there would likely be consequences if they tried to give Roseanne a pass.

You think the Disney corporation wants to take any grief for an extra $45 million in ad revenue? You think advertisers would be eager to go back to the show as Barr made herself radioactive?

Roseanne — and Roseanne — Was a Gamble from the Start, Jim Geraghty, NRO, May 30, 2018.

● Chaser:

This is how you understand corporate activism. This is how you understand media double standards. When conservatives cry foul and demand accountability for Samantha Bee or Joy Reid, they’re communicating with executives and colleagues who have known and liked “Samantha” and “Joy” for years.

When you see corporations launch into political activism, that’s not a market-tested response to the popular will. More often than not, it’s an expression of collective executive purpose, reinforced by the applause of spouses and friends — the people who matter most in any person’s life.

When you see a publication like The Atlantic jettison Kevin Williamson within days of a controversial revelation — and then watch its editor-in-chief declare that he’d “die” for writer Ta-Nehisi Coates, a man who’s written his share of heartless words — you’re watching a high-school-level morality play. We love our cliques. We have little patience for the out-group, and we can always reason backwards to justify our bias.

How Samantha Bee Survives, David French, NRO today.

● Hangover: To use the language of the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg when he justified firing Williamson and keeping Coates on board, Joy Reid is very much “in the family,” too: “MSNBC breaks silence on star Joy Reid’s ‘hateful’ blog posts: ‘She has grown and evolved.’”

Just like her fellow fabulists Al Sharpton and Brian Williams. So much growth and evolving going on with the MSNBC starting lineup.

ALL BETTER NOW? Samantha Bee apologizes to Ivanka Trump: ‘I crossed a line.’

I would like to sincerely apologize to Ivanka Trump and to my viewers for using an expletive on my show to describe her last night. It was inappropriate and inexcusable. I crossed a line, and I deeply regret it.

It was “inappropriate and inexcusable” and entirely scripted and prerecorded, and TBS’s standards & practices division (aka, the network censors) allowed the show to air, presumably after previewing it. As Sean Davis tweets, “If the Turner non-reaction so far is any guide, Roseanne’s big mistake was putting her comments on Twitter instead of in her show’s script. The fact that a whole network reviewed, approved, promoted, and aired Bee’s scripted slur is the best protection Bee could ever buy,” adding that “The Roseanne and Samantha Bee scandals aren’t comparable. Roseanne wrote something on Twitter and her show was immediately cancelled. In the case of Samantha Bee, an entire network’s legal and editorial team knew exactly what Bee would say, approved it, and broadcast it.”

So it’s very likely this check-the-box apology will be enough for her to keep her job amidst the destructive malevolence that is Time-Warner-CNN-HBO. And her own promise to the New York Times at the beginning of 2017 that “We’re facing a new reality after the election. These next four years are going to require a broad coalition of straight-up decency.”

Interesting word that. Back in January, while leftists were freaking out over Trump’s “shithole” comments, Glenn wrote, “I’m amused when people who’ve spent 50 years declaring the very concept of decency repressive and outdated suddenly start with the ‘have you no decency?’ shtick. When Joseph Welch used that phrase, it was pretty much Peak Decency, or as we’re now told, a horrible regressive time of racism, homophobia, transphobia and xenophobia.”

Update: Samantha Bee Apologized for Giving Her Audience What It Demands.

Consider this: The YouTube channel for “Full Frontal” posted just that final 50-second segment containing her Ivanka rant as its own video Wednesday night. It’s now deleted, but the show clearly thought it was a winner until the backlash began.

Of course, Bee will be right back at it next week, just with less salty language.

As for the backlash to her remarks, I suspect media figures were extra-sensitive to getting busted for the dreaded double standard attack, given the swift blowback to Roseanne Barr’s racist tweet about Valerie Jarrett.

Bee should remember comedy is all about timing.

And getting paid: Autotrader.com “suspended” their sponsorship of Bee’s show; likely the network feared a repeat of social media panicking Laura Ingraham’s sponsors.

More: State Farm has also suspended its sponsorship of Bee’s show, according to showbiz site The Wrap. 

DISPATCHES FROM THE NEW CIVILITY. Samantha Bee: Ivanka Trump certainly is a feckless c*nt.

But she’ll get a pass, of course. As Allahpundit writes:

Bee is “in the family,” to borrow a memorable phrase from liberal paterfamilias Jeffrey Goldberg. But Rutz is right that Kimmel or Colbert or any male host who’s also “in the family” would have taken some heat for saying this. It wouldn’t have been a firing offense a la Roseanne’s racist joke and an apology would have been duly offered, probably in the course of blaming Trump for letting their temper momentarily cloud their good judgment. (“It’s just this war and that lying son of a bitch Johnson!”) Family can always be forgiven but there are times when they need “correction.”

Even Bee probably would have had to apologize, though, if she had leveled this at a left-wing woman, as hard to imagine as that is. If she’d called Jill Stein a see-you-next-Tuesday for pulling key votes from Hillary in the Rust Belt, some perfunctory remorse might need to be arranged. The reason Bee dropped the C-bomb, which is rare even on pay TV, is because all the stars had aligned here and she knew it — she’s in the family, she’s a woman, the policy she’s describing is deeply loathed by Democrats, and her target was not just a woman affiliated with the right but Trump’s favorite child/advisor. Given a chance to utter one of the few remaining taboo words on television with impunity, knowing the sweet, sweet clapter it would produce, how could she resist?

As the Washington Examiner noted last year, after Bee described a young Democrat recovering from cancer as having “Nazi hair,” because he happened to have attended CPAC:

In January, just weeks before then-President-elect Trump was sworn into office, Bee made a call for decency.

“We’re facing a new reality after the election. These next four years are going to require a broad coalition of straight-up decency,” Bee said in a freewheeling interview with the New York Times.

“And we’re going to need to be able to talk to people who would normally feel alienated by my show,” she added.

Sounds like a good plan. When does she start?

When the next president has a (D) after his or her name.

Related: “Tonight, Bee is scheduled to receive an award from the Television Academy for ‘advancing social change.’ Were it not for double standards…”

Increasingly, I’m convinced that we’re living in the Matrix — and the robots hired Tom Wolfe to write the source code.

ANDREW MCCARTHY: In Politicized Justice Department, Desperate Times Call for Disparate Measures.

It has now been confirmed that the Trump campaign was subjected to spying tactics under counterintelligence law — FISA surveillance, national-security letters, and covert intelligence operatives who work with the CIA and allied intelligence services. It made no difference, apparently, that there was an ongoing election campaign, which the FBI is supposed to avoid affecting; nor did it matter that the spy targets were American citizens, as to whom there is supposed to be evidence of purposeful, clandestine, criminal activity on behalf of a foreign power before counterintelligence powers are invoked.

But what was the rationale for using these spying authorities?

The fons et origo of the counterintelligence investigation was the suspicion — which our intelligence agencies assure us is a fact — that the Democratic National Committee’s server was hacked by covert Russian operatives. Without this cyber-espionage attack, there would be no investigation. But how do we know it really happened? The Obama Justice Department never took custody of the server — no subpoena, no search warrant. The server was thus never subjected to analysis by the FBI’s renowned forensics lab, and its evidentiary integrity was never preserved for courtroom presentation to a jury.

How come? Well, you see, there was an ongoing election campaign, so the Obama Justice Department figured it would be a terrible imposition to pry into the Democrats’ communications. So, yes, the entire “Russia hacked the election” narrative the nation has endured for nearly two years hinges on the say-so of CrowdStrike, a private DNC contractor with significant financial ties to the Clinton campaign.

In Investigations 101, using foreign-intelligence authorities to spy on Americans is extraordinary, while taking custody of essential physical evidence is basic. By the way, the government’s failure to ensure the evidentiary integrity of the DNC server by taking possession of it and performing its own rigorous testing on it makes it practically impossible to prosecute anyone for “colluding” in Russia’s cyber-espionage. It’s tough to prove that anyone conspired in something unless you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the something actually happened the way you say it happened. To do that in a courtroom, you need evidence — a confident probability analysis by your intelligence agencies won’t do.

They covered for Hillary. They spied on Trump, and then when he unexpectedly won they panicked. Now, you’ll notice, all the mad leaking to the NYT and the WaPo is defensive in nature: Smoke-blowing to try to cover their tracks. In fact a lot of people involved in this should be in jail, and I’m beginning to think some of them might actually wind up going to jail.

IF THEY DIDN’T HAVE DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL:   Hollywood Hypocrite: Alyssa Milano’s Disastrous NRA Video.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Heckled law prof: CUNY Law would have sicced cops on pro-life protest of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. But right-leaning students should act to heighten the contradictions here.

AND THERE’S THIS THING:  Hypocrisy and Double Standards.

RAISE THE CONE OF SILENCE: Watchdog finds EPA broke law by spending $43K on Scott Pruitt’s soundproof booth and not telling Congress.

