↓
 

The New Neo

A blog about political change, among other things

  • Home
  • Bio
  • Email
Home » Page 813 << 1 2 … 811 812 813 814 815 … 1,884 1,885 >>

Post navigation

← Previous Post
Next Post→

Is Sessions on the way out?

The New Neo Posted on August 24, 2018 by neoAugust 23, 2018

Perhaps:

Top Senate Republicans sent dueling signals on Thursday about whether it would be safe for President Donald Trump to fire the attorney general he can’t stand…

The back-and-forth on the Hill came just as Sessions took the rare step of defending himself and his leadership of the Justice Department after a withering attack from Trump in an interview with Fox News that aired early Thursday over Sessions’ recusal from the Russia probe now overseen by special counsel Robert Mueller: “Even my enemies say that ‘Jeff Sessions should have told you that he was going to recuse himself and then you wouldn’t have put him in.’ He took the job and then he said, ‘I’m going to recuse myself.’ I said, ‘What kind of a man is this?’

Sessions’ behavior regarding the investigations into Trump has long been puzzling, and it has angered a great many people on the right. I don’t know what’s going on with him, but I’ll hazard a guess, which is that Sessions was appointed for two reasons. The first was as a sort of thank-you for being one of Trump’s earliest supporters, and one of the few early supporters who was already a respected figure in the GOP. The second is that Sessions’ field of expertise was immigration and that’s what he expected to focus on. I don’t think he saw all this brouhaha (and certainly not the tangled mess of it) coming, and I don’t think he has the stomach for it, and so he took the first opportunity to recuse himself.

Sessions has said the following:

While I am attorney general, the actions of the Department of Justice will not be improperly influenced by political considerations. I demand the highest standards, and where they are not met, I take action.

Nice sentiments. But I don’t think it’s possible in the current climate, and I think Sessions might be hopelessly naive about what’s going on. He wants to retreat to an ivory tower and not be in the messy position in which he finds himself.

And it might get a lot messier before it gets neater.

Posted in Law, Politics, Trump | 14 Replies

Is Fiat the world’s worst car or just one of the worst?

The New Neo Posted on August 23, 2018 by neoAugust 23, 2018

Discuss among yourselves.

When you rent a car in Italy and want an automatic, the choices are very limited. For the duration of this trip so far I’ve been a passenger in a Fiat, and right from the start the transmission sounded like rattling junk and felt like a mildly bucking bronco.

Last night the car simply stopped. Made a dreadful sound for a moment, and then cut out. Fortunately, it happened as we arrived at a restaurant in a 2-car caravan, with one member who speaks fluent Italian. So the call to the car rental people went fairly smoothly, and someone actually came to take a look at it after about an hour and a half of relatively pleasant waiting in the restaurant.

The person who arrived pronounced the car unsalvageable on inspection, and towed it away (down a big long hill, of course). I waved that vehicle good-bye with nary a regret, happy to see it go.

Since I’m with so many other people I may not even need a car again in Italy, because the tail end of the trip will be spent in Rome and the plan all along was to drop the car off before the Rome segment.

So, what’s up with Fiats?

Posted in Me, myself, and I | 58 Replies

The Asia Argento saga and #MeToo

The New Neo Posted on August 23, 2018 by neoAugust 22, 2018

My finger is not on the pulse of movies, and so I’d never heard of Asia Argento before the Weinstein scandal in which she was one of his earliest and most vocal accusers, a regular star of the #MeToo movement.

To very quickly summarize how I feel about that movement, (already expressed in some previous posts): sexual harassment and/or abuse is wrong, and threats to harm a career if someone tells about an assault are wrong—but I don’t believe the stories of any particular group of people on the basis of their membership in said group (for example, women), and I don’t think people should be tried in the court of gossip.

Argento was also briefly in the news in connection with Anthony Bourdain’s suicide, because she was his girlfriend.

A couple of days ago a bombshell dropped about Argento that made the #MeToo hashtag especially ironic, because Argento has also been accused of sexual abuse, this time of a minor in 2013 in the person of former child actor Jimmy Bennet, who was 17 at the time of the alleged sexual act. The age of consent in California is, surprisingly enough, 18, and that would make the act that allegedly occurred statutory rape.

Statutory rape is an odd crime in that it doesn’t matter whether the sex was consensual or not. But it’s really not odd if you realize that children by definition cannot give consent. Children are by definition presumed to not yet have the kind of judgment and maturity that would make consent meaningful and valid. Thus the law places the burden and responsibility on the adult.

