31--yes 31--Harvard organizations have declared that the murders, rapes, kidnappings, and other atrocities committed by Hamas against innocent people are in no way the fault of Hamas, but are rather entirely the fault of ... Israel. Something is deeply, deeply wrong in academia.

1/ I sometimes ask students what their position on slavery would have been had they been white and living in the South before abolition. Guess what? They all would have been abolitionists! They all would have bravely spoken out against slavery, and worked tirelessly against it.

Being Woke means never knowing what you'll be required to believe tomorrow.

I apologize to the Covington Catholic boys. What Rod Dreher says of himself goes double for me. I jumped the gun and that was stupid and unjust. It is I, not the boys, who needs to take a lesson from this. The Catholic Bonfire At The Stake theamericanconservative.com/… via @amconmag

I've got an idea. I'll say what I think and why. If you disagree, you say what you think and why. I'll consider your arguments and respond to you. You consider mine and respond to me. I won't bully or try to silence you. You won't bully or try to silence me. We'll call it ....

Agreed Mr. Mayor. And for an ambitious politician who associates himself with Christianity to say it's OK to suggest that God smiles on the division of a child into a collection of severed body parts at the hands of an abortionist, has lost all claim to be other than a hypocrite.

Do I have this right? A BLM activist in Louisville who writes columns for the city's main newspaper and has been honored by Barack Obama's foundation, shoots at a Jewish guy who's running as a Democrat for mayor, is caught and arrested for attempted murder ... and is out on bail?

5/ (5) that they would risk being denied valuable professional opportunities as a result of their moral witness. In short, my challenge is to show where they have at risk to themselves and their futures stood up for a cause that is unpopular in elite sectors of our culture today.

Catholic and Protestant friends: Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints are today mourning the death of their beloved leader, President Nelson. At the same time, they are in shock at a murderous assault at a church in Michigan. This is NO TIME for theological disputations! The only thing we should be saying right now is this: "We stand in loving solidarity with you, dear brothers and sisters."

Chloe Cole looks to me like a nuclear missile aimed at the gender-industrial complex, its supporting ideology, and its profits. If her lawsuit gets past the initial motions to dismiss, things will get very interesting, very fast. And many others will file. ncregister.com/cna/former-tr…

To get rid of Trump, some people felt it was necessary to say things about Joe Biden that aren't true--that he is competent, for example, compassionate, caring, even wise. For some to say it, they had to find a way to make themselves believe it. Now reality has come crashing in.

I have no horse in this race, and no particular regard for any of the personalities involved, but I wonder why Bobby Kennedy's siblings are attacking him so viciously. Why does it all have to be so acrimonious? Why not just say something like the following? "We see things one way, but our brother sees things differently. We think he's mistaken to endorse Trump, just as he thinks we're mistaken to support Harris. Families needn't agree on everything, and ours doesn't. But we love each other and all of us respect each other's right to have an opinion of his or her own." Why do they have to ratchet up the rhetoric with talk of a "betrayal" of their father and their family and all of that? It's overheated, will make no difference politically, and will only poison familial relations.

The next stage of the revolution will feature terrified people going beyond self-censorship to denouncing and actively joining in the persecution of others, to place themselves above suspicion of lacking zeal for the cause. It's how these things work. You can take it to the bank.

Students: May I suggest a couple of New Year's resolutions? 1) If you don't have a smart friend who disagrees with you about important things that you deeply care about, make one. 2) Resist groupthink and self-censorship. Think for yourself; seek the truth; speak your mind.

Ohio woman takes abortion pills. They cause labor but fail to kill baby, who's born alive at 28 wks. Woman & boyfriend provide no care, seek no med help. Child dies. Police find corpse in shoebox. Couple is prosecuted for manslaughter. Question for Dem candidates: Should they be?

If, as appears, the shooting victim in Portland was targeted because of his politics, then we've got a political murder--an assassination. Whether the victim's politics were right, left, or center is irrelevant. An assassination is an assault on an individual and on the republic.

2/ Of course, this is nonsense. Only the tiniest fraction of them, or of any of us, would have spoken up against slavery or lifted a finger to free the slaves. Most of them—and us—would have gone along. Many would have supported the slave system and happily benefited from it.

Pro-life friends: Please read Lincoln's Second Inaugural and be guided by its spirit. Let us not exult over those of our fellow citizens--good people who are sincerely concerned about women's welfare--who see the demise of Roe as a disaster. Malice towards none; charity for all.