In a report issued Monday, the Government Accountability Office said the agency violated the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act of 2017 when it failed to notify both House and Senate appropriations committees prior to obligating the money to install a soundproof privacy booth in Pruitt’s office.

Any office expenditure above $5,000 requires lawmakers be notified, according to the eight-page GAO report. The total cost of the soundproof booth and its installation amounted to $43,238.68.

The privacy booth cost $24,570, including delivery and assembly, according to the GAO. The remaining expenses included: “Concrete Floor Leveling” ($3,470); “Drop Ceiling Installation” ($3,360.97) “Prep and Wall Painting” ($3,350); “Removal of CCTV Equipment” ($7,978); and “Infrastructure Cabling and Wiring” ($509.71).

EPA Spokeswoman Liz Bowman said the agency would comply with the findings and alert lawmakers.

It’s important to cross all the I’s and dot all the T’s, especially when the press is out to get you.

WITHOUT DOUBLE STANDARDS, THE LEFT WOULD HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL:  Obama’s illegal campaign contributions vs. Trump’s.

JEFF REYNOLDS: Leftist Double Standards: Bashing Scott Pruitt While Ignoring Obama’s EPA Scandals. “Pruitt’s transgressions pale in comparison.”

Double standards must be twice as good as regular standards, right?

IF IT WASN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THE LEFT WOULD HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: The UK Guardian’s been harvesting your data — while bashing Cambridge Analytica.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS …  Scott Pruitt slammed for spending less on travel than Obama’s EPA chiefs.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL:

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Twitter Refuses to Revoke Louis Farrakhan’s Blue Checkmark Despite Numerous Anti-Semitic Tweets.

IF IT WASN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THE HOUSE OF STEPHANOPOULOS WOULD HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Does ‘The View’ Think Pelosi Has ‘Mental Illness’ Since She Says She Hears Dead People?

The hosts of ABC’s “The View” said that Christians like Vice President Mike Pence have “mental illness” if they think Jesus talks to them – but, do they feel the same way about Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) repeated claims she’s heard dead peoples’ voices?

On the Feb. 13, 2018 episode of “The View,” the show’s hosts mocked Pence’s Christian faith, leading host Joy Behar to declare the vice president mentally ill.

* * * * * * *

But, the liberal media looked the other way when video surfaced of Democrat Pelosi describing her encounter with ghosts back in August of 2012. An Aug. 12, 2012 CNSNews.com story recounts Pelosi’s claim she not only heard – but also felt – dead women sitting in a chair with her:

Also getting a pass from the DNC-MSM on listening for voices from beyond: “God, if you think I’m supposed to run, you gotta tell me, and it has to be so clear that not even I can miss it.’ And I haven’t gotten that,” Oprah tells People magazine today.

BUT TRUMP IS LOWERING THE TONE OF OUR POLITICS: Democratic candidate Randy Bryce once used Bristol Palin’s pregnancy announcement to suggest she sell condoms.

Randy Bryce, the viral Democrat running to “repeal and replace” House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., in 2018, once used Bristol Palin’s pregnancy announcement as an opportunity to suggest she sell condoms.

After Palin announced her second unwed pregnancy in 2015, Bryce sent her a tweet that read, “I’d suggest a career selling condoms instead of abstinence. Looking for help @TrojanCondoms?”

Palin had previously advocated on behalf of abstinence.

Bryce has secured endorsements from a number of progressive politicians and organizations, including NARAL and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. He frequently lends support to women’s causes on Twitter, from the Women’s March to birth control mandates.

While Bryce’s tweet to Palin, flagged on Tuesday by Peter Hasson of the Daily Caller, does not amount to a major scandal, those sentiments would not be tolerated by his feminist supporters if there were an R next to his name rather than a D.

If it weren’t for double standards, they’d have no standards at all.

WITHOUT DOUBLE STANDARDS THEY WOULDN’T HAVE ANY STANDARDS AT ALL: Environmentalist Millionaire Candidate Heavily Invested in Fossil Fuels.

Millionaire congressional hopeful Dean Phillips invested as much as $2 million in energy companies even as he criticized Rep. Erik Paulsen (R., Minn.) for supporting fossil fuel development.

Phillips, a Minnesota liquor heir, is campaigning as an environmentalist in a bid to win a crowded Democratic primary and unseat Paulsen, a five-term congressman. He has supported a massive carbon tax as well as a shift away from automobiles to cut down on emissions.

“I care about the environment and I’d like to see fewer cars burning fossil fuels,” he said at a May townhall with voters. “Anybody who argues that a carbon tax would kill jobs is simply, fundamentally misguided.”

Phillips’s financial records show that the environmentally conscious candidate has no problem profiting off of automakers and fossil fuels. He has invested between $780,000 and $2 million in energy companies and major car companies. He held stocks valued between $65,000 and $150,000 in Energy Transfer Partners, owners of the Dakota Access Pipeline that has inspired numerous protests and arrests from radical environmental activists.

Well, what else is he supposed to do now that the “clean” energy crony bonanza is drying up?

THE DOUBLE STANDARD FOR TRUMP SPOKESWOMAN SARAH SANDERS:

Liberal male columnists have written about Sanders in terms that, if applied to a progressive woman, would be recognized as despicable and borderline misogynistic. In the most infamous example, Los Angeles Times writer David Horsey called her a “slightly chunky soccer mom” in a scathing column. It was so clearly offensive that he was forced to issue an apology: “I want to apologize to Times readers — and to Sarah Huckabee Sanders — for a description that was insensitive and failed to meet the standards of our newspaper. I’ve removed the offending description.”

Just when you think a media establishment that has lost its collective mind, credibility, and sense of decency since last November can’t go any lower, it does. These sexist, cruel taunts have little to do with Sanders’s job performance or making sure the American public gets the facts from a sometimes fact-averse White House. Viewed from a wider lens, the treatment of Sarah Sanders has little to do with Sanders at all. The vicious ridicule is directed at all conservative women — particularly women from the South — whom the Left will never forgive for helping elect Donald Trump. It’s on a continuum with attacks against conservative women such as Kellyanne Conway, Ivanka Trump, Melania Trump, and Betsy DeVos. The hatred is aimed at all female Trump voters — Sanders is simply a proxy. A year that began with faux feminists participating in the Women’s March, where aggrieved women loudly pledged to defend their sisterhood against sexist bullying or attacks, is ending with a whimper.

As all the best people who hold themselves out as progressive intellectuals believing in hope, tolerance and diversity told me about Sarah Palin in 2008, “She’s not a woman, she’s a Republican.”

SOME ARE UNHAPPY ABOUT THE LACK OF A DOUBLE STANDARD: Under New Civility Rules, Facebook Is Banning Women For Calling Men ‘Scum.’ “When asked why a statement such as ‘men are scum’ would violate community standards, a Facebook spokesperson said that the statement was a threat and hate speech toward a protected group and so it would rightfully be taken down.”

Related: “I don’t support what Facebook is doing, but I do think the use of the word ‘scum’ warrants a historical note on ‘SCUM’ — The Society for Cutting Up Men. The author of ‘The SCUM Manifesto,’ Valerie Solanas wasn’t joking. . . . I wrote ‘Valerie Solanas wasn’t joking,’ because she did go out and shoot Andy Warhol.”

DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY HAVE THEM:  Celebrities Love Free Speech! (If It Hurts Trump).

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Adriana Cohen: Diversity, inclusiveness fraud in academia.

INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY: The Left Tries To Politicize Charlottesville, And Exposes Its Own Double Standards. “When a violent event fits a liberal narrative it sparks wails of outrage, makes the front page news, gets talked about 24/7 on cable news. But if it doesn’t fit that narrative — for example, the targeting of Republicans by a deranged liberal, or vicious attacks by leftists on Trump supporters, death threats to conservatives, etc. — the left can barely muster any reaction at all. Obama never mentioned the anti-cop sentiment fomented by Black Lives Matter — with an assist from Obama himself — in his brief statement after five police officers were assassinated in Dallas. Obama did find room in those remarks to mention racist cops. Did anyone on the left complain?”

THOUGHTS FROM THE INSTA-WIFE ON DOUBLE STANDARDS.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Elizabeth Warren Again Calls for ‘Equal Pay,’ Ignores Pay Gap in Own Office: Warren’s women staffers earned 71 cents for each dollar earned by men in 2016.

YES, THESE ARE THE STAKES:

But our childish and entitled political class continues to play with fire. Because it’s childish and entitled.

