Tuesday, April 15, 2014

The regime feels unassailable. The pattern of behavior shows it.

Ron Paul group to defy IRS

Ron Paul's nonprofit Campaign for Liberty will fight the Internal Revenue Service's demand that it reveal its donor list to the agency, despite having already been fined for refusing to do so.
"There is no legitimate reason for the IRS to know who donates to Campaign for Liberty," Megan Stiles, the communications director at Campaign for Liberty, told the Washington Examiner in an email on Tuesday. "We believe the First Amendment is on our side as evidenced by cases such as NAACP v. Alabama and International Union UAW v. National Right to Work. Many 501(c)(4) organizations protect the privacy of their donors in the very same way as Campaign for Liberty. For some reason the IRS has now chosen to single out Campaign for Liberty for special attention. We plan to fight this all the way."
Ron Paul suggested that the group will refuse to pay the IRS fine in an fundraising email to supporters about the agency's request for information.
"Paying this outrageous extortionist fine — just to exercise our rights as American citizens to petition our government — may even be cheaper in the short run," he wrote. "But it’ll just embolden an alphabet soup of other federal agencies to come after us." Paul's email said that the rule requiring that 501(c)(4)s list their donors is "rarely enforced."
Stiles accused the IRS of trying to silence her organization. "The IRS technically requires donor information from 501(c)(4) organizations and is forbidden by law from releasing it to the public, yet despite this they have 'mistakenly' released the information repeatedly over the years," she wrote. "Often these leaks have been made to political opponents of the conservative groups whose information was leaked. Leaking the donor information is intended to harass and to intimidate those donors from donating to political causes. Campaign for Liberty has refused to provide donor information to the IRS to protect the privacy of our members. Now the IRS has demanded the information and fined Campaign for Liberty for protecting its members’ privacy."

We are all at risk and that's precisely the way the bureaucrats - politicians like it.

Donald Rumsfeld pens open letter to the IRS every year explaining he has 'no idea' if his returns are accurate 

  • Rumsfeld made the claims in a letter shared on Twitter on Tuesday
  • Says he doesn't even know if tax returns and payments from years prior for him and his wife are accurate
  • Calls his lack of knowledge regarding the documents' accuracy is a 'sad commentary on governance in our nation's capital'
  • Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld says he has 'no idea' whether his tax returns and payments are accurate. 
    Rumsfeld made the claims in a letter that was sent to the IRS and shared on Twitter on Tuesday - and says he sends the same letter to the agency every year. 
    He also says he doesn't even know if earlier tax documents are accurate for him and his wife. 
    'I have sent in our federal income tax and our gift tax returns for 2013,' it reads. 'As in prior years, it is important for you to know that I have absolutely no idea whether our tax returns and our tax payments are accurate. I say that despite the fact that I a college graduate and I try hard to make sure our tax returns are accurate.'
    'I have no absolutely no idea if my taxes are accurate': Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld made the claims in a letter shared on Twitter on Tuesday
    'I have no absolutely no idea if my taxes are accurate': Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld made the claims in a letter shared on Twitter on Tuesday
    Rumsfeld's letter later criticizes the perceived complexity of the US tax system. 
    'The tax code is so complex and the forms are so complicated, that I know I cannot have any confidence that I know what is being requested and therefore I cannot and do not know, as I suspect a great many Americans cannot know, whether or not their tax returns are accurate,' he writes. 
    Confused? Rumsfeld said he didn't even know if tax returns and payments from prior years were accurate
    Confused? Rumsfeld said he didn't even know if tax returns and payments from prior years were accurate
    He later adds, 'This note is to alert you folks that I know that I do not know whether or not my tax returns are accurate, which is a sad commentary on governance in our nation’s capital.'
    Elsewhere in the letter, Rumsfeld, 81, says that he hopes the tax code will be simplified before he dies. 
    'I do hope that at some point in my lifetime, and I am now in my 80s, so there are not many years left, the U.S. government will simply the U.S. tax code so that those citizens who sincerely want to pay what they should, are able to do it right, and know that they have done it right.'
    Online commenters have criticized Rumsfeld's letter on the social media platform - and one user has even alleged Rumsfeld committed perjury by submitting the tax documents. 
    '"No idea?" So you both committed perjury when you declared it was true to the best of your knowledge,' the user says. 
    'Protip: IRS doesn't write the tax code, Congress does,' one user wrote. 
    'Accuracy is a tricky thing isn't it? A bit like the evidence for Weapons of Mass Destruction,' another commenter wrote. 
    'Considering you claim to not know what constitutes torture, I think we all have a little trouble believing you,' one user said. 
    'They're going to the debt you crated [sic] with Iraq war. And why aren't you in jail?' another said.  

