What Do Women Want

For John, BLUF:  Broad culture or narrow?  I say go with a little broader.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Monday Law Professor Glenn Harlan Reynolds had a column in USA Today, talking about a recent video of men making catcalls to women on the streets of New York City:  "Catcalling a two-way street:  Video of 'street harassment' shows white feminist values, but societal values are broader."

Here is the lede, with a link to the video:

Last week there was a bit of a kerfuffle over a video of a woman walking the streets of New York and being catcalled by guys.  Most of the catcalls were comparatively tame, though not all were, and the result was a predictable storm of attention on the Internet via Twitter and other social media, exactly as the video's producers — an outfit called ihollaback.org — intended.  But then some things departed from the script.

Ah, departure from the script.  That could be a problem.  The guys doing the catcalling were Black and Latino and working class.  A notable absence of Caucasians (what Professor Reynolds should have meant to say when he said "white").

And whether or not it deserves the charges of outright racism and classism, or even comparisons to The Birth of a Nation, that it got from some minority critics, that's indisputably what it is.

I have always believed that becoming an American has always meant moving toward the WASP model.  Not that everyone should become an Episcopalians or Presbyterian, but that a certain rectitude and sense of responsibility, a certain belief in free enterprise and striving to be the best was expected.♠  It WASP seems narrow, I go with Gene Autry.

But, back to the video, and the newspaper column.  The thing is if we are going to have an inclusive culture we can't be slapping back at those whose culture is a little different.  And we definitely can't be criminalizing those cultural differences.

Read the whole column.

Hat tip to the Instapundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Well, maybe it isn't about being a WASP, but about being a cowboy.  Gene Autry says it here, along with Hopalong Cassidy and a couple of others.

Guy Fawkes Day

For John, BLUF:  Times were tough of Papist.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Today is Guy Fawkes Day.  Guy (1570 to 1606 AD) is remembered as

the last man to enter Parliament with honest intentions.

In honor of this event you should build a bonfire; wait, don't, it isn't legal.

What would Guido Fawkes do?

Regards  —  Cliff

How Will the White House Respond

For John, BLUF:  What does the White House not understand?  And Congress.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Do we believe Brietbart?

Do we believe this headline?—"Report:  Exec Amnesty 'No Matter How Big a Shellacking' for Dems."

Reporter Ian Hanchett claims that ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Jon Karl has

… reported that according to WH officials “the president will move forward with an executive order on immigration reform “no matter how big a shellacking Democrats get tonight” during ABC’s Election coverage on Tuesday.

I think the only reason this would even be contemplated is that the Congress has abandoned their time honored traditions of independence and their place in the Constitution.  I am not talking about Impeachment and Conviction.♠  I am talking about the power of the purse.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  First off, there is Rep Paul Ryan's comment "Have you met Joe Biden."  Then there is the fact that President Obama is perceived as our first Black President and throwing him out of office would be a big lacuna in our historical arc.  Even the stupid can't be that stupid.  Are there issues that could justify Impeachment?  I am sure, but they would be so extreme that near would everyone call for it.  As I say to my Wife, we will know it is time when Senator Harry Reid calls on the Speaker of the House and tells him it is time.

Though Opposition

For John, BLUF:  Tough customer.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

George is one tough customer.  I am thinking it was below 50º.  Notice the lack of gloves.

Regards  —  Cliff

Showing the Flag

For John, BLUF:  Get out there and vote.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Regards  —  Cliff

GENERAL ELECTION

TODAY

Today is the day we decide our future for the next two years.  You can say to yourself that everything is going fine and vote for the incumbents.  You can say that change is needed and vote for the challengers.  You can mix it up, based upon your view of the individuals.

If you don't know where to vote, please call the Lowell City Elections Division at (978) 970-4046.

Regards  —  Cliff

1801 vs. 1811

For John, BLUF:  The Border Patrol was underfunded for too long and then free too fast.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Yes, the title of this blog post is a little obscure, but the author of the linked article thinks it is important.  In the Federal Job Classifications a GS-1801 can arrest you, but a GS-1811 can both arrest and investigate you.  As the article makes clear, the Border Patrol is all street cops and no detectives.  And that is a problem.

The article, "The Green Monster:  How the Border Patrol became America’s most out-of-control law enforcement agency", comes to us via Politico, authored by Garrett M Graff.  It starts and ends discussing the new permanent head of Customs and Border Protection, Mr Gil Kerlikowske  It has taken long time to get a permanent head appointed and confirmed by the US Senate.

Here is an interesting passage about how the current organization and bureaucratic lash up came about, as a result of 9/11.

But the death warrant for INS came soon enough, when word got out that the slow-moving bureaucracy had approved long-delayed visas for two of the 9/11 hijackers, Mohamed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi. No one evidently involved in the process noticed who the now-dead men were. Reading news of the visa approval over breakfast one day, Bush sputtered with rage. “I could barely get my coffee down,” he said. It was stunningly bad mismanagement. INS was done. The government’s entire homeland security apparatus, Bush decided, needed to be shaken up. “Maybe we should stop getting pecked to death like this,” Bush reportedly told Card, months after initially resisting such a major government reorganization. “Maybe it’s time to think big.”

Yes, I can see how President Bush could wish to shake things up and make them more effective, but I believe he was wrong to agree to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security.  I believe it created more bureaucracy, but gave us less performance.  It was an expensive "feel good" action, and when President Bush turned to it he made a wrong turn.  I would like this to be an issue in 2016.

Aside from the abolition of the Department of Homeland Security I draw two conclusions from the linked article:

1. All police shootings should be treated the way we treat aircraft Class A Mishaps.  There needs to be a board of investigation, without manning from outside the Department with the Police Officer.  For example, for a Police shooting in Lowell with loss of life, we invite in as Chairman of the Board someone from Springfield or Manchester, NH.
2. We count on the Political Appointees to keep an eye on the Bureaucracy, but it takes strong leadership on the part of the Political Appointees..

Hat tip to Memeorandum.

Regards  —  Cliff