In liberals’ fantasy world, President Lyndon B. Johnson did the right thing in pushing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, even though he knew Southern Democrats would switch parties and become Republicans.
Scott is a freelance political writer and market researcher for The College Board. He graduated from The College of William & Mary and received his Ph.D. in social psychology from the University of Maryland. Scott has written for NewsRealBlog.com, and blogs at ScottSpiegel.com. He lives in Manhattan.
Articles From Scott
It’s been nauseating watching members of the liberal media patting one another on the back for the past few months in this, the year of the 50th anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, when it’s actually Republicans who deserve 95 percent of the credit for African-American civil rights advances.
On Tuesday, the nation’s grievance-mongers celebrated Equal Pay Day, the day up through which women must work to catch up with men’s earnings from the prior year. But based on the research on the subject, women would need to work only until about brunch on New Year’s Day.
Obamacare isn’t a zero-sum game, it’s a negative-sum game.
This could be a hunch, but I suspect that vulnerable congressional Democrats are going to regret Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid having prematurely kicked off 2014 midterm season by declaring his party’s campaign slogan to be ‘All Obamacare Victims Are Liars.’
If pro-Europe Western Ukraine wants to ally with the European Union and flourish as a responsible 21st-century world power, while pro-Putin Eastern Ukraine wants to sell its soul to the devil, good riddance.
Here’s a question we should have asked ourselves about 10 years ago: Should countries that support state sponsors of terror, give asylum to traitors who leak national security information and commit human rights abuses be rewarded with hosting the Olympics?
According to the International Olympic Committee, the United Nations of sports, of course they should.
Imagine the governor of a large state shutting down two lanes of the busiest bridge in the country for four days, holding up hundreds of thousands of drivers and causing delays, confusion and lost productivity.
Now imagine the President of the United States holding up millions of online shoppers for three months, causing frustration, anger and chaos, not to mention lost health insurance coverage and continuity of care.
Breaking down the ‘New York Times’ Benghazi piece: It depends on what the meaning of the word “Al-Qaeda” is
New York Times reporter David Kirkpatrick recently published a lengthy piece arguing that President Obama’s original al-Qaeda-free description of the causes of the 9/11/12 attack on our Benghazi consulate was accurate, and that then-U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice’s claim that the attack was instigated by a YouTube video was correct.
If I hear one more conservative complain that the A&E Network violated Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson’s free speech rights by suspending him from the show, I’m going to scream.
Liberals pretend that, for people who lost their health care plans because of Obamacare, the Affordable Care Act will lower monthly premiums while offering the same or better coverage — and other people won’t even be affected! They promise a veritable gold standard for 21st-century health care coverage.
Their claim is all flash and no substance.
It seems there’s always some Western nation that’s the butt of foreign policy jokes, that has an embarrassing reputation of refusing to fight or take sides — whether France, Switzerland, Canada, or all of Europe. But with France strapping on its fighting boots and rejecting deals like the one Obama just lapped up with Iran, it seems the U.S. is going to be the butt of international jokes until we get another Republican in the White House.
A CBS reporter fritters away her credibility by conducting a sloppy background check on a fraudulent eyewitness to the attack on our consulate in Libya, and suddenly liberals are salivating to talk about Benghazi.
Liberal journalists selling out their reputations by defending the disastrous Obamacare rollout have been wailing that the real reason for Healthcare.gov’s failure is Republican sabotage. But there’s a huge difference between the tactic Republicans have actually been using — withdrawal of support — and the active interference of which Democrats accuse them.
The way liberals see it, in a free-market system, insurance companies have the capacity to hold enrollees hostage and require them to stay in bad plans with high premiums. But when government steps in and forces both sides to agree to terms they wouldn’t otherwise have chosen, that’s a truly free system.
Three weeks later, the left is still blaming the disastrous launch of healthcare.gov and the state health exchange websites on anything and everything except the incompetence and shortsightedness of the current Democratic administration and the contractors it hired. Here are the top five excuses liberals have offered for the failed rollout, in approximate order from most insane to least delusional.
Liberals have been claiming that if Obamacare doesn’t roll out as smooth as butter, it will be because of Republican obstructionism. But implementation architects have managed to screw up nicely on their own.
While parks, monuments, and campgrounds bring people pleasure, you can’t say the same about the agencies President Obama chose to leave open, which nominally provide key services, but regularly inflect torment on hapless citizens. When was the last time you heard someone gush how the Department of Education or the IRS had made his life better?
Now that the federal government has partially shut down, the big question isn’t how we’ll ever manage, it’s: Did anything actually shut down?
We’ve all heard the arguments against going to war: Leftists and libertarians are leery about our getting involved in yet another conflict in the Middle East; Great Britain and other allies oppose our involvement; and we’re sick of war, bored with headlines covering endless conflicts in the desert and tired of hearing reports of Americans being killed. But if military strikes in Syria will somehow halt the spread of terror, then it’s worth dealing with the threat now.