Related: Peter Berkowitz: The People vs. The Political Professionals. “A satisfactory argument for transferring more power to today’s elites would require addressing the people’s legitimate anxieties about the professional class. These include policy incompetence ranging from mismanagement of the economy and immigration to botching diplomacy and the conduct of war; politicization of the administrative state as illustrated by IRS targeting of conservatives during Obama’s first term; and the elite media’s use of double standards in reporting and opining about left and right. Underlying it all is the corruption of liberal education, which has become boot camp for progressivism, and of graduate and professional schools, which provide advance training in the progressive exercise of power. To play the vital role contemplated for them by our constitutional system, intellectual and political elites have a long way to go in regaining the people’s trust.”

Indeed they do. Remember, Hitler didn’t happen because of Hitler. Hitler happened because of Weimar, which was the failure of the people in charge of the liberal political order to maintain a liberal political order because they were weak, entitled, corrupt, and incompetent.

UPDATE: The Guardian, of all places, has something useful on this:

Even as their world came apart, the bankers clung to denial. By August 2007, the flagship hedge fund of Wall Street’s most prestigious firm was tanking fast – and what explanation came from the man at Goldman Sachs? “We were seeing things that were 25-standard deviation moves, several days in a row.” The bank was getting hit by events that were only meant to happen once every 100,000 years – and they were happening every day of the week. Given a choice between blaming their models or reality, Goldman’s bosses held the world at fault.

You know the rest because, a decade later, you and I are still paying for it. How the banks died, the world economy collapsed and most of us got poorer. How the financiers, mainstream economists and regulators were so detached from reality that they swore blind that such a catastrophe was impossible – even while it was under way.

Their reputation has never recovered. And as an economics journalist, I look across at politics and see the same process at work. Brexit, Donald Trump, Jeremy Corbyn: time after time, the political class has completely failed to understand the world they were governing, policing and analysing. Allow me to be blunt: our political crisis is also a crisis for our political class. And it is one from which I doubt they can recover.

At each major fork in the road, they have sped off down the wrong turning, while decrying the other as unimaginable. Each time, they have crashed.

We need to take a serious look at how we select these people. Our current method is not working.

IF THE MEDIA DIDN’T HAVE DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY WOULDN’T HAVE STANDARDS AT ALL: Questions about Trump’s alleged “I fired Comey the nut job” remark.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Silence from Hill, Liz on Maher speaks volumes.

We just had a vivid, striking example of what Zoob and King were talking about, courtesy of two faux feminists who shamelessly masquerade as heroines of their gender and guardians of our culture.

Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren would have us see them as they see themselves, towering women whose values and principles cannot be compromised.

So it was not surprising that neither could contain her horror when Donald Trump was heard making vulgar, sexist comments in a private conversation.

Both had bully pulpits and wasted no time using them to clobber him.

Then HBO’s foul-mouthed Bill Maher, looking for new ways to tear down the president, reached to the bottom of the barrel to imply he was having an incestuous relationship with his daughter Ivanka.

Anyone with a modicum of decency understood Maher had crossed a line; ideologies notwithstanding, nothing could justify such depravity.

But because it was aimed at Trump, not a peep was heard from Hillary or Liz, suggesting Maher’s smuttiness didn’t ruffle their feathers a bit.

It also suggested they assume their constituents are too superficial to connect the dots and see them for who and what they really are.

Here’s hoping they’re wrong.

We’ll see.

HEY, DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE STILL STANDARDS YOU GUYS: Democrats Are Applying Litmus Tests To Gorsuch Their Favorite Justices Wouldn’t Pass.

CBS’S SCOTT PELLEY LOSES A FIGHT RIGGED IN HIS FAVOR: Ever since it was created by Don Hewitt in 1968, CBS’s Sixty Minutes has functioned as a sort of ritual kabuki for its audiences: it made stars of its left-leaning investigative journalists, who would grill the offending conservative politician or businessman of the week. By the mid-’80s, the show’s formula was summed up brilliantly in the classic parodies by Martin Short’s Nathan Thurm character on Saturday Night Live, who would be drenched in sweat and chain-smoking Marlboro 100s by the time he was done attempting to survive the hammering from the crusading journalist on the other side of the desk.

But CBS made its bones during the days when, as Rob Long wrote of NBC’s Johnny Carson, “There were three big channels—and maybe an old movie on one of those fuzzy UHF stations—so if you didn’t like what was on, you were out of luck. Network television didn’t compete with cable channels or Hulu or Amazon Prime. It competed with silence.”

And such lack of competition allowed the networks’ news divisions to create self-contained worlds where they could absolutely control the dialogue, as Walter Cronkite did throughout his career at CBS, while signing off each night “And that’s the way it is.” His successor’s career at CBS ended there with a Sixty Minutes segment…well, we all know how it ended there, right?

Which brings us to CBS’s Scott Pelley and his recent interview with Mike Cernovich, whom Breitbart.com’s Ezra Dulis describes as “a lawyer, independent blogger/author/filmmaker, and a dominant voice on Twitter,” and whom BuzzFeed describes as “a troll.” The latter Website of course is home of the infamous Trump golden showers with Russian hookers story and an editor who believes covering Trump “sometimes…means publishing unverified information in a transparent way that informs our users of its provenance, its impact and why we trust or distrust it.”

Whatever Cernovich’s excesses, assuming this transcript of the full unedited interview is accurate, it’s fascinating much more for what it reveals about Pelley, watched by six and a half million viewers on the CBS Evening News, than for Cernovich. Here’s how the transcript begins:

Scott Pelley: How would you describe what you do?

Mike Cernovich: I’m a lawyer, author, documenter, filmmaker, and journalist.

Scott Pelley: And how would you describe your website?

Mike Cernovich: Edgy, controversial content that goes against the dominant narrative.

Scott Pelley: What’s the dominant narrative?

Mike Cernovich: The dominant narrative is that there are good guys and there are bad guys. The good guys are liberals. Everybody on the right is a bad guy. Let’s find a way to make everybody look bad. Let’s tie marginal figures who have no actual influence to anybody we cannot overwrite. That’s the narrative.

Scott Pelley: That’s not a narrative I’m familiar with. Who’s narrative is that?

In 2008, Pelley compared global warming skeptics to Holocaust deniers. Ben Rhodes, who until January was Obama’s deputy national security advisor, is the brother of CBS News president David Rhodes. John Dickerson, the host of Face the Nation and the “political director” for CBS, wrote an article for Slate in 2013 charmingly titled “Go for the Throat! Why if he wants to transform American politics, Obama must declare war on the Republican Party.” Katie Couric, whom Pelley succeeded as Evening News host, read a poem on her broadcast to shill for the passing of Obamacare, and after leaving CBS had a Rathergate-like moment of her own, attempting to marginalize gun owners.

But back to the transcript of Pelley and Cernovich, where eventually, the hunter is captured by his prey:  

Scott Pelley: You wrote in August a story about Hillary Clinton’s medical condition the headlines said, “Hillary Clinton has Parkinson’s disease. Position confirms.” That’s quite a headline.

Mike Cernovich: Yeah, Dr. Ted Noel had se-sent a story to me anonymously, that I checked out, analyzing her medical condition. And –

Scott Pelley: It isn’t true.

Mike Cernovich: How do you know?

Scott Pelley: Well, she doesn’t seem to have any signs of Parkinson’s disease.

Mike Cernovich: She had a seizure and froze up walking into her motorcade that day caught by a citizen journalist.

Scott Pelley: Did you, well, she had pneumonia. I mean –

Mike Cernovich: How do you know?

Scott Pelley: Well, because that’s what was reported.

Mike Cernovich: By whom? Who told you that?

Scott Pelley: Well, the campaign told us that.

Mike Cernovich: Why would you trust a campaign?

To ask the question is to answer it. In a post headlined “‘Shamefully Stupid’: CBS’s Scott Pelley Loses a Fight Rigged in His Favor,” Breitbart.com’s Ezra Dulis adds in response, “Pelley has no answer for those six words — ‘Why would you trust the campaign’ — as his entire profession goes berserk with literal-minded fact checks for every tweet from President Trump. Pelley also seems to forget the fakery that Clinton World attempted hours before its pneumonia statement — with the candidate smiling and waving outside her daughter’s apartment, greeting a little girl, and assuring reporters everything was a-okay.”

More:

Mike Cernovich: So let’s be, let’s be honest with one another, which is that you are reporting that the Hillary Clinton campaign-

Scott Pelley: I didn’t report that she had Parkinson’s disease.

Mike Cernovich: You just told me she’s healthy though. Based on what was told to you by the campaign. See? That’s what I’m saying about the double standards which is I don’t take anything Hillary Clinton’s going to say at all as true. I’m not going to take her on her word. The media says we’re not going to take Donald Trump on his word. And that’ why we are on these different universes.

Scott Pelley: Why should anyone take you on your word?

Mike Cernovich: Oh, you should always double-check. You should always fact check. And if people don’t agree with me, people express that disagreement, and I’m completely, completely open to criticism.

Insert Glenn Reynolds’ Rathergate-era comments about the positive nature of the Internet being a low-trust environment here. Not to mention Michael Crichton’s Gell-Man Amnesia Effect.