The point at which a child attains that ability to give legal consent may seem arbitrary, especially when the act occurs close to the borderline of majority. But it’s no defense to say that the victim was almost 18, because “almost” doesn’t cut it.

It also seems odd to many people when a woman (Argento was 37 at the time) is the perpetrator because it is assumed that the boy (young man, whatever you want to call him) must have found it a very pleasant experience. But if true that the boy enjoys it (and it certainly isn’t always true), that’s irrelevant, as well.

Argento has alleged some contradictory things in connection with the accusations:

It led to an initial furious denial from the Italian actress, who claimed she “never had any sexual relationship” with Bennett.

But last night TMZ, the celebrity website, revealed text messages between Argento and a friend in which she admitted a sexual encounter, though she said the teenager “jumped me”.

Argento also claimed in the text messages that she did not know Bennett was a minor until she received a “shakedown” letter from his lawyer demanding money.

She reportedly wrote: “I had sex with him, it felt weird. I didn’t know he was a minor until the shakedown letter. The public know nothing, only what the NYT wrote. The shakedown letter. The horny kid jumped me.”

The actress added: “It (sic) wasn’t raped. but I was frozen. He was on top of me. After, he told me I had been his sexual fantasy since he was 12.”

Argento said in the text messages that she didn’t report the incident at the time because she “felt bad” for “this Hollywood failed child actor”.

Bennett has spoken out and said the 2013 incident was traumatic for him. Also, part of Argento’s tale is that the $350K payment made to Bennett to silence him was made by Bourdain, who talked her into it.

This story is complex. But it can be simplified down to this: Argento was the adult, and she needed to unfreeze herself and act like one, in order to make it clear to Bennett that this was not acceptable. If he had actually physically overpowered her in the face of that refusal, then it would have been Bennett who would have been guilty of non-statutory rape.

But Argento is not claiming that she was physically overpowered (despite the word “jumped”). And in fact we have little idea what actually happened between them, except that the two apparently had sex when Bennett was 17. That’s the problem with these MeToo accusations—the difficulty of sorting out competing stories—as Argento may be belatedly learning.

[NOTE: This business of a woman freezing, not knowing what to do, and/or general passivity is part of a great many of these assault stories. I wrote about the phenomenon in a previous post.]

Posted in Law, Men and women; marriage and divorce and sex, People of interest | 15 Replies

Andrew C. McCarthy on the Michael Cohen plea

The New Neo Posted on August 23, 2018 by neoAugust 22, 2018

McCarthy writes:

The Justice Department has a history of treating serious campaign-finance transgressions as administrative violations, not felonies. A prominent example: The 2008 Obama campaign accepted nearly $2 million in illegal campaign contributions, but was permitted to settle the matter with a $375,000 fine. Of course, the force of that argument is undermined considerably by the fact that Cohen’s infraction has been treated as a felony…

Still, as we’ve repeatedly pointed out, Justice Department guidance does not permit the indictment of a sitting president…The issue for President Trump is not whether he has committed a crime but whether he has committed a high crime and misdemeanor…

The conduct here is not of the egregious nature that rises to high crimes and misdemeanors — it is an infraction committed by many political candidates and often not even prosecuted. More to the point, it is remote from the core responsibilities of the presidency, implicating pre-election actions to conceal alleged indiscretions that occurred a decade earlier. And while the president has denied the indiscretions, it is not like the allegations come as any surprise to the public, who, while well aware of his flaws, elected Donald Trump nonetheless.

There’s much more at the link. Please read the whole thing.

To repeat something I’ve stated many times before, both Cohen and Manafort are only being prosecuted as a means to get to Trump. The campaign law violation of Trump’s that the Cohen case supposedly uncovers is so small and insignificant that, if impeachment were to occur on the basis of it, it would be transparently clear that prosecuting Cohen was merely a pretext to get to that particular end—impeachment.

Actually, that’s been pretty clear for a long, long time.

Posted in Law, Trump | 13 Replies

Tuscan update

The New Neo Posted on August 22, 2018 by neoAugust 21, 2018

I was in Florence yesterday. I’m only about a half hour south of there, so it was a no-brainer to go, although I knew it would be crowded and very hot.

It was crowded and very very hot. Walking on the sunny side of the street was nearly impossible; shade was an absolute necessity. Replenishing lost water stores almost constantly was required—lots of sweat being shed and evaporated. And the crowds at places like the Uffizi made visiting that ordinarily-must-see sight impossible.

