The New Republic

The New Republic

Howard Jacobson on the studied buffoonery of London’s mayor We call Boris Johnson “Boris,” but we don’t call David Cameron “David.” That ostensibly small distinction, which you can bet your life does not feel small to the prime minister, conceals a world of difference. They are both Etonians, both graduates of Oxford, both onetime members of the Bullingdon Club—a secret dining and boozing society for the fatuously overprivileged, where the wearing of tails and the popping of champagne corks (if not the throwing of frisbees) is de rigueur—and therefore both, you would think, unlikely to strike a single chord of sympathy or solidarity with a British populace bleeding from a thousand cuts. Yet we refer to Boris as “Boris” and smile when we see him on television. It takes some explaining.  — Howard Jacobson, “Whiff-Whaff”
Zoom

Howard Jacobson on the studied buffoonery of London’s mayor

We call Boris Johnson “Boris,” but we don’t call David Cameron “David.” That ostensibly small distinction, which you can bet your life does not feel small to the prime minister, conceals a world of difference. They are both Etonians, both graduates of Oxford, both onetime members of the Bullingdon Club—a secret dining and boozing society for the fatuously overprivileged, where the wearing of tails and the popping of champagne corks (if not the throwing of frisbees) is de rigueur—and therefore both, you would think, unlikely to strike a single chord of sympathy or solidarity with a British populace bleeding from a thousand cuts. Yet we refer to Boris as “Boris” and smile when we see him on television. It takes some explaining. 

— Howard Jacobson, “Whiff-Whaff”

“Chief Justice John Roberts initially sided with the Supreme Court’s four conservative justices to strike down the heart of President Obama’s health care reform law, the Affordable Care Act, but later changed his position and formed an alliance with liberals to uphold the bulk of the law, according to two sources with specific knowledge of the deliberations. Roberts then withstood a month-long, desperate campaign to bring him back to his original position, the sources said. Ironically, Justice Anthony Kennedy - believed by many conservatives to be the justice most likely to defect and vote for the law - led the effort to try to bring Roberts back to the fold.” — Jonathan Cohn, “Did Roberts Change His Vote?”
Zoom Info

“Chief Justice John Roberts initially sided with the Supreme Court’s four conservative justices to strike down the heart of President Obama’s health care reform law, the Affordable Care Act, but later changed his position and formed an alliance with liberals to uphold the bulk of the law, according to two sources with specific knowledge of the deliberations.

Roberts then withstood a month-long, desperate campaign to bring him back to his original position, the sources said. Ironically, Justice Anthony Kennedy - believed by many conservatives to be the justice most likely to defect and vote for the law - led the effort to try to bring Roberts back to the fold.”

— Jonathan Cohn, “Did Roberts Change His Vote?”

A Theory to Crush Conservative Jurisprudence “Einer Elhauge of Harvard Law School, for example, pointed out that the Founders had explicitly endorsed the concept of a health care mandate when the first Congress passed legislation in 1790 requiring shipowners to buy health insurance for their sailors. This law was signed by President George Washington. Taking a different angle, Jack Balkin of Yale Law School argued that the mandate is clearly authorized by Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution, which permits Congress to “lay and collect taxes.” Rather than getting tangled in the wonky particulars of exactly when individuals enter the health care market, these scholars were locating a justification for the law in the text of the Constitution and the historical understanding of the men who wrote and ratified it.” -Jeffrey Rosen, “Constitution Avenue”
Zoom

A Theory to Crush Conservative Jurisprudence

“Einer Elhauge of Harvard Law School, for example, pointed out that the Founders had explicitly endorsed the concept of a health care mandate when the first Congress passed legislation in 1790 requiring shipowners to buy health insurance for their sailors. This law was signed by President George Washington. Taking a different angle, Jack Balkin of Yale Law School argued that the mandate is clearly authorized by Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution, which permits Congress to “lay and collect taxes.” Rather than getting tangled in the wonky particulars of exactly when individuals enter the health care market, these scholars were locating a justification for the law in the text of the Constitution and the historical understanding of the men who wrote and ratified it.”

-Jeffrey Rosen, “Constitution Avenue”

Will more prominent, respected conservatives come out of the woodwork to defend Obamacare’s constitutionality? This is the fifth. “The individual health mandate surely passes constitutional muster under settled judicial principles. The Constitution’s Commerce Clause grants Congress the authority “to regulate commerce … among the several States.” The Court’s precedents establish without question that Congress may regulate intrastate economic activities that Congress (not the Court) reasonably concludes have a substantial effect on interstate commerce. The existence of such congressional authority is especially clear when the challenged provision itself is part of a comprehensive legislative scheme that regulates interstate commerce.” - Henry Paul Monaghan, A Conservative Law Professor on the Obvious Constitutionality of Obamacare Photo courtesy of the Library of Congress
Zoom

Will more prominent, respected conservatives come out of the woodwork to defend Obamacare’s constitutionality? This is the fifth.