Two years ago @CornelWest and I prayed in the rain at the grave of Frederick Douglass in Rochester, recalling with gratitude the work and witness of the great abolitionist. Today we read that in that city a statue of him was torn down and thrown into a gorge. God help us.

A question for Catholic X followers: At my local parish in Princeton, there was an enormous turn out of people to receive ashes for Ash Wednesday (despite a soaking rainstorm). I've never seen anything like it. What was the turnout at your parish? Is something happening?

4/ (1) that it would make them unpopular with their peers, (2) that they would be loathed and ridiculed by powerful, influential individuals and institutions in our society; (3) that they would be abandoned by many of their friends, (4) that they would be called nasty names, and

3/ So I respond by saying that I will credit their claims if they can show evidence of the following: that in leading their lives today they have stood up for the rights of unpopular victims of injustice whose very humanity is denied, and where they have done so knowing:

I'm sorry, but I'd close a university before I'd offer counseling to students to cope with ideas they disagree with. dailysignal.com/2017/09/08/b…

The way the game is now played, when people encounter a view they don't like or agree with, instead of trying to defeat it with reasons, evidence, and arguments, they try to defame and stigmatize those holding the view in the hope of making them and others afraid to express it.

I don't know anything about Mr. Williams, but this photograph and his comment perfectly illustrate the profound division in our culture. It's "obvious" to some of us that one of the things you do in a crisis is pray. It's "obvious" to others that praying is (worse than) foolish.

1/ Dorian Abbot is a geophysicist at the University of Chicago. He was to give MIT's prestigious Carlson Lecture on Oct. 21. The topic was to be climates of extrasolar planets. Shamefully, MIT canceled the lecture under pressure from activists who objected to his political views.

A few days ago, I posted a brief statement of what I, as a conservative, seek to conserve. The first item on the list was what I regard as the foundational principle of all sound morality: the profound, inherent, and equal dignity of each and every member of the human family. Everything else I believe about ethics and politics in one way or another stands upon or presupposes that principle. Any form of “conservatism” (or “liberalism”) that denies it in principle or transgresses it in practice is alien to me. That is why I believe that the conservative movement, though it can and should be a broad tent, simply cannot include or accommodate white supremacists or racists of any type, antisemites, eugenicists, or others whose ideologies are incompatible with belief in the inherent and equal dignity of all. As a conservative, I say that there is no place for such people in our movement. So, while I understand and appreciate that politics is about “adding and multiplying, not subtracting and dividing,” and though I welcome conservatives representing a range of viewpoints on a wide swath of issues, I will not—I cannot—accept the idea that we have “no enemies to the right.” The white supremacists, the antisemites, the eugenicists, the bigots, must not be welcomed into our movement or treated as normal or acceptable. Is this a call for “cancelation”? No. It’s a reminder that we conservatives stand for something—or should stand for something. We have core principles that are not negotiable. I am—notoriously, for some of my fellow conservatives—committed to the principle of free speech for everybody, including people with whom I profoundly disagree even on the most important issues, indeed, including racists and other bigots. But defending their rights does not mean allying with them, welcoming them into our movement, or treating them as representing legitimate forms of conservatism. I am also—again, notoriously, for some of my fellow conservatives—willing to engage people with whom I deeply disagree, so long as they are honest and are willing to do business in the proper currency of intellectual discourse, a currency consisting of reasons, evidence, and arguments. (It is pointless to engage bad faith actors, charlatans, and con men.) But, again, engaging and forcefully arguing against people who deny the inherent and equal dignity of all is one thing, welcoming them into the movement or treating their ideas and ideologies as representing legitimate forms of conservatism is something entirely different. Let me be plain. American conservatism today faces a challenge. That challenge comes from those who reject our commitment to inherent and equal human dignity. They are seeking acceptance in the conservative movement and its institutions, and they do so with the ultimate objective of transforming them by undermining that commitment. They openly preach white supremacy and the hatred of Jews, among other noxious ideas. They no longer feel the need even to try to hide their bigotry. It is incumbent upon those of us who maintain the “ancient faith” (to borrow a phrase from Lincoln) to make clear to friend and foe alike that we will not permit the integrity of our movement and its institutions to be compromised. We will not treat its foundational principle of inherent and equal human dignity as optional. On the contrary, we will insist on it, defending and advancing it with renewed dedication.

I'll give Amy Barrett's opponents some good advice, in blissful assurance that they won't take it. Don't attack her faith. Don't go near it. Stay a million miles away. Talk about health care, immigration, the weather, anything but religion. It's not her Achilles heel; it's yours.

