Elon Musk, Glenn Beck, Matt Yglesias, and Donald Trump are FOR lots of LEGAL immigration

 I'M NOT.

More defunct neo-liberalism from Biden & Blinken: Put the losers to Hamas back in charge in Gaza

 “At some point, what would make the most sense would be for an effective and revitalized Palestinian Authority to have governance and ultimately security responsibility for Gaza,” Blinken told the Senate hearing.

More.

Might as well put Matt Yglesias in charge and go full-on not-a-serious-country fairy tale.

This is a bid for the Disney vote, that's all.

 

My plan was to give the Middle East to Disney, Florida to the Jews, and Washington state to the Palestinians, but I now realize that I was sadly mistaken

 This very serious thinker ™ agrees with Glenn Beck that what America needs most to compete in the 21st century is a population of 1 billion.

 

NeverWin National Review is taking heavy incoming for telling Oliver Anthony to write a different song

Lefty Matt Yglesias chimed in with the Uniparty's disapproval of the new Underparty anthem.

Bernie makes millionaires safe for the world just as ancient citizen of Tarsus made Pharisaism safe for the world

It all depends on eliminating the cut with these people.

Puncturing Matt Yglesias: Kids today may be growing less tolerant of those they actually disagree with

Noted here at Heterodox Academy:

Contemporary young adults are significantly less likely to endorse “racist” views than any other U.S. age cohort. Well, are they more likely to give the racists a platform? Actually, they are far less willing today than they ever have been to grant racists a platform. And this is actually far more significant than it may initially seem in light of the fact that the sphere of what counts as “racist” has radically expanded – from David Duke in the 70’s to things like “microaggressions” today. In other words, not only are contemporary youth more willing to censor those they deem racist than previous cohorts, but they are likely to brand a much wider range of speech as “racist” (and therefore, worthy of censorship). ... Coverage on campus speech by Vox writers seems to regularly suffer from bias.

Public school indoctrination about race clearly has succeeded.

Dan Drezner, good liberal, Matt Yglesias, bad liberal

Story here.

Glenn Greenwald eviscerates the Solidarity with Charlie Hebdo hypocrisy of the left and right

Excerpts from his excellent analysis, here:

[T]his week’s defense of free speech rights was so spirited that it gave rise to a brand new principle: to defend free speech, one not only defends the right to disseminate the speech, but embraces the content of the speech itself. Numerous writers thus demanded: to show “solidarity” with the murdered cartoonists, one should not merely condemn the attacks and defend the right of the cartoonists to publish, but should publish and even celebrate those cartoons. “The best response to Charlie Hebdo attack,” announced Slate’s editor Jacob Weisberg, “is to escalate blasphemous satire.”

...

Anti-Islam and anti-Muslim commentary (and cartoons) are a dime a dozen in western media outlets; the taboo that is at least as strong, if not more so, are anti-Jewish images and words. Why aren’t Douthat, Chait, Yglesias and their like-minded free speech crusaders calling for publication of anti-Semitic material in solidarity, or as a means of standing up to this repression? Yes, it’s true that outlets like The New York Times will in rare instances publish such depictions, but only to document hateful bigotry and condemn it – not to publish it in “solidarity” or because it deserves a serious and respectful airing.

...

[T]he journalist Chris Hedges was just disinvited to speak at the University of Pennsylvania for the Thought Crime of drawing similarities between Israel and ISIS.

That is a real taboo – a repressed idea – as powerful and absolute as any in the United States, so much so that Brooks won’t even acknowledge its existence. It’s certainly more of a taboo in the U.S. than criticizing Muslims and Islam, criticism which is so frequently heard in mainstream circles – including the U.S. Congress – that one barely notices it any more. ...  When those demanding publication of these anti-Islam cartoons start demanding the affirmative publication of those ideas as well, I’ll believe the sincerity of their very selective application of free speech principles. One can defend free speech without having to publish, let alone embrace, the offensive ideas being targeted. But if that’s not the case, let’s have equal application of this new principle.