News – Politics – Opinion – Podcasts
Ken White at Popehat has a detailed breakdown of important decisions written by longtime circuit court judge Brett Kavanaugh. The point being, not to advocate but to explore for the purpose of summarizing where a Justice Kavanaugh is likely to come down on future First Amendment cases.
I found them all interesting but one, in particular, caught my attention and it relates to our next GrokPoll (which will be published this evening Thursday.)
Normally I either bypass her Op-Eds in the Union Leader completely or just glance through them. They generally are the usual drivel that would come from a former NH Democrat Party chair (and a DNC vice-chair). Don’t worry, I generally think JHo’s (former NH GOP chair) to be similar screeds. In this case, though, I found at least the premise of the Op-Ed to be both true and false at the same time concerning campaign finance report.
The digital ink was barely dry on this post when what to my wandering eyes did appear but a mysteriously funded left-leaning campaign finance “reform” group attacking AFP-NH for what amounted to following Campaign Finance Laws.
Open Democracy(OD) is a left-leaning affair pushing the left-leaning policy ideas of leftists activist groups and just happens to be an issues advocacy group just like AFP. But Open Democracy supports forced union dues and opposes right to work so when AFP asked voters to ask some useful idiots in the NH House (who happen to be Republicans) about their opposition to Right to Work, OD yelled ‘fire’ in a crowded campaign finance reform move theater.
UPDATE and bumped: Yay! It looks like the NH Administration is taking this seriously (emphasis mine, reformatted):
The Union Leader obtained a memo Attorney General Gordon MacDonald sent to Administrative Services Commissioner Charles Arlinghaus making it clear that as of the next payroll on July 6 all state workers must give permission to have any fees withheld from their paychecks. “As a result of this decision, the Department of Administrative Services must immediately stop deducting an agency fee from any state employee,” MacDonald wrote.
“No agency fee should be deducted from paychecks issued on that date and thereafter unless the employee has given his or her consent.”
Works for me! Now to get rid of the idea that a union can negotiate for me better than I can; how could they in that they have no idea what is best for me?
******
I was talking with a number of folks this morning at a meeting when the word flashed around. My go to blog for SCOTUS decisions is SCOTUSblog.com for their play-by-play calling out of the decisions that are released by The Supreme Court of the United States and the on-the-spot quick analysis of what the decisions mean to “the folks” like me who aren’t lawyers and make no claims no how to be such. Amy Howe summed it up well (all emphasis mine):
UPDATE: As the Supreme court just decided for Janus and against the unions, this post is appropriate. Best news? SCOTUS rules that public sector union MUST be opt-in for payments. Essentially, this returns freedom to individuals over the unions; no more paycheck protection for unions.
************
“Live Free or Die” – that’s our state motto and unlike many on the Left that find that absolutely abhorrent, it’s one of the reasons why I’ve stayed in the Granite State for over three decades (yep, came for a job, stayed for the motto). The rest of the motto is not one that is repeated too often, that saying from General John Stark to his former soldiers: “Death is not the worst of all evils“. The Progressives here shudder every time it is stated.
For them, life is not to be free in the traditional sense of the word. Freedom is the Collective. Freedom is belonging to such a collective. It also isn’t about remembering history because much of their philosophy regresses back to the mistakes and catastrophes of the 20th and 19th Centuries when Collectivism tried to overwhelm that most radical of American ideals – the idea that the Individual is sovereign and happens to have a government instead of what most of the world’s history and actions show to be the opposite – a country with subjects.
American’s for Prosperity in New Hampshire has been doing some issues advocacy. Alerting the residents of seven House Districts held by sitting (r)epublicans that their elected officials opposed Right to Work.
The seven “Republican” House Reps are mad at AFP for daring to let voters, who might not otherwise notice, know how they voted. So they wrote a letter to the Secretary of State and the State’s Attorney General questioning AFP-New Hampshire status as a nonprofit 501(c)4.
Put another way; this truth could hurt them politically and rather than explain their votes to constituents they’ve taken the liberal road to silence an inconvenient exercise of free speech.
The New York State Senate, under cover of protecting under-eighteen year-olds from ‘cyberbullying’ have advanced a bill that presents the government with a far-reaching tool to silence a wide range of speech it decides has violated their law.
I’ll let you explore Eugene Volokh’s examination of potential issues for speech suppression here, but I wanted to make the point that this exercise is no different than the progressive motivations on health care. Expand Medicaid. Expand Medicare. When they meet, you’ve got single-payer health care.
