I hesitate to add anything to the torrent of commentary on Sen. Obama’s press conference performance yesterday.  However, there is one line in it that is not getting the attention it deserves.  It occurs early in his remarks.  Here it is in full, with the troubling language in bold:

His [Wright's] comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate, and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the black church.

To whom is Sen. Obama referring when he speaks of “those who prey on hate”?  One possibility is that he is referring to fringe groups that most Americans would agree are defined by their hatred — the Klan, etc.  That’s a possibility.  Maybe there is some evidence that groups actually predicated on racial hatred have sought to exploit the Rev. Wright situation, but I am unaware of any news reports of Klan PR campaigns directed to this end.  Maybe I am simply ill-informed.

There is another possible meaning in Obama’s phrase, however.  I worry that Sen. Obama may tend to view anyone who opposes him as someone who ”prey[s] on hate.”  As Victor Davis Hanson has pointed out, Obama often refers to unnamed others who seek to “distract” voters and “divide” voters and so on.   But there’s something even more disturbing about the “those who prey on hate” formulation.  If

those who prey on hate = GOP, or even

those who prey on hate = GOP + Democrats and Independents who don’t support Obama,

then don’t be surprised if conservatives develop a somewhat paranoid view of the Senator’s crusade for “change.”

Rebels in Darfur are accusing the government of bombing areas under their control but, of course, the government denies it:
(more…)

If you missed the Society’s recent (March) student confab in Ann Arbor (theme: “The People and the Courts”), fear not!  You can now watch (or just listen) to the whole enchilada online, here.   The full agenda is below the fold: (more…)

I must get back to billable work so I won’t comment beyond recommending this interesting article on why we should abolish the death penalty. (Scroll down to the “On the Square” section).  I don’t agree with the article but it is well written and thought provoking.

AFP has a good article highlighting the fact that nobody really has any idea how many people have died in Darfur:
(more…)

Here’s something I’ve been meaning to post since returning to SA.  The best movie I’ve seen lately — actually, in years — is “The Lives of Others.”  If you haven’t seen it yet, I strongly urge you to rent it.   It is a riveting portrayal of life in East Germany — particularly the surveillance activities of the Stasi.    That’s all I’m going to say about it.  My advice is that you not try to learn any more about it prior to seeing it; that’s why there are no links in this post.

It is quite a powerful film.  But you don’t have to take my word for it; on seeing it, William F. Buckley “turned to [his] companion and said, ‘I think that is the best movie I ever saw.’”

Once you’ve seen it, you should take a look at the film’s fine website, accessible via www.sonyclassics.com  The short interview with the director, Donnersmarck, is well worth reading. Don’t look at the website before you see the movie, though.  It gives away too much.

The soundtrack is fantastic, as well.

You can read or watch the 60 Minutes segment aired tonight, that includes clips from Lesley Stahl’s interview.  The ABA Journal website also posted a bunch of links related to Scalia this evening, including another interview and excerpts from his forthcoming book.

Michael Hirsh wants you to understand that “the South — or what has become the South-Southwest” is the vessel of “a rather savage, unsophisticated set of mores” traceable to Scotch-Irish migration patterns and Andrew Jackson.  “The coarsened sensibility that this now-dominant Southernism and frontierism has brought to our national dialogue is unmistakable.”  And Hirsh doesn’t care for it — the “intolerant nation” he says we’ve become — not one bit.  The essay is subtitled “Southernism is taking over our national dialogue. Maybe it’s time for the North to secede from the Union.”

Yawn.

Such media fear and loathing of the South in Presidential election politics is at least as old as its reaction to Nixon’s “Southern strategy.”   Give it a rest, guys.

Well, good news for people like me who think the International Criminal Court is a good idea – and we are probably in the distinct minority here at SA … so bad news for the rest of you:

A senior Bush administration official said Friday that the U.S. now accepts the “reality” of the International Criminal Court, and that Washington would consider aiding the Hague tribunal in its investigation of atrocities in Sudan’s Darfur region.