Let’s give Pelley the exit quote: “Well, the benefit of intermediaries is having experienced editors check things out and research people. Check the facts before it goes out to the public. You don’t do any of that.”

Mary Mapes could not be reached for comment.

UPDATE: “Was Pelley not around in 2004?” John Hinderaker asks at Power Line. “Has he forgotten how stupid that refrain sounded then? (‘Layers and layers of fact-checkers’) Does he not realize how false it rings today? We have been here before: the liberal media are in a panic because their authority is being challenged. It must be worse now, though, than it was in 2004. Then, Time’s refrain was a relatively benign ‘Who owns the truth?’ Now, they ask, ‘Is truth dead?’ We can translate: ‘Is the liberal news media monopoly dead?’”

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS… WaPo Preps for Storm and Bashes Trump for Doing the Same.

The Post hypocritically bashed Trump for taking this winter storm Stella seriously just hours after the newspaper hyped the storm itself, according to tweets captured by Cameron Gray, a writer for NRA News, on March 14.

A Post Twitter account dedicated to D.C. news mocked Trump for inviting “D.C. mayor to Oval Office for storm that brought 2 inches of snow.”

Less than 24 hours before, however, The Washington Post’s main twitter account asked “Are you prepping for the Northeast Blizzard?,” and advised “here are the things you you really do need in your winter emergency kit,” and reported “more than 4,000 flights” had been canceled due to the impending storm.

It’s different when they do it.

YOU FIRST:

If it weren’t for double standards…

ACE ON MILO: “I would say an important additional dimension here is that if they can do it to him, they can do it to you too. And they seem to be really doing it.” Lena Dunham writes a book where she reminisces about abusing her baby sister and it’s no big deal. Milo talks about being abused, says it wasn’t that bad, and Simon & Schuster cancels his contract. Double standards indeed.

Meanwhile, he should self-publish. He’ll make a lot more money, and, really, you can’t rely on lefty platforms. They’ll cut you loose in a second.

UNHINGED: If It Weren’t For Double Standards….

IF THE TEA PARTY HAD DONE STUFF LIKE THIS TO DEMS IN 2009, THE MEDIA WOULD HAVE CALLED FOR MASS IMPRISONMENT IN FEMA CAMPS: Breaking: Mob Gathering Outside Mitch McConnell’s Home in Kentucky. Just remember, lefties: Every time you do stuff like this, you open up the possibilities. The days of hiding behind double standards are gone.

REPORTERS UNEARTH ANCIENT DOCUMENT: With Trump, Media Strike a Pose as Sticklers for the Constitution. Tom Kuntz at Real Clear Investigations:

When Barack Obama was president, most members of the media apparently believed in a fluid interpretation of the Constitution. Constitutional sticklers were dismissed as dinosaurs or worse—especially if they identified themselves with the Tea Party movement. Except for Glenn Greenwald and the occasional lonely voice or two, the ladies and gentlemen of the press raised barely a peep about the administration’s drone killings, even of U.S. citizens. Executive-branch rewrites of health, immigration and environmental law were met with a collective yawn in the Fourth Estate.

That attitude certainly changed quickly. Donald Trump has turned the mainstream media into strict constructionists, or so they would have us believe. The Constitution they sternly invoke against the new president’s moves is now one carved in granite with words bearing unimpeachably plain meaning in their favor.

This is happening even as Trump – whom they routinely cast as a Constitution-destroying authoritarian – puts forth a Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, who is notably skeptical of expanding presidential power and by most accounts really thinks the document ought to mean what it says.

The media’s new enthusiasm does not require a lot of close reading.  Khizr Khan, the Gold Star father who lost a son in the Iraq War, waved the Constitution at the Democratic convention last summer and invited Trump to read the text, evidently hoping that the mogul would find immigration wisdom within.

I don’t know if Trump ever took him up on the offer, but I did. I didn’t see the words “foreigner” or “non-citizen” or “immigrant” or “refugee” anywhere in the document, nor mention of any right to enter the country.

It may be that policy or legislation or court precedents have created or divined such rights, but those are not what Khan waved at the podium. And, more to my point, that’s not something the media have bothered to explain in their copious sympathetic coverage of Khan – whose law practice includes securing visas for immigrants — and others who pummel Trump as a constitutional transgressor.

If it weren’t for double standards . . . .

 

 

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS…

standards

IT’S DIFFERENT WHEN OBAMA DOES IT: Dem Congresswoman Forced To Face Her Own Voting History After Calling Trump’s Travel Ban ‘Horrifying’

Democratic Rep. Elizabeth Esty from Connecticut launched a tweetstorm Monday afternoon against President Donald Trump’s travel ban, but quickly backtracked after followers confronted her on her visa-related voting history.

Esty co-sponsored H.B. 158 on Dec. 3 2015, a bi-partisan bill that enabled the executive branch led by the the Department of Homeland Security to severely limit or curtail visas from countries like Iran and Iraq.

If it weren’t for double standards…

ANALYSIS: TRUE. Obama Era Precedents Haunt Media.

Noah Rothman:

“Don’t recall ever seeing a WH do this,” remarked Huffington Post White House reporter Christina Wilkie. “Some might call it Propaganda,” NBC News’ Katy Tur averred. “I didn’t totally expect the 1984-esque dystopian future to be so soon, but life comes at ya fast,” snarked the Center for American Progress’s economist Katie Bahn. But this, too, is not an unparalleled abuse of the public trust; at least, not for those who remember how the Obama administration sold the public on the Iran nuclear accords in 2015.

The Obama administration’s “blog” content (now maintained by the National Archives and Records Administration), which includes former Press Secretary Josh Earnest’s “Regional Roundup: What America’s Newspapers are Saying About the Iran Deal.” The blog consisted entirely of favorable headlines from around the country reciting verbatim (and false) administration claims about the nuclear accord. “The Iran Deal” even had its own Twitter account which disseminated not only favorable press mentions but also crafted insipid pop culture memes to get the millennial generation jazzed about nuclear non-proliferation. Imagine the anxiety among journalists when the Trump White House mirrors this tactic.

If it weren’t for double standards…

JOURNALISM PROFESSOR: Boycott Kellyanne Conway.

New York University journalism professor Jay Rosen floated the idea of denying Conway access to television on a Recode podcast. Her ability to befuddle interviewers and parry questions and accusations from journalists frustrated Rosen, who served as department chair from 1999 to 2005.

“This is somebody who can speak for the Trump administration. But if we find that what Kellyanne Conway says is routinely or easily contradicted by Donald Trump, then that [reason to have her on] disappears,” he said. “It’s not just lying or spin or somebody who is skilled in the political arts of putting the best case on things or not answering a question, which is a pretty basic method of doing politics. It’s that when you are done listening to Kellyanne Conway, you probably understand less. That’s a problem.”

Rosen’s concern for spin appears to be new-founded. He was critical of President Barack Obama for allowing reporters to control the narrative during press conferences.

“You’re the President of the United States standing at the podium in the briefing room? You can steer the conversation any damn way you want.”

If it weren’t for double standards…

ADRIANA COHEN: No hats off to rallies’ huge double standard.

Of course none of these women were up in arms and protesting when Hillary “went low” by calling Republicans “deplorables” and comparing conservatives to “terrorist groups.” Liberal women everywhere gave her a pass. They also looked the other way when she didn’t walk the walk when it came to advocating for equal pay for women while serving as a U.S. senator for New York. Senate financial expenditures show Hillary gave the majority of the top-paying jobs to men.

Under Hillary’s watch, women made 72 cents on the man’s dollar — a fact that didn’t result in widespread demonstrations.

These “pussyhatters” also gave President Obama a monumental pass for failing women economically.

Under Obama’s watch, more than 2 million women fell into poverty, according to 2014 Census Bureau reports. The Obama administration also failed to put “equal pay” into practice over the last two terms. But these left-wing women — with their blatant double standards — chose to turn their rage against Trump instead.

That’s the goal.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Trump’s Presser Shows Media Double Standard On Politicians Attacking The Press: The idea that this kind of singling out of press members by politicians is new and especially catastrophic is odd. Remember de Blasio and Obama doing the same? “There was also the time the Obama adminstration named Fox national reporter James Rosen a co-conspirator in violating the Espionage Act so they could spy on his phone records, whereabouts, and personal emails. Or the time the Obama administration seized two months of AP reporters’ phone records. Also, don’t forget the time Obama booted three newspapers’ reporters from his campaign plane because he didn’t like their coverage. So, there’s that.”

That’s different, because shut up.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS… Obama Boasts No Terror Attacks On Our Soil, Then Lists Terror Attacks On Our Soil.

It’s generally considered good form to wait at least 24 hours before contradicting oneself so completely.

