PowerLine – > Hollow NFL protests ignore inconvenient truth – The campus free speech crisis in a nutshell [UPDATED]

PowerLine – > Hollow NFL protests ignore inconvenient truth – The campus free speech crisis in a nutshell [UPDATED]

Powerline image at HoaxAndChange

Powerline image at HoaxAndChange

Daily Digest


  • The campus free speech crisis in a nutshell [UPDATED]
  • Captain Obvious at the NY Times
  • A feel-good NFL story
  • Making Sense of Berkeley Daze
  • Hollow NFL protests ignore inconvenient truth
The campus free speech crisis in a nutshell [UPDATED]

Posted: 28 Sep 2017 04:37 PM PDT

(Paul Mirengoff)

In the video below, a student at the University of California who has stolen the “Make America Great Again” hat of another student defends her theft on the theory that the “f***ing hat” is promoting laws and legislation that are “literally killing people.”

The video illustrates not only the campus free speech crisis but also the staggering stupidity and blatant racism of the students who are generating that crisis.

UPDATE: This article identifies the anti-white thief as Edith Macias. This is from Macias’ Facebook page. She has posted a video of the theft, along with this message:

Wearing a Make America Great Again cap at UCR… Youre making the decision to intentionally hurt people. “Make America Great Again” coded “Continue the Genocide of POC”.

You feel safe cuz you got the cops and politicians on your side. Youre not safe… just saying. We need to make racists scared. Issa movement y’all. #SnatchAHat #FuckTrump #ChataFlies #Share #FTP

Macias’ threat, coupled with the consistent unwillingness of college administrators to punish students who curb free speech rights, including violently, highlights the need for legislation that protects free expression. We have discussed such legislation, especially the need to impose discipline on students who disrupt free expression on campus, here, for example.

  

Captain Obvious at the NY Times

Posted: 28 Sep 2017 12:59 PM PDT

(Steven Hayward)

I gather that the New York Times has abolished or “reformed” its copy editing desk, or is using some other fancy euphemism to explain away the ongoing “reduction in force” moves it has been taking as it lives up to Trump’s description of it as a “failing newspaper.” But sometimes there appears a sentence that ought to make some adult in the room realize they’ve taken these reductions too far.

Today’s Binyamin Applebaum’s story on how Trump’s tax cut plan helps the rich, this sentence appears:

The plan would not benefit lower-income households that do not pay federal income taxes.

So let’s see: a tax cut doesn’t help people who don’t pay taxes. Whoa! What a concept! Let that sink in a minute. Next, the Times will be telling us that gravity affects heavy objects—including large rocks! Sunglasses won’t protect you from the glare of the sun—at night!

  

A feel-good NFL story

Posted: 28 Sep 2017 11:57 AM PDT

(Paul Mirengoff)

Deshaun Watson, a rookie, is the starting quarterback for the Houston Texans. Last year, he led Clemson to the national championship. This year, his pro career is off to a good start.

Watson’s paycheck for his first NFL game was $27,000. Instead of pocketing the money, he divided it into three and gave $9,000 apiece to three of the team’s cafeteria workers who lost their possessions when their homes were flooded by Hurricane Harvey.

“Anything else y’all need, I’m always here to help,” Watson told the women.

Eleven years ago, Watson and his family were the beneficiaries of generosity by then-NFL player Warrick Dunn. At the time, Watson, along with his mother and three siblings, lived in a small, cramped apartment in Gainesville, Ga. One day, Deshaun brought home a Habitat for Humanity note that listed steps to home ownership. His mother pursued them, spending more than 300 hours helping build new houses.

Through his foundation, Dunn was able to surprise the Watson family with a furnished home with four bedrooms, two baths, and even a full refrigerator. Years later, Watson would say, “I felt grown having my own room, just having my own bed, not really being squished, not really worrying about someone sneaking up on me, it was a great moment, a special moment.”

Now, with his first NFL paycheck, Watson has taken the opportunity to give back.

Watson and Dunn aren’t the norms, either among NFL players or the general population, but they aren’t alone among pro football players. A number of Washington Redskins, past and present, contribute generously to worthy causes in the District of Columbia and suburbs.

Although the Redskins statement before Sunday night’s game has received ridicule from leftist sportswriters, the team wasn’t off base when it said: “We are proud of the players, coaches and fans of the Washington Redskins for all that they have done to improve the lives of others in neighborhoods all across our region.”

  

Making Sense of Berkeley Daze

Posted: 28 Sep 2017 10:45 AM PDT

(Steven Hayward)

The first sign that Milo Yiannopoulos’s “Free Speech Week” at Berkeley wasn’t what it was cracked up to be was the news story two weeks ago announcing the “confirmed” speakers for the week that included both Heather Mac Donald and Charles Murray, among others. Both Heather and Charles were quick to say that they had not spoken to Milo or any of his people, and had no interest in participating.