“The U.S. must acknowledge that the ICC enjoys a large body of international support, and that many countries will look to the ICC as the preferred mechanism” for punishing war crimes that individual countries can’t or won’t address, John Bellinger, the State Department’s chief lawyer, told a conference in Chicago marking the 10th anniversary of the tribunal’s founding treaty, the Rome Statute. More than 100 countries have ratified the treaty.

Although it reiterated longstanding U.S. concerns about the court, Mr. Bellinger’s speech represented a rhetorical turnabout for an administration that came to power determined to hobble the movement for a permanent war crimes tribunal.

(more…)

My column in today’s Examiner urges the GOP to grow a spine and fight about judges, but I did not have space to get into a subject that should be of particular interest here: Leahy again is going out of his way to shaft nominees from the old South (excluding semi-southwest such as Texas). Again and again Leahy and the Dems put more roadblocks in the way of southerners than in the way of anybody else. (They also tend to block conservative Catholics.) I will now go so far as to call Leahy an anti-Southern bigot. Consider that for months and months he has used “blue slips” as an excuse for not moving lots of judges, but now confronted with the actual fact that he has blue slips from BOTH senators from both Carolinas, he suddenly ignores his own previous standard and continues to block both Steve Matthews of South Carolina and conservative Catholic Robert Conrad of North Carolina (whom Leahy actually had the gall to claim had some “anti-Catholic writings” when in fact Conrad had written to criticize a leftish nun because SHE had denigrated an older priest specifically because the priest, to the nun’s distaste, had emphasized the traditional aspects of the faith). (more…)

This is actually a few months old, but I just came across it: The International Rescue Committee reports that 5.4 million people have died because of the conflict and humanitarian crisis in the Democratic Republic of Congo and 45,000 continue to die every month:
(more…)

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing on Darfur yesterday where there was a lot of hand-wringing and complaints and very little else:
(more…)

Nobody really has any idea how many people have died in Darfur over the last five years, but now the UN is saying that the death toll is probably upwards of 300,000:
(more…)

Never one to shirk away from aping my betters, I just want to say that I agree wholeheartedly with Joel and Feddie. I also have enough hubris to think I can wrap it all up in a neat package: We do not need pro lifers, pro gunners, and anti taxers. What we need is a return to what our forefathers believed. We need to have an overriding philosophy. Part of the problem is that we keep electing people by using a checklist. Is she pro-life? Does he agree that estate taxes are morally reprehensible? While we are quibbling over details, politicians on both sides of the aisle are making off with the store. I do not think I have to detail how far we have slid in 230 years. Suffice to say that our federal government has become the black hole at the center of our political universe — sucking in powers and rights that were once reserved to the states and growing exponentially with each passing year. Republicans now routinely vote for multitrillion dollar budgets loaded with home-district perks. They support massive new spending programs and encourage more and more regulation under the name of “security” or “fair elections.” The party is fat, dumb, and despondent. It has somehow found its way out of the Promised Land and back into the wilderness where it will remain for another 40 years if something does not change. (more…)

I read Feddie’s thoughtful post below and I believe he makes some good points. He is absolutely correct that the Republican Party lost its way after the 1994 elections. The party that promised limited government and restrained spending in The Contract with America ultimately morphed into the pork barrel party that lost the majority in 2006. I also agree with Feddie that what is needed for the Republican Party to resume the majority is a committed return to first principles. Feddie lists these principles as the following: (1) promoting family values and protecting innocent life; (2) personal and national defense; and (3) fiscal responsibility.

Although I agree that the above principles are important they represent only a partial list. The Republican Party must also be the party of limited government and taxation as well as personal freedom. Furthermore, fiscal responsibility, while important, is not really an end in itself. You could have a fiscally responsible large invasive government that meets its budget through high taxation. Conservatives need to promote fiscal responsibility within the context of a more limited government. (more…)

On Monday, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that New Jersey citizens had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the subscriber information which they provide to their internet providers particularly their IP address which his/her ISP assigns to him/her for use in accessing the internet.  The decision is available here. (h/t to How Appealing).  The Court did so based upon the New Jersey Constitution’s prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures which has been interpreted to be broader in its scope than the protection afforded by the similar language found in the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  As noted in the New Jersey opinion, federal courts which have considered this issue in the context of the Fourth Amendment have not found an expectation of privacy.  This decision is not likely to have an immediate impact in Alabama since our appellate courts have interpreted Alabama’s prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures to be no greater than the protection afforded individuals under the Fourth Amendmen. 

