…moving back to the old Jew Hating days of yesteryear.
There is a pretty clear pattern here–again, assuming that the five nearly-simultaneous sales of shares in Israeli companies were not coincidental. Harvard is happy to do business with oppressors–real oppressors, that is–as long as there is enough money in it. China and Saudi Arabia have, in sheer monetary terms, a lot to offer. But taking a “principled” stand against Israel, still the Middle East’s only democracy (unless you count Iraq, on which the jury is still out) and the only country in the region with a Western human rights sensibility, is cost-free. Sort of like banning military recruiters.
The difference between courage and cravenness is being willing to stand up when it actually costs you something. “Standing up” to Israel costs Harvard on money or reputation among the elites, it risks no anger to among those who shower them with money, yet it allows them to think of themselves as “moral”.
Alas this decision costs nothing of Harvard, except Honor, and it has been a long time since Harvard valued that word.
That fact even more than the disinvestment is the true tragedy here.
As Friday’s protest began at 1 p.m., there didn’t seem to be any people heading into the office, causing Hanley to question whether it had opened.
Jesse Mermell, vice president of external affairs for the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, denied that the office would open Friday. Mermell declined to provide any details on when the office will open.
But at around 1:30 p.m., a woman and her son knocked on the locked door of the Planned Parenthood office, telling a man who looked to be a security guard inside she had an appointment.
Afterward, the woman, Tamu Brobbey, confirmed she had an appointment Friday. emphasis mine
You mean Planned Parenthood lied about something? Who woulda thought it?
What cowards! They know they are going to be protested, anyone following our posts here since January KNOW they are going to be protested regularly, there have been protesters almost daily since day one, and yet Planned Parenthood with the power of the Federal Money and the City Council, the Mayor’s office and the City Solicitor backing them up all the way is too afraid to either put up their shingle or even admit that they are open.
…for revealing that in the face of corruption we intend to give Charlie Rangel a stern reprimand!
The Texas Democrat said he intended to call the head of the full ethics committee, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), to apologize for telling reporters that the subcommittee recommended reprimanding Rangel for allegedly breaking House ethics rules. The revelation was not included in the lengthy documents on the charges faced by Rangel that were released on Thursday.
So says Rep Steve Green.
Let me translate this for the general public.
“Rep Lofgren: I’m so sorry I let the cat out of the bag that we plan on punishing Rep Rangel; who over nearly 40 years in the house likely knows more secrets about members of the house than the CIA ever will; with only a reprimand rather than any actual punitive action. I’m sorry I’ve revealed that the ethics committee is not about to punish the man who writes the tax law for avoiding taxes thus putting all of us in an embarrassing position of having to explain why to the voters in a year when we are already in trouble.”
End translation.
If anyone was wondering why Rangel isn’t cutting a deal, you now know. And what will that mean for Rangel, lets look at some history:
A reprimand carries no consequences. A censure doesn’t either, except for the perception that it’s a stronger reprimand; Barney Frank got censured in 1990 for using his influence to fix parking tickets for his partner, but he still became chair of the House Financial Services committee. However, a Representative who gets censured has to stand in the well of the House to have the language read aloud, which at least causes momentary embarrassment. A fine would carry more sting, but an impeachment or expulsion would send a clear message about following the rules.
Or as Captain Ed closes:
Yes, this would mean that Rangel would get the exact same punishment that Joe Wilson got for exclaiming, “You lie!” during Obama’s speech to Congress last fall.
After all corruption and tax evasion is one thing, but defying THE ONE? That is unthinkable!
Krauthammer just said he is surprised that he would turn down a reprimand deal. Why should he make any deal? If they are afraid of doing more than a reprimand then he knows they aren’t willing to challenge him, and like I said, he knows where 40 years of secrets.
What does the Rangel case tell you about the democratic congress? They are more afraid of Charlie Rangel than the American people.
Update: I couldn’t help but think of the 4th doctor Episode City of Death and the Doctor and Duggen. Jump to 3:25 and you’ll see that in at least one respect the Democratic Ethic committee and the 4th doctor have one thing in common:
The text of the exchange is as follows:
The Doctor: If you do that one more time Duggan I’m going to take very very severe measures!
Gosh darn it, it was supposed to be a surprise! Perhaps a nice surprise, tied up in a little bow, and delivered on August 11th when Democratic Party leaders throw a big birthday fundraiser — er, party — for the man whose birthday passed two months earlier. Who knows? The combination celebratory good feelings, hard campaign cash, and the softball reprimand might have convinced Charlie to shut the hell up and take a pass on the ethics trial slated now for the middle of the campaign season.
A Mosque could be built anywhere on the subway line to have easy access, building it near ground zero is a deliberate attempt of Islam to assert power. Every radical Islamist worldwide will see it as a sign of submission, particularly when the towers have not been rebuilt. Pretending otherwise is a delusion of the type we’ve talked about before.
Yet Sarah Palin comes right out and says it. Not only is the uncomfortable truth expressed but it is expressed by the one the left hates most of all. That is why it has driven this “Patrick” and others totally nuts.
Tell you what guys. Let’s take a national poll of Americans and see if they think a Mosque at or near Ground Zero is a good idea. If you want your guys to run on that be my guest. You might manage to win Berkley, SF and Cambridge and I stress the “might”.
I wonder if Bloomberg’s aide would be willing to call the Saudi’s racist since they will not allow a Christian Church in their country. I wonder if that aide would call the Palestinians racist because they insist on an Judenrein Gaza? I think not. This is an example of the “courage” of cowards.
The days when the denial of reality pays off are rapidly dying.
Da Techguy's (no longer backup) Blog 