Charles C. Johnson For ASCMC President

My name is Charles C. Johnson and I’m running for ASCMC President.

In Roman times, candidates were expected to appear wearing white togas, indicating their purity. It may well be true then that no one is without blemishes at a school this small and I’m certainly not without my faults.

But I care deeply about this school and I think I have some good ideas to improve. I hope you won’t let our past differences get in the way of the honest dialogue we deserve about our school. Student government ought to be about more than who you know, who your friends are, how much money you can raise for some pet cause or how big of a party you give days before an election. (That $25,000+ allocated for the exclusive Wedding Party doesn’t include the $249.00 for the balloon person or the $595.54 for the generator – to say nothing of the VIP tables we all have to pay for.)

It ought to be about ideas.

So here are mine:

• Elections for the Qualified, Not Appointments of Friends: There are many smart students here who have become disillusioned by the ASCMC student government because they see how administration after administration just appoints their friends to positions of power. If elected, I will not appoint my friends to a position. Rather, I will hold elections for every single position, save one – that of the Chief Financial Officer. This election includes ASCMC J-Board jurors, liaisons to the Board of Trustees, Secretary, curriculum committee members, Academic Affairs and the ASCMC Forum, among other positions. Those positions we cannot elect, we will require that all applicants have their applications placed online and every ASCMC meeting, no matter its nature will be online. Most will be on the CMC-equivalent of CSPAN. (Try not to get too bored.) And, in keeping with that transparency, every dime will be placed online. These reforms allow people with ideas to run on the strength of their ideas – and not who they happen to know -- and give an opportunity for a freewheeling student press to hold ASCMC officers responsible for the pledges they make.

• Parking Negotiations with Scripps College: Parking has gotten really atrocious with all of the ongoing construction. At the start of the year, I opposed the decision to ban freshmen from parking on the grounds that it was unfair and would likely lead to parking ninjas – people parking without permits. I was right. Just to the north quad lies a parking structure that is at maximum only 15% full. ASCMC should negotiate to allow us to park there and I will begin that process. Eventually, we could negotiate to have a five campus wide parking permit for those times when you don’t exactly feel like walking to class up at Harvey Mudd or Pomona.

• Turning Down Money For Myself, So That You Can Have More: ASCMC Presidents shouldn’t be running for room and board, but for the privilege of serving their fellow students. If elected, I will voluntarily abolish both the president’s special slush fund – “the president’s special fund” and my own room and board allotment. I encourage my competitors to do the same, if they are able. I will not fund any group on campus that does not have CMC members and will be more stringent about requiring non-CMCers to contribute their fair share to our parties. I will hold a referendum on whether or not we should continue to fund Ayer (the yearbook) and one of our biggest expenses per year at some $25,000+. Together, that should save us around $60,000 – money you will get back in the form of ASCMC rebates, which you can spend however you like. (Of course, I’m currently in talks with several local liquor stores for ASCMC discounts when you should spend that money. The thinking is that you’ll buy better booze than ASCMC does – not a tall order.)

• Ending Wasteful, Dishonest Spending: Claremont McKenna produces some of the finest accountants and financial thinkers in the country – and yet our budget, according to one former CFO, routinely leaks up to 30 to 40 percent. To put it less charitably, it is stolen. A few years ago, a CMC junior class president took (or "misplaced") between $6000 and $10,000 from Monte Carlo Night and then promptly dropped out of school. The money was never paid back. I would hit people caught taking money from ASCMC with a 1099 form. (If they are stealing money from us, they probably aren’t going to want the IRS to find out.) An email went out last semester that said that the “sloppiness” at the parties accounted for “a few g’s” over the then-past few weeks. I’d find out and hold those responsible for the damage.

• More Efficient Allocations of Club Funds: Clubs are part of what makes CMC extracurricular events such an enriching experience for so many of us. But what’s to be done about the clubs that get a disproportionate amount of money and have few members? What’s to be done about club leaders exaggerating the number of members they have, so as to get more funding? I propose that before any club receives funding, we should require its leaders to put in the card numbers of its members. Clubs where one card member appears too much will have their funding reduced – incentivizing clubs not to inflate their numbers and guarantee a fairer distribution of club member fees. (If this idea sounds as if it came from Freakonomics, that’s because it did.)

• Financial controls on parties: We have two parties coming back to back right now – the White Party and the Wedding Party. It strikes me that these parties were designed with the election of people to future ASCMC offices. These parties represent total boondoggles. When it comes to spending upwards of $20,000 – nearly a twelfth of ASCMC’s total budget – I will hold a referendum so that we can be sure that that’s money we want to spend. I will never authorize those large expenditures without calling for a school-wide vote.

If these ideas appeal to you, I’d appreciate your vote. I encourage you to run with me – for any and every position so that we can have a critical mass to get the job done. This platform is a work in progress, and I would appreciate any feedback -- positive or negative -- on the ideas presented. Let's make this a contract between you, me, and ASCMC to make our school better. It won’t be easy, but nothing worth doing ever is.