A recent survey of Dartmouth Students got ample attention from me here and here, but Jack Kerwick, writing at Townhall.com, combed through it here and I wanted to share his conclusion because it distills the noisy narratives down to a moment of clarity.
In summary, the Dartmouth survey establishes the truth of three propositions:
(1)Republican students are overwhelmingly outnumbered by Democrats at Dartmouth.
Hopefully, Ellen cleared up the “narrowness” of the decision in the SCOTUS Masterpiece Cake Shop LTD v. Colorado Human Rights Commission. The verdict was narrow not the vote. And while it was a victory for religious conscience, it was not a sweeping defense of Free Speech.
We do, however, find advocates for free speech in concurring opinions that should be examined because they remind us that the First Amendment is under constant attack and the Supreme Court provides a wealth of resources for its defense when needed. And they are needed.
In a story that went wide yesterday, Exeter Police Chief William Shupe had Robert Frese arrested for an online comment in which he said: “Chief Shupe covered up for a dirty cop.”
I may have my differences with the NH ACLU, but we’ve consistently agreed on one thing. Free Speech. Shupe is a public official. As such he is subject to the broadest possible interpretation of the first amendment. But rather than dismiss the banter the Chief had the accused arrested for violating the state’s defamation law.
A disruptive heckler who was filmed harassing Dave Rubin during a speech at the University of Hampshire on May 1 turns out to be a Senior Lecturer in Women’s Studies at UNH.
Rubin, a well-known gay, Democrat online talk show host, has recently gained popularity among young conservatives for his willingness to provide a platform to conservative personalities such as Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson, and transgender conservative commentator Blaire White. His May 1 UNH speech largely focused on civil discourse, free speech, and tolerance of ideas.
According to Campus Reform, UNH Women’s Studies Professor Dr. Joelle Ruby Ryan has been identified as one of the primary opponents to free speech.
Aaron Brown, writing at Real Clear Markets reports that, according to NASA Data, “the greatest global two-year cooling event of the last century just occurred.”
How could you have missed that news? It sounds a lot like Climate Change. The Climate changed, measurably, and historically, on the altar of the same NASA Climate Temple as all that “hottest this or that ever” news. How could the watchdogs, the scribes of truth and history, fail to report this?
Greg Moore took me by surprise with a tweet about how the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) had given UNH its highest rating for free speech. Say what?
The Coalition for Open Democracy was founded by New Hampshire’s Granny (D) Haddock to fight big money in politics. All based on the idea that wealthy special interests are warping the process.
Granny D left our world in 2010 and since then, or more specifically in 2014, 2015, and 2016 Open Democracy racked in a total of 750,000.00 dollars in donations.
From where?
(H/T: Powerline)
Eugene Volokh is writing a series of articles on Free Speech and freedom of the press over at Reason. In this installment, he looks at exceptions afforded to a special class of corporate ‘speakers’ the professional press.
Under any sensible accounting scheme, an editorial supporting a candidate would cost a lot in labor costs and the editorial’s share of newsprint, ink, and distribution costs. That would often far exceed $1000; and most newspapers are of course organized as corporations. Likewise for extended coverage supporting or opposing a candidate, when engaged in by an opinion magazine.
Democrats don’t know what they don’t know and they only have themselves to blame.
Why are so many Democrats shocked when a Republican is elected president? Because, as they themselves say, they “don’t know anyone” who voted for the Republican. The primary reason for this is the people in their life who voted for Donald Trump — professional colleagues, and even friends and relatives — are afraid to tell them.
Sadly, this treatment works in a much broader sense to advance liberal narratives and often promote progressive policies, especially at the local level “where get out the vote” means find ways to keep your opposition at home, so they win by default.
The Univerity of New Hampshire has added a Social Media Policy to its Student’s Rights, Rules, and Responsibility code of conduct. It’s a Big Brother chill-blanket on free speech that allows anyone to report anyone else whenever they think their feelings have been hurt or the feelings of others might be hurt.
What could go wrong?
Carolyn McKinney’s rebuttal to “some Republicans” pushing to remove the word ‘traditional’ as a qualifier to the word ‘marriage’ in the New Hampshire Republican State Platform is brilliant. It’s so good those Republicans don’t want you to read it. (If you have problems with the above link the piece is also cross-posted here.)
Somone or perhaps a few someones are flagging every effort to post this on Facebook as in violation of Facebook’s rules making it difficult to share.