HOWIE CARR ON HATE-CRIME HYPOCRISY:

Finally, yesterday, the Chicago police charged the four aspiring rappers with a hate crime for allegedly beating, torturing and kidnapping a white mentally disabled kid from the suburbs.

They were screaming “Bleep white people!” and “Bleep Trump!” but none of the PC posse wanted to … uh, jump to any conclusions.

Take Obama — please. His flack Josh Earnest was asked if this was a hate crime.

“I think it’s too early to tell.”

No call from Obama for a “national conversation” about hate crimes. He didn’t even call it “workplace violence.” . . .

This wasn’t the first post-election black-on-white hate crime on the West Side. In November, a 50-year-old white man was dragged from his car by four people screaming obscenities about Trump. That hate crime was likewise recorded on videotape.

Police arrested Rajune Lewis, Dejuan Collins, Julian Christian and a juvenile and … do you remember seeing anything about this on the network newscasts? Me neither.

Compare this kid-glove treatment for all these thugs to what happened to the two Babson College students who drove over to Wellesley College after the election. Let’s let Babson President (and former Lt. Gov.) Muffy Healey describe how her students “engaged in behavior that was, at a minimum, insensitive, unacceptable and contrary to our core values.”

Their crime? They were yelling “Trump 2016!” and “Make America Great Again.”

Muffy banned them from campus and they were kicked out of their frat. They had to hire lawyers to fight Muffy’s fake news.

If it wasn’t for double standards, the alt-left wouldn’t have any standards at all.

True.

WASHINGTON EXAMINER: How Trump Clears Obama’s Minefield.

Before moving into the White House, President-elect Trump needs to double check the Oval Office for trip wires. His predecessor has spent the last month setting traps to ensnare the new administration.

President Obama has more on his mind than an effort to solidify a legacy and nail down policy. He has adopted a guerrilla strategy designed to defame and debilitate. Inherently political, it’s administrative sabotage by extra legislative means and it threatens to hobble Trump.

Obama has prepared what looks like a classic episode from Mad Magazine: Executive vs. Executive. Instead of delivering on his own agenda, Trump will be forced to deal with the aftermath of his predecessor’s final binge. They could consume a notable portion of Trump’s first 100 days, but if left unaddressed it would stain his administration long term.

To avoid that hazard, an examination of President Clinton’s final days in office is helpful. After all, Obama didn’t develop these tactics on his own. He lifted them directly from a manual written by the Clintons.

Just days before President George W. Bush’s inauguration, Clinton weaponized EPA regulations to set a trap for the new administration. Despite complaints from rural communities about crippling compliance costs and a lack of a scientific consensus, Clinton adopted aggressive arsenic standards for drinking water. When Bush eased the mandate, it unleashed a torrent of criticism that had been long planned, most notably from Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York.

Despite calling for studies based on “sound science,” Bush couldn’t shake accusations that he wanted to poison children. The attacks found their mark, and Bush later remembered the experience as one of the worst mistakes of his young administration.

Now Obama’s running the same play. But while his midnight regulations haven’t escaped media attention, journalists continue giving the Obama administration charitable coverage. By focusing on the policy impact, they ignore and amplify the coming political fallout. . . .

Although Obama promised a smooth transition, he’s moved unilaterally to make that impossible. He lacks the grace and modesty to recognize that the country does not want him or his policies any longer. His indefinite oil ban in the Arctic Ocean provides a perfect example. Overturning the ban would require congressional action and incur significant political opportunity cost. For every regulation Trump overturns, he risks letting another slip into the Federal Register forever.

None of this should dissuade Trump from delivering on his pledge to roll back regulation. But he should proceed with the proper preparation and study on both the substantive policies and on the public relations.

Trump would be wise to condemn early and often Obama’s weaponization of executive action. Remember how Obama blamed everything on Bush until, oh, about the sixth year of his presidency. Trump should make sure the public knows where the blame really lies.

I expect he will.

OF COURSE HE DID: Obama circumvents Constitution with ‘signing statements’ after blasting Bush.

President Obama said Friday that the annual defense policy bill Congress sent him violated the Constitution — but he signed it anyway.

Instead of a veto, Mr. Obama issued a statement saying he would modify the law in its execution so he carries it out the way he thinks meets constitutional muster.

Mr. Obama promised during the 2008 campaign not to engage in issuing signing statements. He said that kind of behavior was a dark spot on the presidency of George W. Bush. But in the years since, Mr. Obama has become a regular practitioner, issuing more than 20 signing statements purporting to alter the way Congress wrote laws.

If it weren’t for double standards…

IF IT WASN’T FOR DOUBLE-STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Gutless Liar, Harry Reid, Smears James Comey As A ‘Partisan’

IF IT WASN’T FOR DOUBLE-STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Roger Simon on the Democrats’ Nauseating Putin Hypocrisy.

CAMPUS TRUMP SUPPORTERS PUNCHING BACK AGAINST BIAS AND DOUBLE STANDARDS:

Conservative students who voted for Mr. Trump say that even though their candidate won, their views are not respected. Some are adopting the language of the left, saying they need a “safe space” to express their opinions — a twist resented by left-leaning protesters.

Administrators are struggling to maintain a balance between political factions. But some college presidents have entered the fray with statements that seem more sympathetic to the left, in some cases provoking a backlash. . . .

For conservative students like Ms. Deletka, the messages from university officials, seemingly assuming that everyone on campus was upset about the election result, were particularly offensive. . . .

Ms. Delekta described how she had been offended when a classmate wondered why as a “white female,” she had not voted for Hillary Clinton. She resented what she saw as identity politics on campus.

“My identity is so much more than my race and my gender,” Ms. Delekta said. “We’re all so much more similar than we think.”

She was able to separate Mr. Trump’s policies from his personal attitudes toward women, she said later. “I’m not electing a grandpa or a babysitter,” Ms. Delekta said.

Ibtihal Makki, a self-confident senior in a pink hijab who is studying biopsychology and neuroscience and is chairwoman of a student government diversity committee, objected to conservatives on campus saying they needed safe spaces to express their views.

Of course she did. And it looks like I was ahead of the curve here. And Pres. Mark Schlissel’s really blown it at Michigan.

And students should be punching back. Despite all the talk about “diversity” and “inclusion,” many campuses — Michigan clearly among them — are marginalizing and “othering” Trump supporters and conservative/libertarian students in general.

But conservative/libertarian students are members of the “university community” too and deserve to be treated with respect, and to have their political views treated as legitimate. Students should demand this from administrators, and alumni, parents, and legislators should demand it from universities.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS…

IF LEFTIES DIDN’T HAVE DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL:

screen-shot-2016-11-23-at-8-24-30-am

Related:

screen-shot-2016-11-23-at-8-26-16-am

WHEN REPUBLICANS USED OBAMA’S MIDDLE NAME, THEY WERE CALLED RACIST: If these people had no double standards, they would have no standards at all. Poor Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III.

DID OBAMA HAVE TO “EARN” HIS? Al Hunt: Trump Needs to Earn His Mandate.

If it weren’t for double standards…

WHAT’S SAD IS, I’VE ALWAYS THOUGHT OF GEORGE MASON AS LESS P.C. THAN AVERAGE: George Mason Needs To Get A Grip.

My school, George Mason University, has been triggered.

I know this from the seven — yes, seven — university administration emails I received in less than 24 hours advertising forums described as “post-election conversations” and “healing spaces.” These forums are offered as “a space for students to gather in the wake” of the election to “discuss and make sense of the outcomes.” Counselors from the university’s Counseling and Psychological Services will be available for “students wishing to discuss the recent election results in a safe environment.”

Although “snacks and refreshments” will be provided, the emails say nothing in the way of binkies or diapers; students may need to bring their own.

Okay, fine, I should not joke. There are, after all, some very sinister undertones hidden in these emails.

First, let’s strip these forums of all pretext: such “post-election conversations” are intended for those unhappy with Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s victory. I can only speculate, but I think it is safe to assume the university would not take such ridiculous measures had Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton won. Professors would have outwardly exalted checking off the “madam president” box, students would have celebrated preserving our nation’s indifference to abortion, and much of George Mason would have been cheering what conservatives view as the destruction of individual liberty.

Moreover, such sweeping liberal changes would have bolstered left-wing hubris, giving conservative Americans ample reason to fear for their freedom, beliefs and even personal safety. Just ask David Wilcox, Omar Mahmood, Jade Armenio, Ben Shapiro, the North Carolina and Delaware GOP or these Republicans. Given past edicts of the Democratic Party (e.g., providing space to “those who wished to destroy”) and the viciously anti-conservative censorship culture on most of America’s college campuses, it is not at all clear conservatives would have been safe to disagree.

So, yes, conservatives were completely justified in fearing a President Clinton.

With their true purpose exposed, however, George Mason’s “post-election conversations” become even more disturbing. . . .