    Your tax day information

    Paying more than your fair share of income taxes

    Ethel C. Fenig
    If you are a member of the 53% of the US population who actually pays income taxes, due today without a penalty, perhaps this chart from the Internal Revenue Service and analyzed by Mark J. Perry of AEIdeas will make you feel better.  Or not.
    IRS data: The top 1% pay 37% of all taxes, the bottom half pay 2%, a blubbering David Letterman can’t believe the facts

    IRS data for 2009 (most recent year available) are displayed above and show that the top 1% of US taxpayers (about 819,000 filers) paid 37% of all federal income taxes collected, the top 50% paid almost all taxes collected (98%) and the bottom half (about 41 million filers) paid only 2%.
    And these are the stats on people who at least pay income taxes; in 2012 Republican presidential candidate's Mitt Romney was actually criticized for even mentioning  that 47% don't pay income taxes.
    But, as you mail your taxes and pay your "fair share" but certainly use government services than your "fair share" be comforted by Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes' observation
    "Taxes are what we pay for civilized society …"
    (OK, OK, add your joke/insight here if you must.)

    The government statisticians covering up for a failed Obamacare

    Census Survey Revisions Mask Health Law Effects

    The climate change scam


    Even by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's own lamentable standards, its new report - by Working Group III of the Fifth Assessment Report - makes no sense whatsoever.

    Perhaps it never did but what definitely made it worse was the politicised meddling of the Obama administration.
    Before the report's formal release, US officials - who had seen an earlier draft - wrote to the United Nations demanding it be amended.
    "The discussion of the economic costs of mitigation is too narrow and does not incorporate co-benefits of action."
    Loosely translated this means: "If we admit how much we're spending to such little purpose, the taxpaying public is going to kill us."
    So the report was duly amended to suggest that the benefits of wind turbines, solar panels, biofuels - not to mention the losses entailed by leaving fossil fuels in the ground - more than offset the massive costs and inconvenience involved.
    This presumably is why the left-wing Guardian was able to give its coverage the headline"IPCC climate change report: averting catastrophe is eminently affordable".
    Catastrophic climate change can be averted without sacrificing living standards according to a UN report, which concludes that the transformation required to a world of clean energy is eminently affordable.
    “It doesn’t cost the world to save the planet,” said economist Professor Ottmar Edenhofer, who led the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) team.
    Perhaps this was an accurate summation of the report if you read it a certain way. But equally, it was accurate to report, as Breitbart London did, that it was basically a wish list for the eco-fascist new world order.
    Or - as some other newspapers did - you could decide that the report's main take home message that the IPCC had now come round to the virtues of nuclear energy and was guardedly approving of shale gas.
    How could the report lend itself to such different conclusions? Because it was written by a vast international committee and then tinkered with further by politicians in order to be all things to all men.
    Problem is when you try pleasing everyone you end up pleasing nobody.
    But at least there's one thing on which almost everyone ought to be able agree. This truly is the lamest report in the IPCC's history.

    North Korea strikes out

    North Korean officials visit salon over Kim Jong-un 'bad hair' advert

    Poster of Kim Jong-un in the salonThe poster has become a tourist attraction, the salon claimed

    North Korean officials paid a visit to a London hair salon to question why it had used their leader Kim Jong-un's picture in a poster offering haircuts.
    The poster in M&M Hair Academy in South Ealing with the words "Bad Hair Day?" below the leader's picture.
    Barber Karim Nabbach said embassy officials were shown the door and the salon's manager spoke to the police.
    Met Police said: "We have spoken to all parties involved and no offence has been disclosed."
    The salon put up the poster on 9 April and the next day two men claiming to be officials from the North Korean embassy visited the salon and demanded to meet the manager, Mo Nabbach.
    Karim Nabbach said: "We put up posters for an offer for men's hair cuts through the month of April. Obviously in the current news there has been this story that North Korean men are only allowed one haircut.
    "We didn't realise but the North Korean embassy is a 10-minute walk from the salon. The next day we had North Korean officials pop into the salon asking to speak to the manager.
    "He said 'listen this isn't North Korea, this is England, we live in a democracy so I'm afraid you're going to have to get out of my salon'."
    The manager later informed the police about the visit by the North Koreans and he was told the embassy had also contacted officers.
    "We haven't had any trouble since then, if anything the poster has become a tourist attraction," Karim Nabbach said.
    Last month it was reported by Radio Free Asia reports that male university students in North Korea were now required to get the same haircut as their leader.