I began to wonder whether the whole thing was a business plan of Milo’s that didn’t come together, and/or whether it was a massive trolling operation. Did he just decide to throw out every potential conservative speaker that the left hates as a means of maximizing the leftist outrage? As the dates drew near, and the number of “confirmed” speakers began to shrivel down to a tiny handful of B- and C- listers, it became apparent that trolling the campus left and the university administration was likely the chief goal of the thing. Finally, Milo made a perfunctory appearance last Sunday at Sproul Plaza that didn’t amount to much, and the campus sponsor pulled the plug on the whole idea.

But if Milo’s purpose was to troll the Berkeley left into embarrassing itself, it has to be counted a spectacular success. A number of Berkeley faculty, not so strangely clustered in the various politicized “studies” departments, had proposed canceling classes this week because of the potential disruption of the Milo circus, and of course because Milo represents “hate speech” that would make the campus “unsafe.” Even though the Milo Show didn’t come off, the leftist protests against it went forward, requiring a large police presence on campus most of the week. There were so many announced protests that they had a scheduling problem. The one I saw yesterday was a small and a rather pathetic affair. (Pictures below.)

Protesters disrupted the library and also Wheeler Hall; the local Bank of America kept its ATM machines boarded up for much of the week (the “Antifa” folks had smashed them with sledgehammers back in February), and, perhaps most fitting, there were arrests after a scuffle at the plainly mis-named “Empathy Tent.” In other words, the left did to the campus exactly what they accused Milo of wanting to do. It’s almost enough to make you want to take a knee. Kneel before Zod!

I had to be on campus this week for a couple of meetings—and also a short news story about me—so I got to take in some of the circus first hand. Here are a few more pics from on-scene (it is tempting to call this “The Weak in Pictures”):

BofA, taking no chances.

Here’s the announcement:

And here’s the turnout:

  

Hollow NFL protests ignore inconvenient truth

Posted: 28 Sep 2017 09:33 AM PDT

(Paul Mirengoff)

While poorly educated athletes, egged on by leftist commentators, indulge in Black Lives Matter based protests against their country, evidence pours in that black-on-black crime is the real threat to black lives and that attacks on policing are causing an increase in such crime.Heather Mac Donald has the details.

She points out that nearly 900 additional blacks were killed in 2016 compared with 2015, bringing the black homicide-victim total to 7,881. That’s 1,305 more than the number of white victims (which in this case includes most Hispanics) for the same period, even though blacks are only 13 percent of the nation’s population. The increase in black homicide deaths last year comes on top of a previous 900-victim increase between 2014 and 2015.

Who is killing these blacks? Not whites. According to Mac Donald, among all homicide suspects whose race was known, white killers of blacks numbered only 243.

Not the police. Mac Donald writes:

In 2016, the police fatally shot 233 blacks, the vast majority armed and dangerous, according to the Washington Post. The Post categorized only 16 black male victims of police shootings as “unarmed.” That classification masks assaults against officers and violent resistance to arrest.

Contrary to the Black Lives Matter narrative, the police have much more to fear from black males than black males have to fear from the police. In 2015, a police officer was 18.5 times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male was to be killed by a police officer. Black males have made up 42 percent of all cop-killers over the last decade, though they are only 6 percent of the population. That 18.5 ratio undoubtedly worsened in 2016, in light of the 53 percent increase in gun murders of officers—committed vastly and disproportionately by black males.

What accounts for the pronounced increase in the killing of blacks? Mac Donald cites the Ferguson effect:

Cops are backing off of proactive policing in high-crime minority neighborhoods, and criminals are becoming emboldened. Having been told incessantly by politicians, the media, and Black Lives Matter activists that they are bigoted for getting out of their cars and questioning someone loitering on a known drug corner at 2 AM, many officers are instead just driving by.

Such stops are discretionary; cops don’t have to make them. And when political elites demonize the police for just such proactive policing, we shouldn’t be surprised when cops get the message and do less of it.

Seventy-two percent of the nation’s officers say that they and their colleagues are now less willing to stop and question suspicious persons, according to a Pew Research poll released in January. The reason is the persistent anti-cop climate.

We discussed the Ferguson effect here and here, for example. FiveThirtyEight, hardly a conservative outfit, has found support for the existence of this phenomenon.

These truths are inconvenient for black activists and their mindless followers. Too inconvenient to be spoken.

Earlier this year, Mac Donald’s ability to speak them on campus was restricted. And earlier this month, a speech at Howard University by James Comey, who acknowledged the Ferguson effect when he was President Obama’s FBI Director, was disrupted throughout by student protesters.

NFL players have the right to ignore, or be ignorant of, the facts, and I don’t believe they should be punished for taking a knee or otherwise disrespecting America when the National Anthem is played. But it is fair to observe that, in addition to disrespecting the country that has been so good to them, they are boosting the Ferguson effect and thus likely adding to the toll on thousands of law-abiding people in the inner cities who need more police protection.

  

Leave a Reply