Conservatives have suffered many disheartening setbacks in the past few years, many of which kept us up at night in worry and anger. Yet we saw no comforting emails from administrators or invitations to use “special resources” (not that we would have used them; we value our dignity). Rather, we were left to endure the harassment, intimidation and death threats all by ourselves. And we’re still here and still going strong.

Students and faculty and George Mason: get a grip.

Couldn’t have said it better myself.

And let me note that, even though I’m at a state university in a conservative state, a university that has a green-light rating from FIRE for free speech, I’ve had lots of conservative students say they’re afraid to speak out, whether in support of Trump or on other topics.

And the author of this piece, Thomas Wheatley, is a law student at George Mason. I hope that more students will be inspired to push back against these double standards at their own schools.

PAST PERFORMANCE IS NO GUARANTEE OF FUTURE RESULTS:

● “We have proof, in exit polls, that white women will pawn their humanity for the safety of white supremacy.”

What Happened on Election Day, The New York Times, yesterday.

Due to the double standards being played by the mainstream media, the Clintons have been able to hide their racist skeletons.  The Clintons’ “Birth of a Nation” tactics have gone unnoticed by many White people, but best believe that African-Americans peeped it in South Carolina and definitely in Pennsylvania as we witnessed Hillary chant over and over again to her predominately White audience “he’s not one of us”and “I will fight for you.”   Well, people here’s the iceberg to HRC’s already sinking Titanic:  The United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC). The UDC is a neo-Confederate organization that is affiliated with white supremacist groups including: the Council of Conservative Citizens and the League of the South, to name a few.  The organization was formed in 1894, and limits its membership to white women who are related to Confederate veterans of the “War Between the States.”  Now how are the Clintons affiliated with them? Oh, they’ve  just only written letters lavishing praise upon the organizations values and ideology for more than 10 years!!  I can’t believe this woman has audacity to say she’s more electable.

The Clintons’ Link to White Supremacist Group-UDC, the Daily Kos, May 8, 2008.

An unhinged tirade by Air America Radio host Randi Rhodes has led to an unprecedented suspension from the network, according to its new management and several left- wing websites. This is a breaking story with details still emerging.

In a rant so salty it could make a sailor blush, Rhodes repeatedly called Hillary a “big f***ing whore”, to both cheers and jeers from the audience. The afternoon drive talker was there on behalf of Air America at an event sponsored by the local affiliate.

In addition, Rhodes referred to former Democrat vice presidential candidate [and Hillary campaigner in ’08] Geraldine Ferraro  as a “David Duke in Drag”.

Randi Rhodes Suspended; Calls Hillary ‘Big F—ing Whore,’ NewsBusters, April 3, 2008.

If Hillary pulls it out in Pennsylvania, and she could, and if she follows it up in Indiana, she can make a credible case that she deserves to be the candidate; these last primaries will show which of the two Democratic candidates is better at overcoming the bias of a vast chunk of the population that has never in its history had to vote for anyone but a candidate who could have been their father or their brother or their son, and who has never had to think of the president of the United States as anyone other than someone they might have been had circumstances been just slightly different.

Hillary’s case is not an attractive one, because what she’ll essentially be saying (and has been saying, although very carefully) is that she can attract more racist white male voters than Obama can. Nonetheless, and as I said, she has a case.

—Nora Ephron, “White Men,” the Huffington Post, April 20, 2008.

— Father Micheal Pfleger, in Obama’s Trinity United Church, circa 2007-2008. In May of 2008, CNN reported that “Obama has known Pfleger for more than 20 years.”

“JURORS AWARDED A UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA ADMINISTRATOR $3 MILLION MONDAY FOR HER PORTRAYAL IN A NOW-DISCREDITED ROLLING STONE MAGAZINE ARTICLE ABOUT THE SCHOOL’S HANDLING OF A BRUTAL GANG RAPE A FRATERNITY HOUSE,” AP reports tonight, adding, “Jurors found that the magazine and its publisher, Wenner Media, acted with actual malice because they republished the article on Dec. 5 with an editor’s note after they knew about the problems with Jackie’s story. The jury also found that Erdely acted with actual malice on six claims: two statements in the article and four statements to media outlets after the story was published. Jurors awarded $2 million to Eramo for statements made by Erdely and $1 million for the republication of the article by Rolling Stone and Wenner Media. Rolling Stone could appeal the verdict.”

Rolling Stone is currently facing a $25 million defamation lawsuit from the UVA fraternity whose house was where Jackie claimed she was raped,” Bre Payton of the Federalist adds.

Earlier: “Rolling Stone Can Take Their Defamation Statement And Shove It,” Mollie Hemingway wrote on Friday:

When Rolling Stone published “A Rape on Campus” in 2014, it was attempting to drive a sketchy narrative for progressive political results. That’s what Sabrina Erdely has done with many of her pieces over her career. That’s why Rolling Stone hired her. They took a very serious issue of how the sexual revolution has led to all sorts of abuses on college campuses and decided instead to focus on the dubious “rape culture” message pushed in recent years by progressive activists. Abuses on college campuses — and especially off college campuses — are real, but the recent “rape culture” craze has led to attacks on the civil liberties of men and created a panic built on emotion more than reality.

Rolling Stone has spent the last half century fostering that aforementioned sexual revolution, and has pushed hard for numerous additional examples of relaxing social mores. As Jonah Goldberg wrote in a recent G-File, “If we can’t immediately grasp why some old practice, some ancient tradition, some venerable custom or Chestertonian fence is worthwhile, we tend to instantly dismiss it as outdated and old-fashioned. But again, as Chesterton and Hayek alike understood, simply because something is ‘old-fashioned’ doesn’t mean it wasn’t fashioned in the first place. And by fashioned, I mean manufactured and constructed. Customs are created because they solve problems. But they get less respect in our present age because they have no identifiable authors. They are crowd-sourced, to borrow a modern phrase for an ancient phenomenon. The customs and institutions we take for granted are crammed full of embedded knowledge every bit as much as prices are. But most intelligent people are comfortable admitting they can’t know all the factors that go into a price, but we constantly want to dissect the whys of every custom.”

Let’s assume for a moment that Rolling Stone’s base story was true. Or as Jann Wenner was quoted as saying late last month by the New York Times while defending the story as being fake but accurate (to quote a Times-approved phrase):

“We did everything reasonable, appropriate up to the highest standards of journalism to check on this thing,” Mr. Wenner said in a libel trial in federal court here. “The one thing we didn’t do was confront Jackie’s accusers — the rapists.”

As he has previously, Mr. Wenner assigned much of the blame to the woman at the center of the article, identified as Jackie, whose account of being raped began to fall apart shortly after the article was published two years ago. Mr. Wenner said there was nothing a journalist could do “if someone is really determined to commit a fraud.”

He said that while the magazine rightly retracted “the Jackie stuff,” he disagreed with the decision to retract the entire article in the wake of a damning report on it in April 2015 by The Columbia Journalism Review. He said the bulk of the article detailed ways that the University of Virginia could improve its treatment of victims of sexual assault.

Does Wenner feel that Rolling Stone, his life’s work, bears any responsibility for creating the conditions he describes in the above passage?

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: On Accepting Election Results.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: When Democrats say the ‘system is rigged’ the media doesn’t seem to mind.

2008 FLASHBACK: GOP Nominee McCain Is A Sexist, Entitled Predator. “How can purported feminists even contemplate voting for McCain when his creepy, fighter-jock attitude toward women has left a trail throughout his public career? Let’s look at just three dots of gender jokes over time and see if we can connect them.”

The Dems use the same playbook every time, and the GOP is caught by surprise, every time.

Related: Sex, double standards, and journalists.

UPDATE: Politico: Exclusive poll: GOP voters want the party to stand by Trump.

Related: Byron York: Will there be a GOP stampede from Trump? And will it matter?

DOUBLE STANDARDS: Twitter under fire after it was slow to react to Jewish Labour activist being subjected to anti-Semitic abuse. “A Jewish Labour activist has been told that abuse calling for her to be deported to Auschwitz does not violate Twitter rules.”

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY WOULDN’T HAVE ANY STANDARDS AT ALL: UNC Rape Case Reveals Race Double Standard.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: The White House’s top spokesman refused on Wednesday to condemn the company or its top executive, whose father is a Democratic senator, for dramatically increasing the price of EpiPens.

“As it relates to this specific issue, you know, obviously I’m not going to make specific comment or specifically second-guess the pricing strategy or the business practices of one private enterprise,” Josh Earnest, President Obama’s press secretary, said on Wednesday.

He was reacting to reports that Mylan N.V. had boosted the price of the life-saving allergy shot 400 percent, to roughly $500 per dose. Earnest and other officials have had more violent reactions to similar price spikes in the healthcare industry that have often been blamed on corporate greed.

Earnest also had no comment on the fact that Mylan CEO Heather Bresch is the daughter of Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va.

She also got a phony MBA degree from WVU while Manchin was Governor.

