Wednesday, July 16, 2014


RAG on Opinion Journal: LIRR on Strike?

The Wall Street Journal editorial board's Mary Kissel and I chatted Wednesday about the impending Long Island Rail Road strike and its implications for New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Mayor Bill de Blasio (vacationing in Italy, Mr. Mayor? Serioiusly?).

Enjoy the segment!

Labels: , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share

Tuesday, May 20, 2014


The Biggest D'Loser...

Dinesh D'Souza pled guilty today to making illegal contributions to Wendy Long's US Senate campaign two years ago. D'Souza, who's made quite a fair bit of bank in the last several years by climbing aboard the anti-Obama crazy train, claimed that he was the victim of selective prosecution because he was an opponent of the president. 

That's a little difficult to prove in this case because the prosecutor, US Attorney for New York's Southern District, Preet Bharara has made anti-corruption -- both official and political -- a huge part of his portfolio.  His list of scalps include a host of big-name Democrats and Republican politicians. He's even investigating Gov. Andrew Cuomo's own anti-corruption board -- for possibly being too close to the governor! 

Regardless, a judge last week rejected D'Souza's request to dismiss the charges.

My sympathy level for D'Souza is zero.

For conservatives who want to paint him as a martyr to anti-Obama activity, save your sympathy for far worthier individuals.  As I wrote a few years back, D'Souza is an individual of dubious intellectual and ethical integrity. The latest development just shows that you can only run a con for so long before your deeds end up coming back to bite you on the ass.  I just hope that some future conservative publisher, producer, think tank, academic outlet, etc. doesn't get taken in by D'Souza's smooth bull, only to be embarassed by his subsequent antics -- as so many others have previously.

UPDATE:  Rod Dreher dismisses the whole "selective prosecution" defense too -- including the political one conservatives have mounted for D'Souza.


Bookmark and Share

Saturday, May 03, 2014


RAG on Newsmax: Talking Race

Friday afternoon, I appeared on "The Steve Malzberg Show," part of Newsmax TV (currently Web-only, but word is that it plans on expanding to become a competitor to Fox).  Steve invited me after reading my column earlier this week analyzing the Cliven Bundy/Donald Sterling episodes.

Here's the 10-minute segment:

Labels: , , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, April 30, 2014


The Week in Racism

Originally published in the New York Post, April 30, 2014.

Race in America is like everyone’s favorite Facebook relationship status: “It’s complicated.” Last week’s news, from Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy to Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling, proves the point.

Blame conservatives (mostly) for helping make Bundy — locked in a conflict with the federal Bureau of Land Management — a national story in the first place, by “adopting” him as one more victim of federal overreach in the Obama era. How dare the feds send armed agents to threaten Bundy with eviction? How dare the feds hold onto nearly 90 percent of the land in Nevada?

In reality, the fact that Bundy was still on the land was a symbol of absurd federal restraint. He’s refused to pay fees, fines, etc. for more than two decades. But the “victim” coverage actually emboldened him, leading to daily press conferences — one of which provided The New York Times with the quote that “Negroes” might have been better off under slavery than being on welfare.

After first claiming he was misquoted, Bundy doubled down: “Are they happier now under this government-subsidy system than they were when they were slaves and they [were] able to [keep] their family structure together and … people [had] something to do?”

 It’s easy to conclude that Bundy is a flat-out racist (who never learned that slavery actually tore black families apart), but then there’s some of his other comments: “Now let me talk about the Spanish people. You know, I understand that they come over here against our Constitution and cross our borders. But they’re here and they’re people … Don’t tell me they don’t work, and don’t tell me they don’t pay taxes. Don’t tell me they don’t have better family structures than most of us white people … We need to have those people join us and be with us.”

That makes the “racist” formulation more, yes, complicated. Bundy’s a bigot? But his views on immigration sound like what most Democrats have been saying for some time. And his welfare comments clumsily echo not just conservatives, but Democrats like the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

So do his welfare remarks make Bundy a full-fledged racist — any more than his Hispanic comments make him a spokesman for immigration reform? Ahem, no.

Together, they make him a confused clown who shouldn’t have been given a national platform in the first place.

Some on the right tried to change the subject to Bundy’s own “neighbor” — Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader.

Bundy wasn’t the only old, crusty Nevadan who had used the other N-word — “Negro” — in discussing black people, these conservatives noted. The history of the 2008 campaign, “Game Change,” quoted Reid as saying — privately — that then-Sen. Barack Obama was a strong presidential candidate because he was “a light-skinned” African-American “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.” Hey, isn’t that racist?

Hardly. Reid was stating in rather non-PC terms what just about anyone steeped in political history would’ve said about the prospects of a black man winning the presidency. Recognizing this nation’s awkwardness with race, it’s hardly rocket science to divine that a light-skinned African-American with oratorical skills might gain an edge with white voters.

OK, but Donald Sterling’s surreptitiously recorded comments reveal old-school racism, right?

Yes, there’s no N-word or other slurs on this tape. And he’s revealed as happy to have black players on his teams, have a black coach — but he doesn’t want his Mexican/black girlfriend (with whom he’s been in a long adulterous relationship) coming to the arena or being pictured with high-profile blacks like Magic Johnson.