But how could I not go to Florence? I’d only been there once before, for a single day when I was 15 years old, on a teen budget tour where we were herded around but hardly saw a thing that I remembered except a guy on a motorcycle (or motor scooter?) who chased me and a bunch of my girlfriends up a flight of church steps.

So yesterday I walked Florence’s very uneven sidewalks (ouch!) and saw its ancient facades, fabulous Duomo (only from outside, but that was impressive enough), fashionable shops, evocative bridges, scrumptious gelato stores, surrounding hills, and the Bargello, a building whose insides (and especially ceilings) fascinated me as much as its art collection.

My general impression of Florence was of a beautiful city gone to seed and yet not to rack and ruin. There was a whiff (not literal) of decay, and yet the people seemed very vibrant and alive. An amazing and fascinating place.

One of the ceilings in the Bargello:

Posted in Me, myself, and I | 19 Replies

Manafort verdict: guilty on 8 counts, mistrial on 10

The New Neo Posted on August 22, 2018 by neoAugust 21, 2018

The first sentence of this article is telling, isn’t it?:

President Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort on Tuesday was found guilty of eight of the 18 charges brought against him by special counsel Robert Mueller.

It’s really quite simple: if Manafort had not been “Trump’s former campaign manager” he’d be a free man today. That doesn’t mean he’s innocent—I happen to believe he’s guilty of some form of fraud. But it means that he was only prosecuted in hopes that he’d turn on Trump and implicate him, as well as to frighten other people who might want to work for Trump, and to embarrass and annoy Trump.

I’ve been trying to discover whether the verdict yesterday reflects the fact that the jury rejected the testimony of Rick Gates (see this) and convicted Manafort based on other evidence, or whether belief in Gates’ story was a necessary part of the mix. I’m not sure, but apparently the answer is that they didn’t need to believe Gates in order to convict Manafort:

Manafort’s lawyers sought to discredit Gates, revealing he embezzled what they said was millions of dollars from Manafort by falsifying expense reports and had an extramarital affair.

Andres, though, acknowledged to the jury that Gates was an imperfect witness, but challenged them to test his testimony against that of Manafort’s bookkeeper and tax preparer, and pair it with documents for verification.

“The star witness in this case is the documents,” he said.

It probably was exactly that.

It goes without saying—but I’ll say it again anyway—that all of Manafort’s fraud was committed before working for Trump and was completely unrelated to his campaign.

It also is the case that Manafort could be put away for a long, long time. And he faces still another trial connected with his actions, this one in a different venue. But there’s a little catch:

Manafort will likely appeal the verdict, but the case might not even get that far. Even before Manafort’s initial indictment, observers have speculated that President Donald Trump might pardon Manafort…

But pardoning Manafort would be especially controversial given Manafort’s place at the center of investigations into what Trump did or did not know about Russian intelligence’s efforts to influence the 2016 election, and whether Trump himself was involved in those efforts. Pardoning Manafort would look like, and perhaps be, an effort to use presidential power to cover up Trump’s own wrongdoing.

Those optics mean it might make political sense for Trump to hold off on pardons, as Vox’s Andrew Prokop explains here. What’s more, as multiple law professors told my colleague Sean Illing, pardoning Manafort might deprive him of his Fifth Amendment right not to testify when subpoenaed, potentially putting Trump in more legal jeopardy.

The article goes on to add that if the state of NY decides to pursue Manafort in addition, Trump would lack the power to grant him a pardon in any convictions at the state level.

So there are a lot of wildcards there, including what sort of punishment the present convictions end up drawing for Manafort (he faces a possible 80 years in this particular trial). If Manafort’s ultimate sentence is relatively mild, I doubt Trump would go the pardon route. But it all remains to be seen.

Posted in Law, Trump | 13 Replies

Pot use, pot abuse, and legalization

The New Neo Posted on August 22, 2018 by neoAugust 21, 2018

Pot’s illegality hasn’t stopped it from being used with great frequency in recent years by a great deal of the American public. So why not legalize it?

Well, one reason might be that it would result in even higher use:

…[A]longside legalization, such problems [self-described cannabis-use disorder] are becoming more common: The share of adults with one has doubled since the early aughts, as the share of cannabis users who consume [pot] daily or near-daily has jumped nearly 50 percent—all “in the context of increasingly permissive cannabis legislation, attitudes, and lower risk perception,” as the National Institutes of Health put it.