“The individual health mandate surely passes constitutional muster under settled judicial principles. The Constitution’s Commerce Clause grants Congress the authority “to regulate commerce … among the several States.” The Court’s precedents establish without question that Congress may regulate intrastate economic activities that Congress (not the Court) reasonably concludes have a substantial effect on interstate commerce. The existence of such congressional authority is especially clear when the challenged provision itself is part of a comprehensive legislative scheme that regulates interstate commerce.”

- Henry Paul Monaghan, A Conservative Law Professor on the Obvious Constitutionality of Obamacare

Photo courtesy of the Library of Congress

What would William F. Buckley think of the GOP of today? “Buckley felt that outlandish stances discredited conservatism by making it seem “ridiculous and pathological,” as he wrote to a supporter who had criticized his editorial. They allowed the media to tar all conservatives as extremists, and turned off young people. He insisted that conservatism had to expand “by bringing into our ranks those people who are, at the moment, on our immediate left—the moderate, wishy-washy conservatives” who comprised the majority of the Republican Party. “If they think they are being asked to join a movement whose leadership believes the drivel of Robert Welch,” he warned, “they will pass by crackpot alley, and will not pause until they feel the embrace of those way over on the other side, the Liberals.” Buckley consistently maintained that conservatism was the “politics of reality.”” - Geoffrey Kabaservice “What William F. Buckley Would Think of Today’s GOP” Photo courtesy of the Atlantic
Zoom

What would William F. Buckley think of the GOP of today?

“Buckley felt that outlandish stances discredited conservatism by making it seem “ridiculous and pathological,” as he wrote to a supporter who had criticized his editorial. They allowed the media to tar all conservatives as extremists, and turned off young people. He insisted that conservatism had to expand “by bringing into our ranks those people who are, at the moment, on our immediate left—the moderate, wishy-washy conservatives” who comprised the majority of the Republican Party. “If they think they are being asked to join a movement whose leadership believes the drivel of Robert Welch,” he warned, “they will pass by crackpot alley, and will not pause until they feel the embrace of those way over on the other side, the Liberals.” Buckley consistently maintained that conservatism was the “politics of reality.””

- Geoffrey Kabaservice “What William F. Buckley Would Think of Today’s GOP”

Photo courtesy of the Atlantic

TNR presents a college paper by Rick Santorum—and what it says about his political evolution. “But more significantly, the paper with its detailed discussion of the process of politics, is arguably the latest confirmation of something that the media lately begun to discover, or rather rediscover, about Santorum: The man who is arguably America’s foremost culture warrior was—for much of his early career, including his four years at Penn State—less an ideologue than a political tactician.” —Molly Redden, “A College Paper by Rick Santorum—and What it Says about his Political Evolution” For more, enter the latest TNR Contest: how would you grade Rick Santorum’s college term paper? Photo courtesy of Penn State University Library
Zoom

TNR presents a college paper by Rick Santorum—and what it says about his political evolution.

“But more significantly, the paper with its detailed discussion of the process of politics, is arguably the latest confirmation of something that the media lately begun to discover, or rather rediscover, about Santorum: The man who is arguably America’s foremost culture warrior was—for much of his early career, including his four years at Penn State—less an ideologue than a political tactician.”

—Molly Redden, “A College Paper by Rick Santorum—and What it Says about his Political Evolution”

For more, enter the latest TNR Contest: how would you grade Rick Santorum’s college term paper?

Photo courtesy of Penn State University Library

What’s behind the increasingly disturbing war against women’s rights? “Taken individually, these incidents all seem like isolated events. Taken together, they start to look like a disturbing trend. Increasingly, what we are seeing from the right when it comes to women’s issues is not conservatism but radicalism: a bid to roll back the gains and freedoms that feminism has managed to earn for women.” —The Editors, “The Increasingly Disturbing War Against Women’s Rights”
Zoom

What’s behind the increasingly disturbing war against women’s rights?

“Taken individually, these incidents all seem like isolated events. Taken together, they start to look like a disturbing trend. Increasingly, what we are seeing from the right when it comes to women’s issues is not conservatism but radicalism: a bid to roll back the gains and freedoms that feminism has managed to earn for women.”

—The Editors, “The Increasingly Disturbing War Against Women’s Rights”

An abortion provider on Rick Perry’s unprecedented laws in Texas: “You have to have this conversation while [this probe] is in your vagina, its not like we can have pleasantries. You have to have a scripted conversation provided by politicians where you have to put your hands over your ears. That is not how we practice medicine. We try to make sonograms comfortable when it is required for a medical procedure, so this really has the effect of harassment.”
Zoom

An abortion provider on Rick Perry’s unprecedented laws in Texas:

“You have to have this conversation while [this probe] is in your vagina, its not like we can have pleasantries. You have to have a scripted conversation provided by politicians where you have to put your hands over your ears. That is not how we practice medicine. We try to make sonograms comfortable when it is required for a medical procedure, so this really has the effect of harassment.”