I live between two worlds. One is conservative, the other progressive. I continue to be astonished by the crazy things I hear people in each world saying about people in the other. They live side by side, citizens of the same nation. Yet they don't understand each other at all.

Muslims attacked while praying in a mosque in New Zealand; Catholics attacked while praying in churches in Sri Lanka; Jews attacked while praying in synagogues in the U.S. The monsters who kill those gathered for prayer will face God on the charge of sacrilege as well as murder.

1/ Something I've learned in 36 years of teaching super talented, high achieving, highly ambitious young men and women: A great many people believe what they believe because they think it's what smart, sophisticated, high achieving people believe and are expected to believe.

Fellow professors: The survey evidence is clear that students are censoring themselves. This is bad. Liberate them. Make clear in your first lecture or seminar meeting and on your syllabus that you want them to speak their minds & that there will be no thought or speech policing.

It is CRITICAL that we derive the right message--and avoid deriving the wrong one--from Liz Magill's "voluntary" resignation. The wrong one is that universities like Penn need more restrictions of speech. The right one is that double standards will no longer be tolerated.

Whether it's Collin College or Georgetown Law School, it's time for academic administrators to get the memo: Your job is to honor and protect academic freedom, not to police the thought and censor the speech of students and faculty.

I respectfully request that Twitter post a list of the matters in dispute among people representing different philosophical, religious, and ideological perspectives that your company regards as definitively settled and therefore not eligible for debate on your platform.

Why is "Down Syndrome" trending on Twitter? Because some people are arguing we need permissive abortion laws so we can "screen" for people with Down's and kill them in utero. So wrong. No member of the human family is inherently superior or inferior to any other in basic dignity.

How easy it is to denounce the evils & villains of the past. How difficult it is to muster the courage to confront the evils of the present.

Friends: Happy New Year! If you've been censoring yourself--or, worse, affirming Woke or other dogmas you know aren't true--make 2022 the year you break free. Don't let groupthink, fear, ambition, or anything else enslave you. Think for yourself. Seek the truth. Speak your mind.

The problem for Tony Dungy haters is that the man knows what he believes and why he believes it. He neither lusts for their approbation nor fears their animosity. They can't intimidate him nor, in the end, will their cancellation campaign against him succeed. He's bullet-proof.

I'm pleased to announce that Dorian Abbot's lecture on extrasolar planets, meant to be the 2021 Carlson Lecture at MIT (until MIT disgraced itself by yielding to pressure to cancel it), will be given at Princeton on the date it was to be given at MIT: Oct. 21. Details to follow.

1/ I'm re-reading the autobiography of Frederick Douglass published in 1845. It is all-too-easy for us to forget what a brutal, horrific, inhuman reality slavery was. Facing it, as Douglass forces us to do, makes us wonder how people could have supported or tolerated it. And yet

Exam question: Statues of 19th and 18th (even 15th) century figures are being removed, toppled, or vandalized. Yet a bust of the notorious 20th century racist eugenicist Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger sits in a place of honor in the National Protrait Gallery. Explain.

Lennart Nilsson's iconic photograph of a tiny girl at 18 weeks gestation, published in the April 30, 1965 issue of Life Magazine: "The Drama of Life Before Birth."

Here's Bernie Sanders officially excommunicating pro-life Democrats. Asked if someone can be a pro-life Democrat, he replies: "Being pro-choice is absolutely essential to being a Democrat." So: if you're pro-life you are unacceptable, unwanted, an intruder. Time to go elsewhere.

If you are Catholic, and are giving an ear to people who proclaim themselves to be faithful Catholics while directing animus towards Jewish people or their faith, please consider that the faith which you yourself hold long ago repudiated and, indeed, expressly repented of, the anti-Jewish stains on its own history, declared anti-Semitism in any form to be sinful, and proclaimed that the Jews, far from being enemies or aliens, are our brothers in faith. theprincetontory.com/why-chr…

Let's be frank. The notion that some people--the severely mentally ill, the cognitively impaired--are "useless eaters," "better off dead," "lebensunswertes leben," is back--with a vengeance. It's dressed in the language of "compassion" and "choice." We must resist it--fiercely.

I marvel at the wonderful DIVERSITY on our Supreme Court! We have female Harvard or Yale Law grads and male Harvard or Yale grads. We have black Harvard or Yale grads and white Harvard or Yale grads and Latino Harvard or Yale grads. We have tall Harvard or Yale grads and short...