    Islamist terrorism

    Nigeria unrest: 'Attackers abduct 200 schoolgirls'

    Nigerian forces on patrol in Borno state, April 2013Heavy security in north-eastern Nigeria has not stopped the attacks
    Scores of girls have been abducted in an attack on a school in north-east Nigeria, parents say.
    Gunmen reportedly arrived at the school in Chibok, Borno state, late last night, and ordered the hostel's teenage residents on to lorries.
    Parents told the BBC's Hausa service that at least 200 girls had been abducted. The attackers are thought to be from the Islamist group, Boko Haram.
    On Monday, bombings blamed on the group killed more than 70 people in Abuja.
    A map showing Borno state and the town of Chibok in Nigeria
    Boko Haram, whose name means "Western education is forbidden" in the local Hausa language, has been waging an armed campaign for an Islamic state in northern Nigeria.
    'Soldiers overpowered'
    The attack on the hostel in Chibok was confirmed by police, although they had no confirmation of the abductions.
    Residents in the area reported hearing explosions followed by gunfire last night, said BBC reporter Mohammed Kabir Mohammed in the capital, Abuja.

    Boko Haram at a glance

    • Founded in 2002
    • Official Arabic name, Jama'atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda'awati wal-Jihad, means "People Committed to the Propagation of the Prophet's Teachings and Jihad"
    • Initially focused on opposing Western education
    • Nicknamed Boko Haram, a phrase in the local Hausa language meaning, "Western education is forbidden"
    • Launched military operations in 2009 to create an Islamic state across Nigeria
    • Founding leader Mohammed Yusuf killed in same year in police custody
    • Succeeded by Abubakar Shekau, who the military wrongly claimed in 2013 had been killed
    "Many girls were abducted by the rampaging gunmen who stormed the school in a convoy of vehicles," the AFP news agency quotes Emmanuel Sam, an education official in Chibok, as saying.
    Another witness, who requested anonymity, told AFP that gunmen overpowered soldiers who had been deployed to provide extra security ahead of annual exams.
    A student, who did not wish to be named and managed to escape, told the BBC they were sleeping when armed men burst into their hostel and asked to be shown the school's store.
    The schoolgirl said the men loaded the food items in the store into a truck and ordered some of the girls to climb in.
    The other girls were packed into a bus and two other trucks, one carrying sacks of food and the other petrol.
    The girl said the convoy had passed about three villages when the truck she was in developed a fault and was forced to slow down.
    A screengrab taken from a video released on You Tube in April 2012, apparently showing Boko Haram leader Abubakar Shekau (centre) sitting flanked by militantsThe attackers are thought to be from the Islamist group, Boko Haram
    This gave her and about 10 to 15 other girls the opportunity to jump off and escape into the bush.
    Nigerian media reported that two members of the security forces had been killed, and residents said 170 houses were burnt down during the attack.
    Boko Haram emerged as a critic of Western-style education, and its militants frequently target schools and educational institutions.
    This year, the group's fighters have killed more than 1,500 civilians in three states in north-east Nigeria, which are currently under emergency rule.
    The government recently said that Boko Haram's activities were confined to that part of the country.
    However, Monday's bombings in Abuja prompted renewed fears that the militants were extending their campaign to the capital.

