ActRight

Students at California State University–Los Angeles have set up a “healing” space to deal with pain they were caused by having Ben Shapiro speak on campus — even though that speech was three months ago and most of them didn’t even go.  “On February 25th, our campus experienced immense hurt and trauma,” states the description for the event, which will take place on Tuesday night.  #ad#“Almost two months later, students are still feeling the emotional, mental, and physical effects that this event posed, and nothing has been done to facilitate our healing,” it continues. “How can we help each other heal and move forward? How were you affected emotionally, physically, psychologically?” Here’s the real kicker: According to Young Americans for Freedom program officer Amy Lutz, who attended the event, most — maybe even all — of the kids involved in this event didn’t even go to the damn speech. I mean, really, kids? You’re suffering “immense hurt and trauma” and dealing with “emotional, mental, and physical effects” from a speech that happened sort of near you two months ago that you didn’t even attend? You need “healing” from that? Oh boy. I’ve got to say, good luck. If you are suffering from “trauma” from that, then there is no way you are going to handle the real world.  #related#Now, the event description also claims that students were “shoved” and “abused” because of the speech. But according to Lutz, there’s a real kicker on that one, too: The students who were doing the shoving were the protesters to the Shapiro event, not the people who came to hear him speak.  She also said that the group’s claim that people were bussed in from Orange County is a flat-out lie.  Come on. The event, titled “Debrief on Anti-Blackness; Threats of Violence,” is being organized by the school’s Black Student Union.  — Katherine Timpf is a reporter for National Review Online.

Every liberal, Progressive agenda — homosexual marriage, abortion, anti-bullying edicts, the marginalization of Judeo-Christian beliefs, etc. — has a societal price: We count the costs and ask whether the changes are worth the price.

The unspoken rule is that a knocked-up female soldier will have an abortion. I made a different choice: Motherhood

Amid Trump's denunciations of The New York Times, one of his attorneys says a lawsuit is a "distinct possibility."

For more resources visit http://reasonablefaith.org Dr. William Lane Craig speaks on the importance of the intellectual life for Christians at Johnson Ferry ...

A savage hate crime at the University of Iowa that sent shockwaves across campus turned out to be just another hoax, police said Tuesday. The case of Marcus Owens caused a deluge of outrage when it

A Donald Trump tweet seems to extol the virtue of ignorance

Hillary Clinton Memo: Ellen Willing To Use Her Show To ‘Promote’ Hillary’s ‘Agenda’

Many talk about “unbinding” delegates, but the efforts are scattered and uncertain.

Burlington College anticipated losing its accreditation after massive debt and strained finances.

The senator’s supporters were incensed at a state convention they believe epitomized a rigged political system, with some threatening officials online.

Empresas Polar, which supplies 80 per cent of beer drunk in Venezuela, shut down its last brewery in April, forcing President Nicolas Maduro to threaten to jail its owners unless they reopen.

Guest post by Joe Hoft Billionaire Donald Trump is set to sweep all the delegates in the Oregon primary today ...

We all know that mainstream news is slanted liberal and that liberals really hate guns, but what Tom Brokaw just said may be the most anti-gun thing ever uttered by a member of the leftist propagan…

Even before Ted Cruz suspended his campaign a few weeks ago, speculation has been mounting about a potential Supreme Court bid for the brilliant legal scholar. But when asked Friday about the possibility of being a justice, Cruz demurred. "That is not a desire of my heart," he said.

Here's my arrangement of "America the Beautiful"... Get it on iTunes: http://apple.co/1LculDu Get it on GooglePlay here: https://goo.gl/WwrMvS Get it on Amaz...

LAS VEGAS (AP) — Nevada's Democratic party on Monday warned the Democratic National Committee that Sen. Bernie Sanders' supporters have a penchant for violence and may seek to disrupt the party's national convention in July, as they did during the Nevada convention Saturday.

The absurd comparisons have got to stop.

The bill passed by unanimous consent despite vocal opposition from the White House.