Public-health experts worry about the increasingly potent options available, and the striking number of constant users. “Cannabis is potentially a real public-health problem,” said Mark A. R. Kleiman, a professor of public policy at New York University. “It wasn’t obvious to me 25 years ago, when 9 percent of self-reported cannabis users over the last month reported daily or near-daily use. I always was prepared to say, ‘No, it’s not a very abusable drug. Nine percent of anybody will do something stupid.’ But that number is now [something like] 40 percent.” They argue that state and local governments are setting up legal regimes without sufficient public-health protection, with some even warning that the country is replacing one form of reefer madness with another, careening from treating cannabis as if it were as dangerous as heroin to treating it as if it were as benign as kombucha…

“I do think that not legalization, but the legalization movement, does have a lot on its conscience now,” [Kleiman] said. “The mantra about how this is a harmless, natural, and non-addictive substance—it’s now known by everybody. And it’s a lie.”…

“The reckless way that we are legalizing marijuana so far is mind-boggling from a public-health perspective,” Kevin Sabet, an Obama administration official and a founder of the nonprofit Smart Approaches to Marijuana, told me. “The issue now is that we have lobbyists, special interests, and people whose motivation is to make money that are writing all of these laws and taking control of the conversation.”

As a member of the generation of Americans that grew up in the 60s and was probably the first cohort to experience fairly widespread pot use (although the drug was very very different back then in terms of strength), I’m not the least bit surprised at the drug’s capacity for fostering problematic dependence. It’s been clear for decades that it has a lot of potential in that direction, and that although it’s almost certainly less dangerous than alcohol that does not make it benign.

I’m trying to think whether there is another substance that has been banned in America for a long time and has then become legal, and if so what happened after that. I can’t think of one, however. Liquor is not a good example, because it was traditionally legal and its use commonplace, and then it became illegal for a very short time (Prohibition) before it became legal again.

Alcohol is an enormously problematic substance that was already so heavily used by the public at the time of its banning that Prohibition didn’t have a chance. It was an example of a cat that was already out of the bag and could not be put back in. I believe that marijuana use today has been approaching that level, and that previous criminalization has resulted in differential, spotty, and ultimately ineffective prosecution. There may be no putting that particular cat back in the bag, either. But that’s not to say it isn’t a dangerous cat.

I don’t have an solution, unfortunately. But I definitely see a problem.

Here are some proposals:

One extreme option would be to require markets to be noncommercial: The District of Columbia, for instance, does not allow recreational sales, but does allow home cultivation and the gifting of marijuana products among adults. “If I got to pick a policy, that would probably be it,” Kleiman told me. “That would be a fine place to be if we were starting from prohibition, but we are starting from patchwork legalization…

The government could run marijuana stores, as in Canada. States could require budtenders to have some training or to refrain from making medical claims. They could ask users to set a monthly THC purchase cap and remain under it. They could cap the amount of THC in products, and bar producers from making edibles that are attractive to kids, like candies. A ban or limits on marijuana advertising are also options, as is requiring cannabis dispensaries to post public-health information.

Then, there are THC taxes, designed to hit heavy users the hardest.

At this point, the states represent a natural laboratory for the study of various approaches and their effects, because there’s a great deal of variety there. It seems to be the best we can do right now.

Posted in Health, Law | 37 Replies

Free-climbers [Part I]

The New Neo Posted on August 21, 2018 by neoAugust 20, 2018

[NOTE: It might help to have read this previous post of mine, about free-climbing El Capitan, before reading the present post.]

This article is about Dean Potter, a free-climbing star who died in a base-jumping accident in 2015. It was written before the mishap:

Potter doesn’t want to die, he just wants to come as close to the brink as possible. “I’m addicted to the heightened awareness I get when there’s a death consequence,” he says. “My vision is sharper, and I’m more sensitive to sounds, my sense of balance and the beauty all around me. A lot of my creativity comes from this nearly insane obsession. Something sparkles in my mind, and then nothing else in life matters.”

I’ve read quite a few interviews with folks who engage in these sorts of high-risk athletic adventure activities, and they nearly all say something akin to that last sentence.