    Great idea

    Glow-in-the-dark roads make debut in Netherlands

    The Democrats answer to everything

    Obama has Proposed 442 Tax Hikes Since Taking Office

    Since taking office in 2009, President Barack Obama has formally proposed a total of 442 tax increases, according to an Americans for Tax Reform analysis of Obama administration budgets for fiscal years 2010 through 2015.
    The 442 total proposed tax increases does not include the 20 tax increases Obama signed into law as part of Obamacare.
    “History tells us what Obama was able to do. This list reminds us of what Obama wanted to do,” said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform.
    The number of proposed tax increases per year is as follows:
    -79 tax increases for FY 2010
    -52 tax increases for FY 2011
    -47 tax increases for FY 2012
    -34 tax increases for FY 2013
    -137 tax increases for FY 2014
    -93 tax increases for FY 2015
    Perhaps not coincidentally, the Obama budget with the lowest number of proposed tax increases was released during an election year: In February 2012, Obama released his FY 2013 budget, with “only” 34 proposed tax increases. Once safely re-elected, Obama came back with a vengeance, proposing 137 tax increases, a personal record high for the 44th President.
    In addition to the 442 tax increases in his annual budget proposals, the 20 signed into law as part of Obamacare, and the massive tobacco tax hike signed into law on the sixteenth day of his presidency, Obama has made it clear he is open to other broad-based tax increases.
    During an interview with Men’s Health in 2009, when asked about the idea of national tax on soda and sugary drinks, the President said, "I actually think it's an idea that we should be exploring."
    During an interview with CNBC’s John Harwood in 2010, Obama said a European-style Value-Added-Tax was something that would be novel for the United States.”
    Obama’s statement was consistent with a pattern of remarks made by Obama White House officials refusing to rule out a VAT.
    “Presidents are judged by history based on what they did in power. But presidents can only enact laws when the Congress agrees,” said Norquist. "Thus a record forged by such compromise tells you what a president -- limited by congress -- did rather than what he wanted to do.”

    Monday, April 14, 2014

    Those wild Germans make San Francisco appear provincial

    Nudity Goes Legal In Munich

    Harry Reid, the pugnacious thug tells you what he thinks of opposition to government decisions.

    Sen. Reid on Cattle Battle: "It's not over"

    RENO, Nev. (MyNews4.com & KRNV) -- Senate majority leader Harry Reid hasn't been very vocal about the cattle battle showdown in recent days, but says "it's not over." 

    Reid tells News4's Samantha Boatman his take on the so-called cattle battle in southern Las Vegas. "Well, it's not over. We can't have an American people that violate the law and then just walk away from it. So it's not over," Reid said. 

    Senator Reid had just wrapped up a speech and question and answer session with students at UNR. 

    Harry needs the land so he can sell it to the Chinese. Life is good for the corrupt nomenklatura. 

    Because it's not scientific it's based on politics.

