Tuesday, March 31, 2015

Why the Rolling Stone gang-rape story will never be labeled a hoax | WashingtonExaminer.com

Why the Rolling Stone gang-rape story will never be labeled a hoax | WashingtonExaminer.com: "No, the reason it will not be labeled a hoax comes from an anonymous McGill University student, using the pseudonym Aurora Dagny, who wrote last year that dogmatism is in part to blame for activists' refusal to accept evidence contrary to their worldview.

"One way to define the difference between a regular belief and a sacred belief is that people who hold sacred beliefs think it is morally wrong for anyone to question those beliefs," Dagny wrote. "If someone does question those beliefs, they're not just being stupid or even depraved, they're actively doing violence. They might as well be kicking a puppy. When people hold sacred beliefs, there is no disagreement without animosity.""

'via Blog this'

Friday, March 27, 2015

The Democratic Party has (almost) lost Wall Street « Hot Air

The Democratic Party has (almost) lost Wall Street « Hot Air: "One of the worst kept secrets of President Barack Obama’ first term in office is how closely aligned that administration and the members of the Democratic Party were with the interests of the financial sector, despite party members’ repeated insistence that they wanted nothing more than to curb Wall Street’s excesses. The well-heeled bankers at Goldman Sachs had little to fear from Democrats who professed their appreciation for the promise of the Occupy Wall Street movement while the institution’s members were filling Democratic pockets with campaign contributions. The financial community could rest easy knowing that Democrats were aware of who truly buttered their bread.

But the Democratic Party has begun to match its anti-Wall Street rhetoric with action since figures like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) have risen to power. According to a Reuters exclusive, the trading sector of the economy has had it with the rhetoric of the Warren Wing of the Democratic Party, and they’re ready to do something about it."

'via Blog this'

Bergdahl: I left my base in order to, uh, walk to another base and report wrongdoing « Hot Air

Bergdahl: I left my base in order to, uh, walk to another base and report wrongdoing « Hot Air: "I assume he chose the defense he chose because it gives him more political traction than a simple insanity defense would. If he says “I snapped,” the retort will be that that’s no excuse to desert. Most soldiers cope with severe mental strain and many, I’m sure, have complaints about various officers up the chain of command, and only rarely do any of them decide to choose their own adventure outside the wire. Also, none of the men from his unit who’ve accused him of desertion have said anything about obvious signs of insanity from Bergdahl before he left. How would he prove that he snapped when there’d be a dozen witnesses claiming they saw no evidence of it at the time? Claiming instead that he was headed to another base to report wrongdoing makes it seem like the Pentagon’s coming after him now to punish him for trying to speak out, which may swing anti-war activists and civil libertarians over to his side. It won’t spare him from a sentence but maybe political pressure will keep that sentence lighter than it otherwise would have been. The Army’s not really going to send a misguided but well meaning “whistleblower” away to prison for life, are they?

Exit question from Aaron MacLean: Why are senior defense officials leaking Bergdahl’s self-serving story to CNN? Is there any explanation apart from them wanting to cover Obama’s ass by making the subject of his disastrous prisoner swap look as good as they can?"

'via Blog this'