Patterico's Pontifications


Rep. Jim Jordan Demands Dr. Fauci Tell Him When Americans “Can Get Their Liberties Back”

Filed under: General — Dana @ 11:50 am

[guest post by Dana]

Things got heated this morning between Rep. Jim Jordan and Dr. Anthony Fauci today at a House Coronavirus Crisis Subcommittee meeting:

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) had to intervene in a shouting match between Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Dr. Anthony Fauci by telling Jordan to “shut your mouth.” Jordan ranted at Fauci for several minutes, demanding the doc provide definite answers on when the pandemic will end, when public health mandates will be lifted, and when Americans will have their “liberties” back. “You’re indicating liberty and freedom. I look at it as a public health measure to prevent people from dying and going to hospital,” Fauci said, adding that life will return to normal when people get vaccinated.

When Jordan complained that no one was allowed to criticize Fauci, he shot back: “You’re making this a personal thing.” Jordan claimed he wasn’t but Fauci said, “You are, that’s exactly what you’re doing.” Jordan kept ranting after his time expired, prompting Waters to yell, “You need to respect the chair and shut your mouth!” Jordan’s home state of Ohio is experiencing a nearly 25 percent surge in new cases

You can view the exchange here. I’m sorry I am unable to embed it. However, the seven-minute clip is worth your time as it lays out two different viewpoints of the situation. Most Americans seem to hold one or the other of these viewpoints, so it’s a good representation of a polarized COVID-19 America. With his hyperventilating theater, it appears that Jordan doesn’t really want answers from Fauci, rather he just wants to rally his base (MAGA) and show them that he’s on the job!

Here is a snippet of the exchange:

Full video here. Go to the 54:15 mark.


Biden To Supreme Court: Don’t Take Up Lawsuit Calling All-Male Military Draft Unconstitutional

Filed under: General — Dana @ 10:56 am

[guest post by Dana]

Is eliminating all sex-based classifications a good thing?

The Biden administration has asked the Supreme Court not to take up a lawsuit that calls the all-male military draft unconstitutional.

Because Congress is considering whether women should also be required to sign up, Acting Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar said in a brief to the court, “any reconsideration of the constitutionality of the male-only registration requirement . . . would be premature at this time.”

The brief does not state whether President Biden thinks women should be included, nor does it defend the current system, which requires only men ages 18 to 26 to submit their information should a military draft be needed again.

“Congress’s attention to the question may soon eliminate any need for the court to grapple with that constitutional question,” Prelogar wrote.

The American Civil Liberties Union, representing two men and a group called the National Coalition for Men, challenged the men-only requirement as “one of the last sex-based classifications in federal law.”

According to the ACLU’s brief:

It imposes selective burdens on men, reinforces the notion that women are not full and equal citizens, and perpetuates stereotypes about men’s and women’s capabilities.


Ria Tabacco Mar, director of the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project, said the result was telling.

“Noticeably absent from the government’s brief is any argument that men-only registration is constitutional,” Mar said. “That is not surprising given that men-only registration is outdated, based on gender stereotypes, and no longer recommended by the military itself.”

Further, Mar pointed out that Congress has had 40 years to act on this, and has never gotten around to it, thus the need for the Court to act:

“President Carter made the same ask in 1980, and Congress hasn’t fixed the problem despite having 40 years to do so,” she said. “It’s long past time for the Supreme Court to declare that men-only registration is unlawful sex discrimination.”

Note that in 2013, the military lifted a ban on women in combat. This was followed by all jobs opening up to women in 2015.


Going to Zero Troops in Afghanistan

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:29 am

I don’t have a firm opinion about this, but wanted to throw it open for discussion with a couple of observations:

1. We have gone over fifteen months without a combat death in Afghanistan.
2. The idea of a perpetual troop presence offends many Americans, but we station troops on a long-term basis in a lot of places.
3. We have prevented the re-emergence of a terrorist safe haven of the type that existed before September 11, 2001. I would not like to see that situation recur.

Your thoughts?

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0638 secs.