Are you feeling motivated yet? I thought our Amazon Product du Jour would do the trick. Meanwhile, Joe's trying to do some de-motivating, as reported by Frederick M. Hess and Hayley Sanon at the Dispatch: President Biden’s Bizarre Attack on Charter Schools
In mid-March, the Biden administration declared war on charter schools. In an announcement that blindsided leading charter school advocates, the Department of Education proposed a raft of new regulations on the $440 million federal Charter School Program (CSP)—all designed to bring the boisterous, popular charter school sector to heel.
The new rules would require charter schools seeking CSP funds to prove that they’d be “racially and socio-economically diverse,” show that they wouldn’t step on the toes of local district schools, and agree to file a ream of documents anytime they deal with a for-profit contractor, which the U.S. Department of Education will define at whim.
It's not surprising, since the Biden Administration is in the pocket of charter-hating teacher unions.
It's time to call it a day. Kevin D. Williamson wonders: Is the Party Over? And he's talking about the party I'm actually registered as.
As the political philosopher Neil Sedaka observed, “Breaking up is hard to do.”
Something you will no doubt have observed in your own life and in the lives of others is that the discord in a relationship — or the bitterness of its ending — is directly proportional to the intensity and closeness of the relationship itself: A romance consisting of three dates in six weeks might end without either party’s even quite noticing, but the dissolution of a 30-year marriage with children is always agonizing and potentially explosive; it is much more wrenching to leave a job you find personal meaning in than a job that is just a paycheck; with rare exceptions, you will never get as angry at your cousins as you do at your brother. Etc.
The thing conservatives need to keep in mind: The Republican Party is not your ex. Neither is the conservative movement. As it happens, I wrote this newsletter — except for the sentence you are reading — before Charlie Sykes’s latest — “A Governor Breaks Up with Trump” — landed in my in-box; the headline could not be more apt.
That governor is mine own, Chris Sununu. Who's now falling back on the "It was just a joke!" defense.
I liked the joke better than the defense.
Goodness, Scientific American is awful these days. Case in point is the article from Adam Mann: New Revelations Raise Pressure on NASA to Rename the James Webb Space Telescope. You'd think with the JWST settling into its orbit doing science, this would be over.
But not when you can publish a thinly-veiled advocacy piece as "news":
Sadness. Disappointment. Frustration. Anger. These are some of the reactions from LGBTQ+ astronomers over the latest revelations regarding NASA’s decision not to rename the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), given that the agency long had evidence suggesting its Apollo-era administrator James Webb was involved in the persecution of gay and lesbian federal employees during the 1950s and 1960s.
The new information came to light late last month when nearly 400 pages of e-mails were posted online by the journal Nature, which obtained the exchanges under a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. Since early last year, four researchers have been leading the charge for NASA to alter the name of the $10-billion flagship mission, launched in December 2021, which will provide unparalleled views of the universe. The e-mails make clear that, behind the scenes, NASA was well aware of Webb’s problematic legacy even as the agency’s leadership declined to take his name off the project.
Now, the "latest revelations" don't actually reveal anything new about James Webb's "problematic legacy". Instead, they look at NASA's internal discussion about the controversy, and it's really tough for a disinterested observer to find anything damning.
But you can always depend on our favorite physics prof at the University Near Here to get a word in…
Regardless of how NASA proceeds going forward, the harm done to its relationship with the LGBTQ+ community will take time and effort to repair. “I’ve lost faith, and I think a lot of people have,” says Chanda Prescod-Weinstein, a theoretical cosmologist at the University of New Hampshire and another leader of the push for renaming JWST. But change remains possible, she says: “As scientists, we often realize we were in error, and we set a new course.”
Needless to say, Professor Prescod-Weinstein has never, to my knowledge, realized she was in error, and set a new course. That's entirely the job for people who disagree with her.
At Hot Air, Jazz Shaw also covers the dreadful SciAm article: Activists are still trying to change the name of the new space telescope. Injecting some common sense:
There was definitely an anti-gay bias in the government in the fifties and sixties, just as there was in much of the private sector. But in 2022, you apparently only had to be in some position of authority during that time period to be labeled as an oppressor of gay and lesbian workers or some sort of demon. If they really want to bring the hammer down on someone who seems to have been directly involved, why not go after Truman? God only knows how many things are still named after him. Then again, maybe I shouldn’t be feeding them any ideas.