We regulars can’t quite understand it. But I think that, if you feel that way, it makes a certain amount of sense to keep up the activity despite the risks—as Steph Davis, a free-climber and base-jumper who was married to Potter and divorced in 2006, and lost her second husband to a similar base-jumping accident in 2013, says:

She doesn’t like the water, for example. She says she would never surf and chance drowning or getting eaten by a shark, “because the reward I would get from the experience would be so minimal compared to the potential risks”…

“Base jumping’s not safe. Road biking isn’t safe. Driving cars isn’t safe. Living isn’t safe,” says Davis. “So if the perception of the value or benefit of any activity is based on whether it could be made ultimately safe – that’s sort of a losing battle ’cause we’re all going to die.”

We can all see the risk; it’s obvious. But they plan and train so that they reduce the risk, although it still remains high (Davis was base-jumping with her second husband when he crashed into the cliff and died, so she is well aware of it). What we don’t see are the rewards—and for the people who fall in love with these pursuits the rewards must be phenomenal. Some people take it up, feel a certain high (to coin a phrase), but not enough to overcome the perception of risk and they drop it. Others (me, for example), can’t even conceive of feeling a reward doing this activity and perceive the risks as so enormous as to be suicidal. For us, the decision is very very easy.

In that interview Potter gave in 2008, he also had this to say:

Potter’s plan goes like this: He’ll build strength by climbing tough routes and hone his focus by highlining, BASE-jumping and free-soloing projects that require him to enter a trancelike state. “I’ll be balanced mentally and physically, and hopefully it’ll all funnel together into this superheightened power to fly,” he says. “That’s all I think about.”…

Aerodynamically, of course, self-propelled human flight is a nutty proposition. Potter, like many BASE-jumpers, often wears a one-piece, bat-shape, nylon wing suit that allows him to extend his horizontal glide during a jump. Wing-suiting, or “bird-manning,” is the closest approximation humans have to real flight. But it’s not the sort of soaring Potter has in mind. What he’s picturing is an actual human body—his—taking a running start, achieving liftoff and, well, flying. With nothing but his own two arms as wings. Just like in his dream.

Seriously.

“I know it’s insane to think that I could fly,” Potter says. “But to make it possible, you truly have to believe in it – to go to a place that’s not accepted.”

You could call this crazy. But these people must go to a place where they exercise mental and physical powers that seem almost superhuman, so perhaps there’s an inherent tendency to go one step further and think they have actually, literally, defied the laws of gravity.

[Part II coming soon.]

Posted in Baseball and sports, Getting philosophical: life, love, the universe | 25 Replies

How can “dog” be considered a racial insult?

The New Neo Posted on August 21, 2018 by neoAugust 20, 2018

The word “dog” is not (and as far as I know, never has been) a racially-tinged epithet, although the WaPo would have you think it is:

The president of the United States had just lobbed another racially charged insult — this time calling his former top African American adviser a “dog”

Yes, Trump called Omarosa a dog. But why is this “racially charged”? And what on earth does “racially charged” mean, anyway, if it can be expanded to include a word that has no especially racial history at all? “Racially charged” has apparently become an all-purpose term that means “any insult directed at a black person that isn’t delivered by a liberal or a leftist.”

Calling a woman a “dog”—or calling any person a dog—isn’t something I’m going to defend. I think it’s juvenile and classless, but Trump is often those things. One thing it is not, however, is racist. It is a generic insult.

As best I can remember, the practice of not allowing any white person on the right to criticize any black person in any way (and in particular in a rude way) without being accused of racism began with Obama’s candidacy. Remember this one, for example, when McCain and Palin were criticized as racists for saying Obama was a socialist?:

“Socialism” is a code word for black? Bizarre. A less bizarre notion is that “racism” has now become a code word for “all criticism of Obama”—or “criticism of any black person for any reason whatsoever.”

I’ve been around a long time, and “dog” is very much an equal-opportunity pejorative. So maybe this is the WaPo’s racism? Perhaps the WaPo thinks black people are more doglike than other people? Is that not racist of the WaPo, or at least racially charged?

Posted in Language and grammar, Race and racism | 33 Replies

Double time stamps for comments

The New Neo Posted on August 21, 2018 by neoAugust 20, 2018

I noticed that yesterday, rather suddenly, the comments began to have double time stamps. This had been a problem in the early days of the new blog (long before the redirect), and I fixed it months ago, but it wasn’t easy to do.

So I can’t say I was the least bit pleased to see the problem recurring. On the other hand, it’s more an annoyance than a serious problem. I’m in Tuscany for about one more week, and I’m not going to fuss with it—or bother my web designer—now. I plan to deal with the whole thing on my return, and I’m pretty sure it will be fixed within a few weeks.