SOME GRIEVING PARENTS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS: “According to the media, not all grieving parents of fallen servicemen are created equal. Whether those parents are protected, defended and respected or ignored, dismissed and smeared depends on their political affiliation — and how useful they are to the ‘right’ side.”

Read: the left side.

THE INSTA-WIFE: Double Standards On Men, Marriage, and Money.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, DEMOCRATS WOULD HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL. Philadelphia’s Disgusting DNC Double Standard on Alcohol:

Pennsylvania is known for its restrictive alcohol laws — venues cannot sell alcohol after 2 a.m. or provide happy hour specials, and all drinks must be purchased at vendors run by the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board (PLCB). But the state gave a special dispensation for the Democratic National Convention this week.

State legislators in Harrisburg have implemented temporary “national event permits” allowing bars to circumvent these restrictive rules, but only for DNC events. This raises the puzzling question of why outside visitors for the Democratic convention can be trusted with alcohol, while native Pennsylvanians cannot.

Know your place, Pennsylvania peasant!

WHY NOT? THERE ARE DOUBLE STANDARDS FOR EVERYTHING ELSE. Is there a plagiarism double standard?

Melania is a potential first lady, not the actual candidate, so the criticism she’s getting seems outsized compared to the plagiarism (h/t Heavy) of past candidates Joe Biden and Barack Obama.

When Biden was running for president in 1987, he had to admit to plagiarizing a law review article when he was in law school. He claimed at the time that his plagiarism was not “malevolent” but merely a “mistake” because he “misunderstood the need to cite sources carefully.”

We’ll have to take him at his word that back in the 1960s, people who made it through high school, their undergraduate studies and into law school wouldn’t properly know how to cite sources.

Biden also stole passages from the Welsh Labor Leader Neil Kinnock during a visit to a state fair. Biden has used quotes from Kinnock before, but had always credited him.

Biden also straight up stole details from Kinnock’s life and used them as his own, like claiming he was the first in his family to go to college. Oh, and Biden also stole passages from Robert F. Kennedy and Hubert Humphrey.

Despite the blatant, serial plagiarism, Biden has been our vice president for the past eight years. It might have kept him from the presidency (not really, he wasn’t that well known in 1988 and in 2008 he was up against Barack Obama), but it didn’t keep him from the Senate or the vice presidency.

President Obama also plagiarized a part of a speech. In 2008, he gave a speech that sounded suspiciously similar to a 2006 speech from then Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick. Patrick closed party ranks and defended Obama after the accusation.

Democrats do that for their own. And so does the press.

WHY ARE DEMOCRATIC ADMINISTRATIONS SUCH CESSPITS OF SEXISM? Obama White House still pays women less than men.

If activists are going to use median annual salaries to claim women are paid less than men, then they ought to be consistent and call out President Obama’s White House.

Female staffers in the White House earn 89 cents for ever dollar that male staffers earn. That’s on par with one of the numbers often reported for the misleading “gender wage gap,” which finds women earning 77 or 78 or 89 cents to a man’s dollar.

American Enterprise Scholar Mark J. Perry, who analyzed the White House data, found the median salary for the White House’s 271 female staffers to be $68,658, while the median salary for the 198 male staffers was $76,928 in 2016.

“Therefore, female staffers in the Obama White House currently earn 89.25% of the median salary for male staffers, or 89.25 cents for every $1 men earn, and there is a 10.75% gender pay gap at the Obama White House,” Perry wrote. “That pay gap is slightly smaller than the 15.8% gender pay gap at the White House last year, but is still more than 2.5 times greater than the average gender pay gap for the Washington, D.C., labor market of only 4% according to the most recent data available from the Department of Labor.” . . .

Activists, naturally, don’t want to acknowledge that Obama’s White House pays women less because, as they’re almost exclusively all Leftists. They would have to tie themselves in knots to explain how this pay gap is different from some other pay gap.

But it’s not different — it uses the same over-simplistic measurement as all similar derivations of the gap. The main reason women earn less in the Obama White House is that more senior positions are occupied by men and more junior positions are occupied by women. You can judge the intention here for yourself, but if you’re going to make excuses for Obama, you might want to apply the same excuses to any other employer where this is the case.

If it weren’t for double standards, “activists” would have no standards at all. But remember: They don’t care about people, they care about power.

FEDERAL EMPLOYEE UNIONS DEMAND HUUUUGE PAY HIKE: They already make on average 78 percent more than private sector works – counting salary and the value of benefits – but a coalition of federal employee unions claim they deserve a 5.3 percent pay raise, reports Katie Watson of the Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group.

“At a time when we need to recruit the best and brightest to civil service, federal pay is falling further behind the private sector and living standards for federal employees and their families continue to decline,” the coalition claims in a letter to Congress. “A catch-up raise to reflect market rates in 2017 is imperative.”

Yes, that’s really what they said.

 

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, SHE’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Senator Warren’s Glaring Hypocrisy.

SCOTT JOHNSON: Dartmouth And Double Standards. PC culture effectively makes black students “lesser breeds outside the law,” not expected to live up to the standards of behavior expected of others. This is racist, of course, but PC was never about getting rid of racism, merely redirecting it in politically useful ways.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, DEMOCRATS WOULD HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Israel Rejects Effort by Democrats to Launch Legal Probe of Jewish State.

WHEN MEN DO IT, IT’S ICKY AND OBJECTIFYING. WHEN WOMEN DO IT, IT’S EMPOWERING! Henry Cavill says women exhibit ‘double standards’ with street propositions and catcalling.

SHOCKING NEWS FROM THE WORLD OF SCIENCE: What Men and Women Want From Sex Robots Is Very Different. Of course, if you consider a vibrator a sex robot, many, perhaps most, women have sex-robot experience already.

Related: Feminist double standards and some classic thoughts from Eugene Volokh.

BUT IT ENRICHED WALL STREET FATCATS/DONORS: Note to Hillary: Clintonomics Was a Disaster for Most Americans: Under Bill Clinton, Wall Street created a ruinous bubble, while workers lost wages and power.

How could Clinton have undergone such a lightening-fast reversal? The answer is straightforward, and explained with candor by Robert Rubin, who had been co-chair of Goldman Sachs before becoming Clinton’s Treasury secretary. Even before the inauguration, Rubin explained to more populist members of the incoming administration that the rich “are running the economy and make the decisions about the economy.”

Wall Street certainly flourished under Clinton. By 1999, the average price of stocks had risen to 44 times these companies’ earnings. Historically, stock prices had averaged about 14 times more than earnings. Even during the 1920s bubble, stock prices rose only to 33 times earnings right before the 1929 crash.

A major driver here was Wall Street’s craze for Internet start-ups. In 1999, for example, AOL’s market value eclipsed that of Disney and Time Warner combined, and Priceline.com’s value was double that of United Airlines. The Clinton team created the environment that encouraged such absurd valuations. Throughout the bubble years, Clinton’s policy advisers, led by Rubin and his then protégé Larry Summers, maintained that regulating Wall Street was an outmoded relic from the 1930s. They used this argument to push through the 1999 repeal of the Glass-Steagall financial regulatory system that had been operating since the New Deal. The Clinton team thus set the stage for the collapse of the Dot.com bubble and ensuing recession in March 2001, only two months after Clinton left office. They also created the conditions that enabled the even more severe bubble that produced the 2008 global financial crisis and Great Recession. . . . The unemployment rate did begin falling after Clinton took office in 1993, reaching a 31-year low of 4 percent in 2000. But this growth in job opportunities resulted primarily from a major expansion in household and business spending tied to the stock-market bubble. A run-up in both household and business indebtedness financed this spending boom. Unemployment started rising again soon after the bubble burst, and the debt-financed expansion collapsed in March 2001.

Yep. The fabulous Clinton economy was mostly a bubble. Plus:

What was Clinton’s overall record with respect to improving living standards for working people and the poor? During the eight full years of Clinton’s presidency, the average real wage for non-supervisory workers, at $13.60 an hour (in 2001 dollars), was 2 percent lower than the average under Reagan and Bush and nearly 10 percent less than under Jimmy Carter’s “years of malaise.” The average individual poverty rate under Clinton, at 13.2 percent of the population, was modestly better than the 14 percent rate under Reagan and Bush. But it was worse than the 11.9 percent figure that was maintained, on average, under Nixon and Ford, as well as Carter.

In sum, Bill Clinton’s presidency accomplished almost nothing to improve conditions for working people and the poor on a sustained basis. Gestures to the poor and working class were slight and back-handed, while wages for the majority remained below their level of a generation prior. Wealth at the top exploded with the Wall Street bubble. But the stratospheric rise in stock prices and the debt-financed consumption and investment booms produced a mortgaged legacy.

But here’s a hint: Electing Bernie Sanders won’t improve things.

