May 23, 2013 | 104 comments
May 15, 2013 | 1 comment
May 13, 2013 | 4 comments
May 10, 2013 | 2 comments
May 8, 2013 | 11 comments
The Wikileaker is now in custody in London and, as might be expected, the Left is protesting to demand “justice” on his behalf, which is to say they want him turned loose to perpetrate his sexual will on women barely half his age, which is the charge facing him in Sweden.
As to the nature of those charges, the feminist writer Jill Filipovic engages in much hand-wringing about whether an International Hero of World Peace who breaches a pre-coital agreement to wear a condom has thereby committed rape.
Undertaking to mock Ms. Filipovic on my personal blog, I found myself suspected of being insufficiently anti-rape (for the record, I’m against rape, and would even oppose Julian Assange being raped in prison), when the actual object of my ire was that species of idiocy known as “pro-sex feminism.”
It is evidently the belief of Ms. Filipovic and her colleagues that the pursuit of random hook-ups can be, and therefore should be, perfectly free from hassles or regrets. This is a stupid idea that deserves to be mocked, and often, and by someone who knows how: “The International Society for Running Around With Sharp Sticks cannot also command respect as the International Society for Eye Safety.”
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
H/T to National Review Online