So please just bear with it for a bit.

Posted in Blogging and bloggers | 2 Replies

Will a Manafort verdict come soon, and what will it be?

The New Neo Posted on August 21, 2018 by neoAugust 20, 2018

Any prognosticators out there?

Posted in Law | 27 Replies

More Tuscany

The New Neo Posted on August 20, 2018 by neoAugust 19, 2018

Recent sightings, and a culinary observation:

Ever since I tasted my first piece of bread here, I wondered: why? Why no salt?

Bread without salt doesn’t taste very good at all. Tuscany is really into food, and good food, so what’s up with the bland, saltless bread? Especially when, in the summer, you lose quite a bit of salt sweating?

So, time to look it up. And the answer is—drum roll, please—nobody knows, but they’ve been doing it that way for centuries. There’s no dearth of theories; follow the link to learn them.

Posted in Food, Me, myself, and I | 14 Replies

Post navigation

← Previous Post
Next Post→

Your support is appreciated through a one-time or monthly Paypal donation

Please click the link recommended books and search bar for Amazon purchases through neo. I receive a commission from all such purchases.

Archives

Recent Comments

  • Gringo on Open thread 5/18/2026
  • Geoffrey Britain on Trump: about to strike Iran, or not?
  • Geoffrey Britain on Roundup
  • Leland on Trump: about to strike Iran, or not?
  • Oldflyer on Trump: about to strike Iran, or not?

Recent Posts

  • Trump: about to strike Iran, or not?
  • Roundup
  • Open thread 5/18/2026
  • Stone Age dentists
  • Israel’s defamation lawsuit against the NY Times for publishing the Kristof piece

Categories

  • A mind is a difficult thing to change: my change story (17)
  • Academia (319)
  • Afghanistan (97)
  • Amazon orders (6)
  • Arts (8)
  • Baseball and sports (162)
  • Best of neo-neocon (90)
  • Biden (536)
  • Blogging and bloggers (583)
  • Dance (287)
  • Disaster (239)
  • Education (320)
  • Election 2012 (360)
  • Election 2016 (565)
  • Election 2018 (32)
  • Election 2020 (511)
  • Election 2022 (114)
  • Election 2024 (403)
  • Election 2026 (32)
  • Election 2028 (7)
  • Evil (129)
  • Fashion and beauty (323)
  • Finance and economics (1,021)
  • Food (316)
  • Friendship (47)
  • Gardening (18)
  • General information about neo (4)
  • Getting philosophical: life, love, the universe (729)
  • Health (1,140)
  • Health care reform (545)
  • Hillary Clinton (184)
  • Historical figures (331)
  • History (702)
  • Immigration (433)
  • Iran (441)
  • Iraq (224)
  • IRS scandal (71)
  • Israel/Palestine (804)
  • Jews (426)
  • Language and grammar (361)
  • Latin America (203)
  • Law (2,921)
  • Leaving the circle: political apostasy (124)
  • Liberals and conservatives; left and right (1,288)
  • Liberty (1,102)
  • Literary leftists (14)
  • Literature and writing (389)
  • Me, myself, and I (1,478)
  • Men and women; marriage and divorce and sex (914)
  • Middle East (381)
  • Military (318)
  • Movies (347)
  • Music (526)
  • Nature (255)
  • Neocons (32)
  • New England (177)
  • Obama (1,737)
  • Pacifism (16)
  • Painting, sculpture, photography (128)
  • Palin (93)
  • Paris and France2 trial (25)
  • People of interest (1,024)
  • Poetry (255)
  • Political changers (176)
  • Politics (2,778)
  • Pop culture (394)
  • Press (1,623)
  • Race and racism (861)
  • Religion (419)
  • Romney (164)
  • Ryan (16)
  • Science (626)
  • Terrorism and terrorists (967)
  • Theater and TV (264)
  • Therapy (69)
  • Trump (1,604)
  • Uncategorized (4,406)
  • Vietnam (109)
  • Violence (1,414)
  • War and Peace (995)

Blogroll

Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
DanielInVenezuela (liberty)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (shrink archives)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor’s Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
Maggie’sFarm (togetherness)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
MichelleObama’sMirror (reflect)
NoPasaran! (bluntFrench)
NormanGeras (archives)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob)
Pamela Geller (Atlas Shrugs)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (exodus)
Powerline (foursight)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RedState (conservative)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
©2026 - The New Neo - Weaver Xtreme Theme Email
Web Analytics
↑