TEACH STUDENTS NOT TO LIE ABOUT RACISM: Students who falsely reported a racist attack will be charged.

Several students who falsely claimed they were the victims of a race-based attack at the hands of a dozen white people will be charged, most likely with filing a false report.

The three students at the State University of New York at Albany claimed they were attacked by a dozen white people while riding on a bus in January. The alleged attack quickly caught the attention of Black Lives Matter activists, the school’s president and even presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, all of whom condemned the attack before any evidence was provided.

The evidence showed the attack was a hoax, and in fact that one of the alleged victims threw the first punch. Bus cameras also showed that no passengers yelled racial slurs at the students, as they had claimed, but one of the accusers did use a racial slur against a white passenger.

Nonetheless, SUNY Albany President Robert Jones said he was “deeply concerned, saddened and angry about this incident.” He added that “there is no place in the SUNY Albany community for violence, no place for racial intolerance and no place for gender violence.”

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton even tweeted about the incident shortly after protesters took to the campus to decry the alleged assault. Clinton wrote: “There’s no excuse for racism and violence on a college campus.”

One SUNY Albany student actually did become a victim after this story was reported. The brother of one of the accusers — who is a lineman for the San Diego Chargers — threatened a student over Twitter whom he claimed was one of the attackers before quickly deleting the tweet. The threatened student allegedly left school fearing for his safety.

In an odd decision, the Albany County District Attorney actually allowed activists to view evidence of the alleged assault. One activist who viewed the footage of course argued against jailing the accusers, but suggested they apologize.

We cannot keep allowing false accusations to go unpunished.

Nope. And note that the story never quite says that the accusers were black, though it does say that the accused were white. Perhaps if the press abandoned racial double standards in these matters it would help.

MORE DOUBLE STANDARDS: Did Amy Schumer Get a Pass for Stealing Jokes because She’s a Woman?

HILLARY’S EMAILS VS THE VALERIE PLAME SCANDAL: A tale of two administrations.

And the double-standards of one MSM.

IF THEY DIDN’T HAVE DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY WOULDN’T HAVE ANY AT ALL: Flint v. Chicago — Democrats’ dirty double standard.

WITHOUT LIES AND DOUBLE STANDARDS, COULD MODERN FEMINISM EXIST AT ALL? Feminist organization still defending Rolling Stone rape hoaxer.

The National Organization for Women must be hurting for publicity and must also adhere to the old saying that there is “no such thing as bad publicity,” because their recent decision to come to the defense of the woman who lied about being gang raped to Rolling Stone is otherwise astonishing.

Police found no evidence to back up the allegation (although they haven’t officially closed the case). The accuser, Jackie, named the man she claimed took her to a fraternity party and initiated the gang rape — and no one by that name was a student at the University of Virginia or even existed in the United States.

There was no party at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house on the night she claimed to have been raped. Her story changed in material ways over the years. At one point, she claimed he had been forced to perform oral sex on five men. At another, she said she had been raped by seven, including with a beer bottle. Every detail she provided to Rolling Stone was either absolutely proven false or cast into very deep doubt — from her bloody and torn dress to the way her friends and a university administrator treated her after she came forward.

Despite all of this, NOW is calling Jackie a “survivor” and condemning the U.Va. dean who is suing Rolling Stone and requesting documents to prove she was defamed by the magazine.

Well, they fundraised a lot off this. If they admit it’s bogus, people might want their money back.

WITHOUT DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL: Facebook’s anti-Israel double standard on hate speech.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL:

cnn_teabagging_schlonged_12-25-15-1

WITHOUT DOUBLE STANDARDS THEY’D HAVE NO STANDARDS AT ALL:  Oh, the hypocrisy!

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS: Planned Parenthood was ‘right wing terror,’ but with Islam suddenly ‘motives don’t matter’.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS, THE MEDIA WOULD HAVE NO STANDARDS:MSM Memes Radical Islam vs Planned Parenthood.

ANALYSIS: TRUE. Alan Dershowitz Goes Off on PC College Culture: ‘the Fog of Fascism Is Descending.’ “It is free speech for me, but not for thee. Universities should not tolerate this kind of double standard… If you’re going to be a college administrator or a professor, if you have tenure, you have to speak back to the students, you have to call these things what they are: double standards, hypocrisy, bigotry, McCarthyism, and the fog of fascism is descending quickly over many American universities.”

IF THEY DIDN’T HAVE DOUBLE STANDARDS: Bill Cosby is being crucified for being conservative.

JOHN COCHRANE: Sclerotic growth is the overriding economic issue of our time.

From 1950 to 2000 the US economy grew at an average rate of 3.5% per year. Since 2000, it has grown at half that rate, 1.7%. From the bottom of the great recession in 2009, usually a time of super-fast catch-up growth, it has only grown at two percent per year. Two percent, or less, is starting to look like the new normal.

Small percentages hide a large reality. The average American is more than three times better off than his or her counterpart in 1950. Real GDP per person has risen from $16,000 in 1952 to over $50,000 today, both measured in 2009 dollars. Many pundits seem to remember the 1950s fondly, but $16,000 per person is a lot less than $50,000!

If the US economy had grown at 2% rather than 3.5% since 1950, income per person by 2000 would have been $23,000 not $50,000. That’s a huge difference. Nowhere in economic policy are we even talking about events that will double, or halve, the average American’s living standards in the next generation.

Even these large numbers understate reality. GDP per capita does not capture the increase in lifespan—nearly 10 years—in health, in environmental quality, security and quality of life that we have experienced. The average American today lives far better than a 1950s American would if he or she had three rather than one 1950s cars, TVs, telephones, encyclopedias (in place of internet), or three annual visits to a 1950s doctor.

But even these less quantified benefits flow from economic growth. Only wealthy countries can afford environmental protection and advanced healthcare.

Yes, but policies that produce strong economic growth produce insufficient opportunities for graft, and our political class — which controls the policies — values opportunities for graft above all else.

IF IT WEREN’T FOR DOUBLE STANDARDS: They’d have no standards at all. Everyone Freaked Out When the Bush Sisters Did It. Here’s the Response to Malia Obama Partying…

DOUBLE STANDARDS: University dismisses male student’s harassment claim.

How are male and female students treated differently under the anti-discrimination law Title IX? Not only are men accused of sexual assault denied due process or the assumption of innocence, but male accusers are often ignored.

Case in point: A male student from Northwestern University brought forward sexual harassment claims against a male microbiology and pathology professor but had them dismissed by the school. Now, the male student waited two years to report the sexual harassment, which allegedly occurred between 2007 and 2010. The male student reported the harassment to his adviser in 2012, who then reported it to the school’s Title IX coordinator.

Setting aside the merits of the case and my initial skepticism, the university dismissed the student’s accusation, claiming Title IX required reporting to be done within 180 days of the alleged harassment. The timing claim, however, applies to filing Title IX lawsuits with the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights, not to filing claims with schools.

Regardless, the male student tried again one year later, this time by appealing to the Title IX coordinator directly. The adviser acknowledged that comments made by the professor to the male student were “ill-advised and unwelcome,” but maintained that they did not rise to the level of sexual harassment.

The student had accused the professor of “making suggestive comments” and “ogling.” He also claimed he was once invited to the professor’s room to have his hair cut and that the professor asked other students about the accuser’s sexual orientation.

Now imagine, as the College Fix does, what would have happened had a female student made similar allegations against a professor.

Related: Prosecutors support more due process for accused students.

ASHE SCHOW: Democrats tweet sexist attack on Carly Fiorina.

For those who weren’t watching the debate, Fiorina wore a pink suit. Of all the disbelief GIFs the Democrats could have chosen, they chose one of a small blonde girl in a pink jacket?

Had this been a tweet from the Republicans about Hillary Clinton, the phrase “war on women” certainly would have been attached. It should be no difference for the Democrats.

While the Left wants to claim that every criticism or slight from a Republican is rooted in sexism, their own Twitter account compares a female Republican to a little girl. Maybe they should look in the mirror the next time they accuse a Republican of being sexist.

If it weren’t for double standards, they wouldn’t have any standards at all.

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Ivy Honors And The Justices: “The differential treatment of justices on the right and left of the Court provides more evidence of the high double standards of higher education. It also offers some indirect evidence that professors on the right likely suffer discrimination in the elite legal academy. After all, the faculty and the administration of the law schools likely have some influence on who gets honorary degrees. And no doubt there is likely to be a similar message in many classrooms about which justices are worthy of emulation.”

CULTURAL TYRANTS: “This isn’t stopping at the Confederate flag. It accelerates with each victory the cultural Left achieves. And never, ever is there a price paid for its aggression,” Scott McKay writes at the American Spectator. “A price must be exacted. The Left cannot be allowed its double standards and guilty pleasures on the way to unquestioned cultural dominance. If traditional America must perish under Alinsky’s Rule #4 (‘Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules’), then so must the Left.”