These past few days I gathered signatures for my run for ASCMC president. Within 10 hours, I had well more than the 200 I needed to be placed on the ballot. In the first day before we filed, I overturned a selective reading of the ASCMC constitution that would have made it a disqualifiable offense for you simply to read this platform here. And while I have formally challenged both of my opponents to a debate, ASCMC has decided that one should not take place. I think this is a mistake, and will gladly debate either or both of my opponents this Sunday or Monday Evening in the Bauer Forum on how we can go forward as a campus.

A Good Verdict From ASCMC's Election Committee With Update

Isayas sent out an email to all of us campaigning saying the following:

Just to provide you all with a quick update, the elections committee met tonight to address a concern that was brought up about the interpretation of a part of the constitution. The line in question goes as follows:

"Candidates may not use any online social networks (for example, Facebook, or MySpace) to encourage others to vote for themselves or to vote in general."

Prior to our meeting, we chose to interpret the use of online blogs under the blanket of social networks or media. After our deliberation, we have decided to allow the use of online blogs because they are not exactly a social network. This does not change anything about the use of social networks, no Facebook, Myspace, Twitter, etc.

Also, news publications will be following the campaign, so feel free to submit a statement if and when your are contacted.

ASCMC has no control over publications that do not receive ASCMC funding. So there is also a chance that certain publications will blatantly support one candidate over another. Although the likelihood of this happening is minimal, it is always a possibility.

Hopefully the remainder of this election goes smoothly and remains stress free.

Remember, you may not begin campaigning until Thursday at 6:30pm when you turn in your signatures and campaign money.

Good luck to you all, and see you in front of Collins.

Today ASCMC's Election Committee handed down a great decision that will allow me to post my platform for this election cycle. I had petitioned the ASCMC Election Committee for a redress because of their then-standing interpretation of the ASCMC constitution that bans campaigning on so-called "social media." Unfortunately, the way several ASCMC Election Board members had interpreted that decision was that this section of the ASCMC Constitution banned all media on campus, including this -- and every other -- private website on campus. What some members of that Election Committee wanted was that only the Forum could comment or run things discussing the race -- something I found inadvisable and unconstitutional.

My thanks to everyone that participated in the discussion and my condolences to the newspaper editors that were present but then asked to leave. I guess that's just another thing that ASCMC can change going forward.

The way it went was that I gave my speech, took some questions from the ASCMC Election Committee and then left the room for some time -- almost thirty minutes or so afterward -- and then they issued their decision. I would like to personally thank Isayas, our current president, who guaranteed a timely turnaround for this decision.

The substance of the decision is that I now have the right to post my platform on this website, and that independent school publications can cover the election as they see fit. Unfortunately, school websites and/or newspapers that do receive funding cannot endorse a candidate, but they are free to hold debates and cover the race, so long as they do their best to be neutral between the candidates.

The ban on Facebook currently stands and I will be deleting this blog post from my Facebook crawler as soon as I can. (I have a corporate finance exam tomorrow and will be off to the library up at Mudd.)

PSU: Ethics of Abortion Debate

The Ethics of Abortion

Rose Hills Theatre, 8pm

February 25^th, 2010

Given the perpetual nature of the debate over abortion in the United States waged between two equally impassioned and highly partisan sides, the PSU has decided to approach the topic of abortion in an event this spring. Abortion is a sensitive issue that permanently remains on the national stage, whether as a litmus test in the elections of public officials, discussed in its own right, or within the context of contemporary legislation, such as the most recent controversy over its inclusion in health care reform efforts in Congress. The PSU believes that this staple of contemporary politics merits thoughtful consideration through an event on campus. While the consensus on campus has settled in favor of reproductive rights, the issue of abortion nonetheless features prominently in American politics and has not lost its potential to inflame opinions in the greater public. To address this controversial topic, the PSU has invited two prominent academics to take part in a debate. The event will investigate the topic of abortion through moral and ethical perspectives to illuminate the deep-rooted philosophical arguments of the pro-choice and pro-life movements. It will take place February 25^th in Rose Hills Theatre on the campus of Pomona College.

Patrick Lee

Dr. Patrick Lee is the John N. and Jamie D. McAleer Professor of Bioethics at Franciscan University of Steubenville, and the Director of the Institute of Bioethics. His best-known book, Abortion and Unborn Human Life, is a comprehensive examination of the moral and ethical foundations of the pro-life position. He also authored Body-Self Dualism in Contemporary Ethics and Politics, and has published numerous articles on such philosophical and ethical topics as human nature, marriage, abortion, euthanasia, and metaphysics. His articles have been published in The National Review, Reason Magazine, The New Atlantic, The Public Discourse, and he regularly delivers lectures at universities across the country.