    Gina McCarthy
    Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy (CNSNews.com/Penny Starr)
    (CNSNews.com) –  Seven months after being subpoenaed by Congress, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy conceded that her agency does not have -  and cannot produce - all of the scientific data used for decades to justify numerous rules and regulations under the Clean Air Act.
    In a March 7th letter to House Science, Space and Technology Committee chairman Lamar Smith (R-Tex.), McCarthy admitted that EPA cannot produce all of the original data from the 1993 Harvard Six Cities Study (HSC) and the American Cancer Society’s (ACS) 1995 Cancer Prevention Study II, which is currently housed at New York University.
    Both studies concluded that fine airborne particles measuring 2.5 micrograms or less (PM2.5) – 1/30th the diameter of a human hair – are killing thousands of Americans every year.
    These epidemiological studies are cited by EPA as the scientific foundation for clean air regulations that restrict particulate emissions from vehicles, power plants and factories.
    The agency has recently come under fire for exposing volunteers to concentrated levels of particulate matter without informing them of the risks, a practice Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.), chairman of the House Science Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, called “despicable.”
    The full committee, which issued its first subpoena in 21 years last August after being stonewalled by the EPA for two years, wanted the raw data from the studies so that their results could be replicated by independent researchers. (See EPA subpoena.pdf)
    However, despite “multiple interactions with the third party owners of the research data in an effort to obtain that data,” McCarthy wrote, some of the data subpoenaed by the committee “are not (and were not) in the possession, custody or control of the EPA, nor are they within the authority to obtain data that the agency identified.”
    “EPA has not withheld any data in our possession that is responsive to the subpoena,” McCarthy stated. “The EPA acknowledges, however, that the data provided are not sufficient in themselves to replicate the analyses in the epidemiological studies, nor would they allow for the one to one mapping of each pollutant and ecological variable to each subject.” (SeeEPA letter to Smith March 7 2014 (1).pdf)
    CNSNews.com asked EPA whether the agency had turned over any data from the Harvard Six Cities and American Cancer Society studies in response to the subpoena.
    “EPA provided to the Committee all the data that was in the possession of the agency or within the agency's authority to obtain under the Shelby Amendment,” which requires that results of federally-funded studies be made available to the public, an agency spokeswoman responded. “As such, the agency has now in good faith obtained and provided to the Committee all the requested research data subject to the Shelby Amendment and covered by the subpoena.”
    A committee staff member confirmed to CNSNews.com that “EPA gave us what they have of both studies, which is a significant amount of data, but not sufficient" to allow independent reproduction or verification of results.
    EPA logo
    "We’re at a point where EPA has conceded that they don’t have in their possession the data necessary to fully comply, and in some cases, never did possess the data,” he added.
    The subpoena was issued as the EPA moves to finalize strict new regulations that could place 90 percent of the U.S. population in non-attainment areas and impose an additional $90 billion annual burden on the U.S. economy.
    However, two newer studies cast doubts on the original research.
    Stanley Young and Jessie Xia of the National Institute of Statistical Sciences published a paper last year questioning the EPA’s reliance on the Harvard and Cancer Society studies, both of which found that breathing fine particulate matter (PM2.5) resulted in increased mortality.
    “There is no significant association of PM2.5 with longevity in the west of the United States,”Young and Xia  noted, adding that “our findings call into question the claim made by the original researchers.” (Seeyoung080113.pdf)
    Another recent study by Johns Hopkins-trained biostatistician Steve Milloy that attempted to duplicate EPA’s findings also found “no correlation between changes in ambient PM2.5 mortality” and any cause of death in California between 2007 and 2010.
    “Virtually every regulation proposed by the Obama administration has been justified by nontransparent data and unverifiable claims,” committee chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said in February, denouncing what he called EPA’s “secret science.”
    “The American people foot the bill for EPA’s costly regulations, and they have a right to see the underlying science. Costly environmental regulations should be based on publicly available data so that independent scientists can verify the EPA’s claims.”
    Smith and Rep. David Schweikert (R-Ariz.) have introduced the Secret Science Reform Act of 2014, which would prohibit EPA from “proposing, finalizing or disseminating regulations based upon scientific information that is not publically available in a manner sufficient for independent scientific analysis.”
    HR 4012, which would amend the Environmental Research, Development and Demonstration Authorization Act of 1978, states that “the Administrator shall not propose, finalize, or disseminate a covered action unless all scientific and technical information relied on to support such covered action is (A) specifically identified; and (B) publicly available in a manner that is sufficient for independent analysis and substantial reproduction of research results.”
    At a February 11th hearing before the Subcommittee on Environment, Raymond Keating, chief economist at the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council, testified in favor of the bill. (HHRG-113-SY18-WState-RKeating-20140211.pdf)
    “The  U.S. has made enormous progress in cleaning the air over the last 40 years, so much so that we now are talking about reducing very small increments of pollution. Achieving those tiny reductions will no doubt be very costly—as EPA itself admitted when it released its cost analysis for ozone in 2010. The question is: will they be worth it?" Keating asked.
    “We won’t know that unless we have the scientific data in front of us, unless scientists from all over the country can attempt to replicate it and determine its validity. Without that, EPA is hiding the ball, and imposing costs without truly knowing what the benefits are.”
    Congress is expected to consider the bill sometime this summer.

    The madness of the ubber left university set. Hate Israel, hate America, love murdering revolutionaries you're good to go at Brandeis.