The wire services are reporting that church leaders in Zimbabwe are warning that organized violence could become genocidal:
(more…)

on NRO’s “Between the Covers.”

h/t: BH.tv

Today is the 172 anniversary of the Battle of San Jacinto. On this date in 1836 General Sam Houston led the forces of Texas against General Antonio López de Santa Anna’s Mexican forces. The battle lasted less than twenty minutes and resulted in a decisive victory for Texas. Lets all raise a toast to General Houston and his brave men.

Oh, and offer a prayer that their descendants finally learn to do Bar-B-Q right. It is PORK not beef.

Hat tip to Daniel over at Grim’s Hall for pointing out today’s significance.

So what are some RonPaulistas up to these days?  Well, a few have set up Paulville.org with the goal of creating gated communities chock full of supporters of everybody’s favorite libertarian Republican Presidential candidate.  Now, can anyone point out the irony in the following plan?

The goal of Paulville.org it to establish gated communities containing 100% Ron Paul supporters and or people that live by the ideals of freedom and liberty. 

The process is forming a co-op of people buying shares in the community and these people would be granted land use at a minimum of 1 acre per share, for as long as they homesteaded the land. The community would be privately held by the co-op to establish private property for the general community thus preserving the community is 100% freedom and liberty lovers. The community votes on all community efforts, such as utilities etc. However no one is forced to consume these utilities and or pay for them, AKA people can be off grid on their share of land. This is in line with the ideals that you’re free to live your life the way you want and not be forced to do or pay for other people’s life styles you may not agree with. 

If you said,  ”it’s a group private property loving individuals setting up a commune,” then give yourself a pat on the back.  I wonder if they only accept payment in gold…

h/t: Ace of Spades

There’s a whole “Underpants Gnomes” vibe to the Barack Obama phenomenon:

Step 1: Elect Obama

Step 2: ?

Step 3: Utopia!

The global warming crowd seems to be preferring the phrase “climate change” instead of, well, “global warming”.  I guess they are tired of people mocking them when they give speeches on the subject during a cold spell in April.

“No one is obliged to take part in the spiritual crisis of a society; on the contrary, everyone is obliged to avoid this folly and live his life in order.”

– Eric Voegelin, Science, Politics, and Gnosticism 22-23 (1968)

It’s gotta be a laff riot, right?  As well as a display of the subtle wit and wistful humanity we’ve all come to expect from the higher ed industry with regard to the Bush Presidency. 

Click here for some of the entries (don’t miss the 5-minute video).  Pick your own favorite, then go below the fold to see who won. (more…)

Don’t miss it!

It occurred to me just now that the news that Justice Scalia has co-authored “Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges” (release date: April 28) hit during SA’s hiatus. I’m surprised that Feddie has not already blogged the Scalia book tour/media blitz (unless I missed it), so here goes –

– To Roger Williams law students: “I am not a nut”

– Remarks to/ Q&A with Virginia high schoolers: video (scroll down to April 9) / story

– 60 Minutes interview/profile to air “in late April”

– Videos of co-author Bryan Garner’s interviews with eight Justices (including Scalia) on the subject of “legal writing and advocacy” / story

Nicolas Sarkozy seems to think it was at least partially responsible:
(more…)

The always-interesting John McWhorter praises the documentary, and offers his personal experience of PC at UC Berkeley.

I have not yet read Judge Posner’s latest, but did enjoy Ed Whelan’s lengthy review on NRO yesterday. Is there anyone out there in the vast SA audience who has an opinion about the book? If so, please post a comment.