That’s reminiscent of slave-era and Jim Crow plantation managers who saw blacks as inferior, yet had no problem cavorting with black women sexually (see: Strom Thurmond).

But then there’s this: Sterling was about to be honored by the Los Angeles chapter of the NAACP for a second time.

This, despite a history of racial animus that included referring to his players as n - - - - - s during an interview with a prospective head coach and being sued twice in federal court for discriminatory housing practices. In fact, both the NAACP’s national office and many of its local chapters have a recent history of choosing monetary support over the obvious best interests of their African-American constituency (in New York, see charter schools). Monday, the LA chapter declined to reveal how much “sterling” it’s received over the years from the Clippers owner.

 America has taken great strides in dealing with its “original sin” — slavery — and its legacy. But just about anything touching on race is still more “complicated” than our pundits or our press care to admit.

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share

RAG on WSJ: De Blasio & Charters

Talked to the Wall Street Journal's Mary Kissel on Opinion Journal today concerning New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio's seeming surrender on the charter school issue; he announced a few days ago that Success Academy Schools that the city had blocked from co-locating in other public school buildings would now be allowed to move into closed Catholic school buildings. I argue that he was largely forced into this position by Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the Legislature. However, the pressure on charters isn't over yet: Several other city pols want to undermine them in any way they can -- including City Council so-called "oversight" hearings.

Here's the clip:

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, March 06, 2014


The Next Movement

Originally published in the New York Post, March 6,2014

Last month, the city’s first lady, Chirlane McCray, urged support for her husband’s signature universal pre-K program by declaring, “Education is clearly the civil-rights issue for today.”
She may well be right — but her husband may be on the wrong side of the real civil-rights issue in education. If Tuesday’s huge rally at the state Capitol, and the words of the parents who rallied, tell us anything, it’s that the charter cause is increasingly looking and sounding like movements of old.
One thing the original civil-rights movement taught America is that people who are passionately energized will sacrifice anything for what they believe in. And these parents are passionate.
Ishema Chadwick Meyers works at a state job where she cares for the mentally challenged; she took the day off to trek up to frigid Albany. And she’ll do it again: “I’ll take a sick day if I have to. That makes sense, because the thought of my kids losing schools that [are] teaching them makes me sick to my stomach.” Ishema’s oldest, Leroy, is a fifth-grader at Harlem Central Success Academy. Mayor de Blasio just took away what would be Leroy’s sixth-grade space.
Samantha Thompson’s daughter Madison is in kindergarten at Success Academy Cobble Hill: “I understand there’s a personal rift between the mayor and [Success Academy CEO] Eva [Moskowitz]. Fine. But don’t take it out on the kids. Doesn’t he realize that we can’t have a better New York without a better education system? I wanted Madison in charters because generally they are all on the same level of quality.”
I asked Whitfield Nicholas (whose son Devante is excelling at Success) what about charters most impresses him? “The diligence of the teachers,” the Antigua-born engineer responds. “In the traditional public schools, if you ask a teacher how to reach them, they say ‘come to see me [in the school]’. In charters, they say call me any time — and mean it.” He sees that as a reason why Success Academy in The Bronx had some of the highest math scores in the state last year.
Not that Nicholas wants conflict between traditional and charter schools. “Both are public schools. It’s Malcolm X and Martin Luther King: Both are headed in the same direction; they’re just taking different paths.”
But which sort of school is which leader?
Nicholas pauses for a moment: “The charters are more Malcolm X — by any means necessary. That’s why we’re here today, right?”
This writer copped a ride with parents and scholars (as Success Academy students are called) back to the city after a long, chilly day. It wasn’t long after the bus hit the road (and sandwiches were eaten) that a young girl’s voice rose up asking, “Can we do some math exercises?”
An exhausted teacher at first said, “Let’s take some quiet time right now.” But not too long afterward, the students were all listening intently as she led them through a fun exercise of drilling exponents, gleefully laughing over who got the question right first.
I told parent Kokayee “Koko” Session-Lansiquot that I hadn’t seen anything quite like that. Fifth-graders asking for math work? Seriously?
Koko, a pre-K teacher herself, responded. “That’s the difference I see with charters. My kids want to go to school. If I’m running late, they tell me: ‘Mommy, you’re going to make me late. I’m missing my morning meeting.’ Monroe [age 11] has gone from being told in a traditional-school kindergarten that he couldn’t learn to having high scores in math and science, consumed with robotics and his telescope.”
Koko’s aunt, Gwen Hedrington, who raised (and home-schooled) her, now cares for a younger nephew and niece. She is no-nonsense and blunt when faced with the threat to charter expansion: “You want to take something away from these kids after they’ve tasted excellence? It’s child abuse, educational neglect, child endangerment.
“If they try that, we must take them to court. Even if we don’t win, we’ll bring enough attention to what they are trying to do. We have a right to a good education. Isn’t that what our ancestors died for?”
These are the voices of parents who see their children’s future in mortal danger, testifying to the impact of charters on their kids, marching to Albany, vowing to do it again — “by any means necessary,” including lawsuits.
Sure sounds like the start of a new civil-rights movement.
Are Bill and Chirlane paying attention?