If Amy Barrett is the nominee, keep an eye on the flow of money from the abortion and pornography industries to the anti-Amy campaign. A super smart female justice who's guided by the constitutional text, its logic, structure, and original public meaning is their worst nightmare.

Every single one of us has a profound interest in government at every level strictly observing due process of law. All of us should be deeply concerned by any violation of anyone's due process rights, whether in criminal or administrative matters. We might like what government can more efficiently accomplish by disregarding proper legal procedures today. But we will rue the day we licensed such governmental misconduct when, tomorrow, a different government disregards legal procedures to achieve quickly results we abhor. The government in power, whatever it is, will not always be in power. There will "arise a pharaoh who remembereded not Joseph." If we want due process for ourselves and in defense of things we cherish and believe in, we must insist on due process for everyone.

"... so that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel ..." The Ohio Supreme Court has ruled against Oberlin College in its appeal of a judgment in favor of Gibson's Bakery. Oberlin is ordered to pay damages of $36 million for defaming the Gibson family as "racists."

Seventy-five years ago today Nazi Germany surrendered. Immense gratitude to my beloved father (now 94) and the other heroes of all allied nations who fought and sacrificed to destroy Hitler's war machine.

Courage can be contagious. That's the good news. The bad news is that cowardice is almost always contagious.

Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood--which gave Northam's campaign nearly $2 million--did something worse than dress up in a Klan costume: she enthusiastically spoke to a KKK woman's group. Yet she is still celebrated as some sort of hero by PP and its supporters. Why?

Yes, this is me retweeting Noam Chomsky. Gladly and gratefully. When the man is right, he's right (and those on the right should say so).

There is no "hate speech" exception to the First Amendment's prohibition of laws abridging the freedoms of speech and the press. Nor is there a "misinformation" exception. Anyone who doesn't know that, or--as is more likely here--who refuses to acknowledge it, cannot be trusted with power.

Delighted to share this announcement: Harvard Law School establishes professorship to honor Justice Antonin Scalia: today.law.harvard.edu/harvar…

The gender gnostics invite JK Rowling to re-education camp and she says no. They realize that there's now a lot at stake and they must bend her to their will. If she refuses to cave & survives cancellation she licenses wholesale dissent from Woke orthodoxy. This is now a Big Deal

I could not be prouder of the students I teach at Princeton. I have an undergraduate course in civil liberties going with about 120 students enrolled. They are brilliant, but that's a secondary reason for my pride in them. We've just spent three weeks addressing profoundly divisive issues, including abortion, euthanasia, and sexual morality and marriage. My students represent a range of points of view on these matters. Some--across the spectrum--hold their convictions quite passionately. Yet in our class discussions they've discussed the issues in a thoughtful, civil, mutually respectful, genuinely truth-seeking spirit. All of them were challenged by readings making the case for ideas they disagreed with. I know this for sure, because I assigned to them the best readings known to me for the competing positions. But instead of allowing themselves to be "triggered" by these challenges, they engaged the work they were assigned, making a sincere and sustained effort to assess fairly the arguments advanced. What more can a teacher ask? How blessed I am to teach these young men and women.

With my favorite Handmaiden of the Law.

I have an idea for a social tolerance experiment--one that would also make good reality TV. We'd film a volunteer wearing a Vote Biden T-Shirt walking down the main street of Elkins, West Virginia, and then wearing a MAGA hat walking through Harvard Square in Cambridge, Mass.

I know I'm old fashioned-a bit of a dinosaur and all that-but I can't shake the idea that when a fellow scholar says something I think is wrong and bad I should give my reasons for thinking it's wrong and bad rather than demanding that he be fired and driven out of academic life.

We can close our eyes, but she is there. We can turn our faces from her, but she's still there. We can pretend she doesn't exist, that she's not one of us, that her life doesn't matter. We can wish her away. We can try not to think about her. But she is there. And we know it.

My advice to university presidents is that your policy should be as follows: We honor freedom of speech and therefore do not impose and will not impose viewpoint-based restrictions on speech. We will, for the sake of protecting everyone's rights to teach and learn, strictly and evenhandedly (that is, in a viewpoint-neutral way) enforce the university's time, place, and manner regulations. Conduct in deliberate violation of these regulations will subject students, faculty, and staff to disciplinary proceedings. Willful violation of the regulations in defiance of a demand by university authorities or police to cease and desist will be grounds for permanent expulsion or exclusion from the university, as will violence of any kind, obstruction, disruption of classes and other university activities, destruction of property, intimidation, threats, and harassment. Due process in disciplinary proceedings will be strictly observed, with those subject to the proceedings afforded the presumption of innocence and the burden of proof being clear and convincing evidence. We reserve the right to refer criminal violations to civil authorities.