One has to truly step into the world of “elite” higher education to understand its isolation and its sad intellectual mediocrity. The men and women who populate our most culturally influential universities quite simply don’t understand America and its citizens. They view dissenters from the academic mainstream as a toxic combination of malicious and ignorant. Defenders of the status quo tend to claim that this is simply the natural order of things. Conservatives, the thinking goes, self-select out of the academy because they’re more interested in commercial gain, less interested in intellectual pursuits, and repelled by the spirit of “open inquiry” and devotion to “critical thinking” that (allegedly) dominate higher education. #ad#In a testament to how bad things have gotten, it comes as a shock that two new studies from inside the academy should employ truly open inquiry and critical thinking to posit a different, more plausible explanation, and detail its costs: Conservatives don’t self-select out of the academy; they’re culled from it by discrimination. Northwestern University’s James Lindgren tracked the results of 16 years of law schools’ efforts to increase diversity. He found that law schools had successfully diversified faculties with regards to gender and ethnicity, such that women and minorities are now over-represented compared to their percentage of the working lawyer population. To no one’s surprise, white Christian males were under-represented in law schools, both at the beginning of the survey and at the end. Here’s Lindgren: By the late 1990s, the proportion of the U.S. population that was neither Republican nor Christian was only 9%, but the majority of law professors (51%) was drawn from that small minority. Further, though women were strongly underrepresented compared to the full-time working population, all of that underrepresentation was among Republican women, who were — and are — almost missing from law teaching. . . .  In terms of absolute numbers, the dominant group in law teaching today remains Democrats, both male and female. Because in the general public both white women and white men tend now to vote Republican, law faculties are probably less representative ideologically than they have been for several decades. Lindgren doesn’t believe that these disparities are “simply the result of discrimination,” and I agree. No one should expect that each and every American demographic will choose and succeed in professions in exact proportion to their share of the population. There are cultural differences. RELATED: When Conservative Scholars Fall Prey to Stockholm Syndrome That said, however, discrimination against conservatives is real — and it has disastrous consequences. James Philips, a doctoral student at the University of California-Berkeley, examined the credentials and publication rates of faculty at America’s sixteen highest-ranked law schools, and found that conservative and libertarian scholars not only published more and were cited more than their peers, but also had “more of the traditional qualifications required of law professors than their peers, with few exceptions.” #share#Evidence of superior credentials is a blow to the “self-selection” hypothesis. Rather than there existing only a few conservatives who are interested in academic careers, only a few conservatives are over-qualified enough to make it through a discriminatory process. Moreover, in the absence of known and notorious discrimination, fewer conservatives would self-select away from academic careers. People don’t like to apply for jobs for which they don’t have a realistic hope of being hired. Academic consensus is typically a result of a combination of groupthink and radical ideology, not rigorous scholarship. The upshot of this is that “elite” law-school faculties are no longer stocked with America’s best and brightest legal scholars. It’s a state of affairs that perfectly suits progressive purposes. The media is fond of citing “scholarly consensus” on key legal disputes, noting the overwhelming numbers of professors who, say, support same-sex marriage or oppose American detainee policies — a task made easier by the dearth of conservative dissenters. Employment at an elite law school can be decisive in determining whether a lawyer is qualified for a spot on the federal bench, which makes it more likely that liberals will become judges, which in turn benefits the project of mainstreaming legal radicalism. Yet academic consensus is typically a result of a combination of groupthink and radical ideology, not rigorous scholarship. New cultural and legal theories are hashed out within the closed academic shop — among like-minded men and women — before being trotted out to the public as a moral and intellectual fait accompli. Against that backdrop, is it any wonder that liberal academics attribute all opposition to ignorance or bigotry? After all, every smart person they know agrees with them. #related#When I left Cornell Law School, my faculty colleagues hosted a nice reception. I liked every person in my department — they were all unfailingly courteous, kind to my family, and conscientious as teachers and scholars. I tried my best to be good to them as they were to me, but at that farewell party, I cringed when a colleague toasted me by saying, “To David, the person who taught me that conservatives are people too.” She was joking, of course, and I took it in the spirit it was intended. But there was an uncomfortable truth only half-hidden in her words. No community composed entirely of people who think like that — kind and well-meaning though they may be — is worth respecting as a neutral arbiter of public debates. The faculty-discrimination racket is real, and we all pay its price. — David French is an attorney, and a staff writer at National Review.

Share on Facebook 1 1 SHARES We are at the start of the general election campaign and Donald Trump has given Democrats in the last 10 months alone a crap ton of material to use against him. After what we have seen I cannot entirely discount a Trump win in the general but it is very unlikely. Given that Trump never seems to be able | Read More »

How are you supposed to satisfy a constantly changing 'gender fluid' person?

Can we really believe Salon writer Todd Nickerson when he asserts he would never act on his urges? Especially when he hi…

Ruling by U.S.District Judge Richard Leon rekindles Second Amendment fight in nation’s capital

Even Voldemort has free-speech rights.