Labels: , , , ,

Bookmark and Share

Tuesday, February 25, 2014


Battle of NY's "SOBs"

Originally published in the New York Post, February 25, 2014 

Both Cuomo, de Blasio Heirs to Clinton Politics 

Since Election Day 2013, there’s been a tight struggle between Andrew Cuomo and Bill de Blasio to determine, not just who’s the King of New York, but who’s the biggest “SOB.” That is, who’s the true “Son of Bill” — the rightful heir to that other Bill who still looms over Democratic politics: Bill Clinton.
After all, the still-beloved-by-his-party 42nd president swore in New York’s 109th mayor on Jan. 1. But, ever the master of the middle-of-the-road, he tipped the rhetorical hat to departing Mayor Mike Bloomberg — striking a different tone than others on the inaugural stage — even while endorsing the new mayor’s concerns over income inequality.
Just a few feet away sat Gov. Cuomo, who served as President Clinton’s secretary of Housing and Urban Development — where de Blasio worked before heading back north to run then-First Lady Hillary Clinton’s US Senate campaign.
Publicly, both the governor and the mayor claim they’re old friends from that time. But de Blasio confidantes paint a slightly more complex picture, saying Cuomo was a high-handed boss who didn’t mind reminding subordinates (particularly one Bill de Blasio) who was top dog. That dynamic seems to fit what’s happened in the few weeks since they shared that inaugural stage.
The fact is, each man seems to have learned different things from Clinton: Cuomo’s copied Clintonian tactics, while de Blasio seems to have absorbed some of his worst habits, including political ones.
Cuomo has plainly mastered the classic Clinton technique of triangulation — and skillfully used de Blasio to do it. The president set himself up as the above-the-fray moderate between an unacceptable/incompetent left (old-school Democrats) and a radical right (my then-boss, Newt Gingrich, and the post-1994 Republican Congress). That allowed him to reject the overly ambitious liberal agenda (HillaryCare) of his first two years, rebound from a disastrous 1994 midterm election that swept the GOP into power and cruise to a rather easy 1996 re-election.
Cuomo has done something similar since de Blasio became mayor. The progressive mayor has provided the governor with a tax-and-spend (on Pre-K and minimum wage) foil that Cuomo has been only too happy to parry at every turn.
Thus, even the governor’s rhetorical misstep about there being “no place” for pro-life, Second Amendment-supporting conservatives in New York (a case of triangulating a little too hard?) seems to have faded from the collective memory, replaced by the image of a “reasonable” leader balancing a social policy that enjoys widespread support statewide while hewing to a fiscal rectitude “brand” by refusing to raise taxes for that policy — as one too-liberal mayor demands.
Secondly, how was that fiscal rectitude brand first displayed? By trading decades of Albany dysfunction for three (soon to be four) on-time balanced budgets.
The on-time bit makes for another interesting contrast with de Blasio, who in his first weeks in office has shown an impressive ability to emulate one of Bill Clinton’s least endearing habits — perpetual lateness.
Ask anyone who had to engage with the then-president in the ’90s, and you’ll always hear the same thing: He can’t be on time for almost anything — and the earlier in the day the event was, the less likely he’d make it.
And while Clinton never started his State of the Union a half-hour late, Mayor de Blasio did just that at his first State of the City.
Apparently, like Clinton, the mayor stays up late — and thus doesn’t get up so early. That squares with what we know about one incident: He was wide awake enough to call the NYPD following the post-11 pm arrest (and subsequent release) of Bishop Orlando Findlayter.
Needless to say, perpetual tardiness leads to other poor judgment calls — such as, ahem, speeding to your next appointment two days after calling for stricter speed laws.
Hey, it’s been barely two months. Bill Clinton managed to right his ship of state after the aforementioned midterms. Bill de Blasio may just want to slow down, get some rest and study some of those lessons, so he can become not just Tall Bill, but NYC’s true SOB.

Labels: , ,

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, February 23, 2014



For some reason, MSNBC seems to like me! I returned Sunday morning to "UP With Steve Kornacki," mildly devastated that I never managed to appear on his ersastz '80s game show "Up Against The Clock" before it heads into its Contest of Champions next week! Alas, the segment had pre-empted a few weeks between coverage of the Chris Christie Bridgegate story -- and the Olympics.

In any event, Sunday I was on talk about the return of Bill Clinton and how would the GOP deal with him after having built him up over the last few years to contrast him with Barack Obama. The first segment, with Steve's intro, is here:

The second segment can be found here -- including a rather funny clip of Kevin Spacey on Letterman, doing a dead-on impression of Bill Clinton. However, what I noticed from the clip is how perfect Spacey would be for any movie in which Mike Huckabee featured prominently. Right, I don't know off the top of my head what such a project might be.

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Technorati search
Search Now:
Amazon Logo
Save This Page
  •  RSS
  • Add to My AOL
  • Powered by FeedBurner
  • Add to Google Reader or Homepage
  • Subscribe in Bloglines
  • Share on Facebook