If you won't permit a view you hold to be challenged, you won't know if it's wrong. You won't know if it's right. Why would you want to hold a view if you can't know if it's right or wrong? To uphold a certain self image? To win favor or inclusion in some community? To get ahead?

I'm not a Tulsi Gabbard fan, but I tell you: keep your eye on her. She's smart, articulate & ambitious. She's figured out how Trump beat the establishment of both paties in 2016 and built his base. She's making the adjustments. A key moment will be the party switch. Watch for it.

To those in the grip of ideological fervor, ordinary laws by which public order is maintained mean nothing. They feel privileged to do as they please, licensed by faith in the unquestionable justice of their cause. But the destroyers of law and order are the midwives of tyranny.

Watch this clip. Watch it now. Don't avert your eyes. I don't want anyone to be able to say "I didn't know" the depths of barbarity into which our culture--including the youth culture--has sunk. Now let's have a serious conversation about how we got here and how we get out.

People have lots of motives for killing other people--greed, envy, ideology, hatred, racism, nihilism, and on and on. Sometimes people kill others simply because they are in the way. Only one thing can overcome all motives to kill: the conviction that every human life is sacred.

This young (though not all THAT young--she's 28) woman shows us the price of a decade and more of infantilizing and coddling high school and college students, filling their heads with perverse ideologies and their hearts with a spirit of self-righteous superiority.

Some free advice: Don't try to defend Roseanne Barr. It's impossible. Don't try to defend Samantha Bee. It's impossible. Don't try to distinguish Roseanne Barr from Samantha Bee. It's impossible. Don't try to defend people who say racist and misogynistic things. Don't be foolish.

Here is how a virtuous man behaves when a tough decision needs to be made. He gets his priorities right and fulfills his most important obligations. If other goals and ambitions must be set aside, he sets them aside. Ben Sasse's stepping down as President of the University of Florida is a profound loss to the University and to the broader academic world. But his highest and first duty, as a husband and father, is to his family. And he is fulfilling his duty.

As direct and explicit an attack on the First Amendment as I've ever heard from a candidate for national office.

Nobody actually believes that, in humans, "sex is assigned at birth." Everybody knows that babies have a sex--male or female--before they are born. Indeed, sex is established in humans from the earliest embryonic stage. So speaking of sex "assigned at birth" is speaking falsely.

It's crazy to identify with a category like "progressive" or "conservative" and then decide your positions on issues based on that identification. Think about each issue and decide what you believe is true. Don't worry about whether the position is regarded as "left" or "right."

Something's happening. It's happening in France. It's happening in England. It's happening in the U.S. I only began noticing it a few weeks ago, on Ash Wednesday. It seems awfully sudden, so perhaps it's just a blip. If so, though, it's a widespread blip. catholicnewsagency.com/news/…

A female researcher makes an indisputably true statement: It's impossible to change biological sex. She gets fired for it. JK Rowling defends her. Rowling then comes under ferocious attack by the more-Woke-than-she. Will Rowling stand her ground? Or will she cave to the bullying?

One may be tempted to dismiss this inanity as amusing ignorance from an overeager, overconfident young pol. It's more insidious than that. It's the sort of ignorance that is produced by a head full of ideology-- and it won't be confined to laughable errors about historical facts.

Many academics are afraid to speak their minds. I'm not. If you're an academic who is, please message me. Let's talk. I'd like to be supportive of you, if I can be. Others want to be too. There's no point in being in our line of work if we can't state what we believe to be true.

My advice to Catholics: Don't assume that Pope Francis is guilty. Don't assume that Archbishop Vigano is lying. Assume nothing. Demand the release of the McCarrick dossier and all pertinent documents. We need the evidence of who knew what when. We are entitled to know the truth.

She's running. The party switch will come in due course but the appeal to Republican primary voters (as well as independents) began a few months ago. She not only knows the words, she can also sing the tune. She's not my candidate, but she's going to be formidable.

Some officials and experts seem to think we're dealing with a virus so smart that it knows whether you're at a defund the police demonstration or a Donald Trump rally, and so virtuous that it infects you and makes you a vector for infecting others only if you're at a Trump rally.