    Michael Graham: Brandeis Embraced Bill Ayers, Has Bred Terrorists

    In one of a pair of Sunday posts at his web site, New England talk show host Michael Graham added an emphatic exclamation point to Brent Bozell's and Tim Graham's Saturday column condemning the cowardice and hypocrisy of Brandeis University's decision to revoke its commencement invitation to Ayaan Hirsi Ali. In the other, Graham roasted the Boston Globe for backing Brandeis.
    Bozell and Tim Graham rightly pointed to the university's embrace of particularly nasty anti-Catholic and anti-Israel speakers. Michael Graham found yet another example adding toxic icing to an already rancid cake, and noted that three of its female graduates have achieved a unique level of infamy (links are in each original; bolds are mine throughout):
    Brandeis Says “No” To Feminist, “Yes” To….TERRORIST?
    ... It is impossible to parody American liberalism, because every example you would invent to mock them is in fact something they have already done.
    When Brandeis University decided to kow-tow to religious extremists and withdraw their honorary degree/opportunity to speak from Ayaan Hirsi Ali, I made an off-hand comment on the air about how these same liberals would have no problem inviting unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers to speak on campus.
    D’oh! From 2009:
    Former radical William Ayers will finally get a chance tonight to be heard on a Massachusetts college campus. ...
    ... For those of you keeping score at home, this is Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers. “I only regret I didn’t do more” bombing Bill Ayers.  The Designed-A-Nail-Bomb-Like-The-One-The-Boston-Marathon-Bombers-Used Bill Ayers. The guy whose nail bomb would have killed new Army recruits at Ft Dix, except his idiot Weather Underground pals blew themselves up instead–that Bill Ayers.
    I’m in the “once you decide to blow people up, you lose your seat at the conversation table” camp.  The students of Brandeis who brought Bill Ayers to campus are not ...
    The same students who–no joke–couldn’t say for sure they would oppose HITLER speaking at Brandeis (yikes!) are now happy to ban a feminist currently living under a death threat imposed by religious extremists.  But for Brandeis, this story is just getting good.
    Because Brandeis’ relationship with terrorism isn’t just theoretical:
    "… around 1970 ... Brandeis saw three of its women students posted to the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted List (Angela Davis, Susan Saxe and Katherine Power), no small feat since only seven women were ever put on that FBI list in all of its history.”
    ... Katherine Ann Power ... started at the Brandeis University SDS chapter, then migrated to Weather Underground terror and murder. She killed a local Waltham cop, then went into hiding until 1993. Now she’s a popular campus speaker, acclaimed by liberals.
    But heroic feminist Ayaan Hirsi Ali is untouchable.
    Separately, Graham skewered the Boston Globe for supporting Brandeis's commencement decision:
    The Boston Globe-Democrat Joins Racist/Sexist Attacks On Black Feminist By Brandeis
    In a surprise to absolutely no one who’s paying attention, the “courageous” truth-to-power editors of the Boston Globe-Democrat agree with the decision of Brandeis University to stop feminist Ayaan Hirsi Ali from speaking at their commencement and stripping her of an honorary degree:
    SOMALIA-BORN feminist author Ayaan Hirsi Ali has every right to criticize Islam, the faith into which she was born. But this right should not be confused with an entitlement to receive an honorary degree. Brandeis University, a nonsectarian Jewish-sponsored college, recently rescinded its invitation to honor her after understandable complaints by Muslim students who were offended by her blanket condemnation of their faith. Hirsi Ali is justified in feeling whipsawed by the university, which should have looked into her more extreme statements before now. But it made the right call in the end.
    You may recall these are the same brave Boston Globies who reported on the violence inspired by the Dutch “Mohammed cartoons,” but refused to let their readers actually see the cartoons because they were terrified of Muslim pressure. The Globe-Democrat went so far as to compare supporters of a free press printing news to “Nazis.”  No joke.
    It’s funny, but when I googled looking for a similar editorial from the Boston Globe-Democrat denouncing Brandeis for their honorary degree to Tony Kushner (He calls the creation of Israel a “mistake” and says pro-Israel Jews are the most “repulsive”)–I got nothing.
    And I’m trying to imagine what a Globe-Democrat editorial celebrating a Catholic university for dis-inviting a pro-gay-marriage speaker would sound like? What would the lede be to their editorial praising an Evangelical college for defending its principles by disinviting a pro-same-sex-marriage commencement speaker?
    It’s almost as if the Boston Gl0be-Democrat has NO principles, that they just find a way to promote their partisan, far-Left views–with a little self-protective kow-towing to potentially-violent Muslims thrown in for good measure.
    On Saturday, Bozell and Tim Graham wrote:
     Now let’s wait for famous Brandeis faculty, past and present, to speak out. What say you, Robert Reich? And how about you, Anita Hill? A black woman has been silenced.
    We're still waiting.