No matter the reason (and no matter where) children are in government custody, soap, toothbrushes, blankets, & a decent place to sleep are minimal conditions of human decency. This should not need to be litigated and it's disgraceful for govt. agencies to defend the indefensible.

Ummm .... "Move along. Move along now. Nothing to see here. No. Nothing to see. Move along now. We've got everything under control. Move along. Get about your business."

My God! People! People!!! Do you not see where this goes??? Do the Dutch, who suffered under--and in many cases heroically resisted--Hitler's domination, forget that the "final solution" began with the dehumanization and eugenic killing of the handicapped?

It becomes clearer every day that the President is not up to the job. There is a leadership vacuum and it is having tragic consequences--in Afghanistan, yes, but not just in Afghanistan. And we're only seven months into the President's term. This is not good.

Uju nails it. What the Cleveland Clinic has done in surgically repairing a spina bifida defect on a child in the womb is healthcare. To have deliberately killed the child (say, because she had spina bifida and was therefore "unwanted") would NOT have been healthcare.

There will now be two kinds of people: Those who find what they watch on this video deeply moving and who regard Greta Thunberg as a prophet and perhaps a saint, and those who are outraged by what they regard as the indoctrination, manipulation, and exploitation of a child.

4/ MIT's caving in to a cancel mob's demand to disinvite a distinguished scientist who had been invited on the basis of his achievements to give an honorific lecture shows just how badly science today has been politicized. The integrity of science can't survive politicization.

It begins.

I confess to feeling a bit sorry for Mayor Wu. She's a bright, hard-working, and no doubt dedicated person who was educated in the Bubble. Her head is filled with ideological notions that prevent her seeing a problem with the exclusion she's practicing in the name of inclusion.

The defamatory attacks--especially those by fellow journalists--on Matt Taibbi are disgusting. He's an honest, responsible writer/reporter who calls 'em as he sees 'em. Like the rest of us human beings, he's got a point of view. But he does his best to provide unvarnished facts.

Phony manliness is about vulgarity and bravado. Real manliness is about serving others sacrificially and protecting the weak and vulnerable.

3/ It is impossible to exaggerate how disgraceful MIT's capitulation to a mob's demands to cancel Dr. Dorian Abbot's lecture is. That he was qualified on the basis of his achievements as as a geophysical scientist to give the Carlson Lecture was never questioned--nor could it be.

Eugenics is now a permanent temptation. Every new generation will face it. Resisting it will be as difficult as it is important. It is critical that we understand children as *persons*, not products. We must not make them objects of manufature, subject to "quality controls."

Heather MacDonald nails it. The problem for the Penn, Harvard, and MIT presidents is not that they failed to endorse censorship when they should have. It's that they were exposed as hypocrites and dissemblers when they appealed to free speech principles. city-journal.org/article/rig…

Confirmation hearings for S.Ct. nominees aren't constitutionally required. They began in 1916. We've not gotten better justices because of them. They often degenerate into partisan brawls and forums for character assassination. Senators can obtain the info they need without them.

We've seen this movie before--more than once. The Jacobins. The Bolsheviks. The Red Guards. How many times do people need to view it before realizing that the ending never changes? They promise "justice" and "a better world" but deliver the destruction of basic civil liberties.

Ostensibly secular universities are actually deeply religious--their lives as punctuated and regulated by liturgies and rituals as any monastery. There's the land acknowledgment liturgy, the diversity statement ritual, the pronouns ritual. We have saints, demons, even holy months

I'd like to say something to my fellow conservatives. It's something that I hope will speak to old-school liberals as well. We must be people of principle--unwaveringly so. We must be so most fundamentally because it is right. It is morally required. And we are not relieved of that moral obligation when our political adversaries behave in unprincipled and hypocritical ways. Secondarily, we would do well to consider that our side will not always have control of institutions in which power can be abused. Sometimes, people whose beliefs are antithetical to ours on very important questions will hold the levers of power. We must not authorize the abuse of power by abusing it ourselves or going silent when officials on our side abuse it. Some people will say, "Well, they'll abuse power whether we do it or not, so we should fight fire with fire, lest we be played as saps and suckers." But this is to give up on the Constitution and our commitment to the rule of law. It's also a half-truth. Yes, there will be some abuse, and we'll have to call it out and push back forcefully against it. But it will be easier, and we will be more credible, if we are not hypocrites. What's more, there will be less of it if we do not, in effect, authorize it.

Whoa!!! This is whistle blowing on ideological bias at NPR on a whole new scale. My hat is off to Uri Berliner. This took guts. thefp.com/p/npr-editor-how-n…