David Boonin

Professor David Boonin is Professor and Chair of the Philosophy Department at the University of Colorado at Boulder, where he teaches on applied ethics, ethical theory, and the history of ethics. He is the author of A Defense of Abortion and The Problem of Punishment, as well as a number of articles spanning a wide range of topics, including same-sex marriage, euthanasia, the moral status of animals, race, affirmative action, and hate speech. He has published articles in Public Affairs Quarterly, Philosophy and Public Affairs, Environmental Ethics, the Journal of Applied Philosophy, and the Journal of Social Philosophy, and is the co-editor of a popular philosophy textbook.

For More Information:

Please contact Greg Carter at gregory.carter@pomona.edu or at (202) 316-7678. To learn more about our other upcoming events and to sign up for our mailing list, please visit psu.pomona.edu.

Nick George's Response to My Writings on Him

Nick George, of TSA fame, is complaining that I buried him in a comment thread related to a post I wrote about him. Seeing as there are three comments in that entire thread, this doesn't strike me as a particularly deep burial, but then again, perhaps Nick's not particularly deep, given his attack on special needs people and Sarah Palin. (Really, how trite.)

Here it is in full:

I originally wrote a much longer response that went point by point down Charles Johnson's piece, but when I finished, I realized something.

This is the wrong discussion. The discussion shouldn't be about me, what I think about Glenn Beck, what my major is, or how long my hair is. (Or my past contacts with the Communist Party of Bulgaria. Mr. Johnson failed perhaps to notice that the quoted facebook account also as me pictured as a cat, the quotes to all other fields being "meow." A rather unimaginative prank made by a friend sophomore year. But I guess we can't all understand satire as well as Sarah Palin.)

Here's the thing: I have no interest in defending myself. All these arguments breakdown at the moment when they determined that I had no contraband and posed no threat to airport security. That was before they arrested me. Thus, I believe I can sum up my argument briefly.

Black's Law Dictionary defines "probable cause" as “[a] reasonable ground to suspect that a person has committed or is committing a crime.” First off, what's the crime? Terrorism? Really? Is anything Charles Johnson mentioned in his article reasonable ground to suspect that I'm committing or have committed terrorism?

It's not about me. It's about the law. When you cuff somebody and put him in a jail cell for learning a foreign language, you've crossed the line. Anyone who argues in favor of arrest without probable cause needs to take a good hard look at their definition of 'radicalism.' My case is about upholding the Constitution, a value any good conservative must hold.

(Finally, I add parenthetically that regardless of what language Dan Rubin chose to use in his article, I did not "hem and haw" when asked about 9/11. I said it was terrible. I'm sorry I didn't immediately go into a Glenn Beck at the mention of 9/11, but I was taken completely aback by a law enforcement officer from my own country agressively [sic] implying that I was either complicit or at least sympathetic to the worst terrorist attack on American soil. Neither my patriotism nor my morality should be questioned because I study Arabic.)

Allison- you look great in that picture!

I told Nick that I'd be responding point by point to his response. So here's my response.

It's a shame that Nick won't go line by line telling me where I'm wrong. My suspicion is that he cannot do it. If Nick had read the post I wrote for Big Government, he'd realize that my mentions of his views of Glenn Beck, his major, and his shortened hair were all related to the claim that he may or may not be radicalized. (The point I made about his political views was more than a bit tongue and cheek-- although one has to wonder about a guy who jokingly refers to belonging to the Communist Party of Bulgaria, a group which murdered thousands of people.)

But instead of answering the charges as to why he might have been perceived suspicious, he ignores them -- which is fine, but it doesn't make it any easier for TSA to do its job. A part of that job is to evaluate threats and Nick wasn't a threat, we know that now, but put yourself in the position of the TSA. Nick had visited half a dozen Muslim countries, one of which is on the State Department's list of terrorist sponsors. The TSA probably thought, "hmmm... why would somebody be visiting a war zone?" -- a thought which isn't all that unreasonable. (Hence the reasonable part of his search and seizure.)


And I don't have a hard time believing that Nick "hemmed and hawed" given that he's already changed his story about what he said to the TSA. To The Student Life Nick said he didn't know what his view point was on 9/11, but to The Philadelphia Inquirer he said that he was against it. Which is it?

He says he didn't "immediately go into a Glenn Beck at the mention of a 9/11, but you don't have to be a talk show host to say that 9/11 was a horrific attack. Really, you're in an airport being interrogated by the TSA and you're going to get political? How smart is that? Why does he have to politicize the murder of 3000 people? Couldn't he just have easily said something more forceful?

Nick quotes something from Blackstone about arrest, but what he lives out is this: the police can hold you for up to 24 hours without charge in police custody. When it comes to terrorism cases, the courts can authorize an extension of up to 28 days in police custody.

Remember, if Nick's to be believed, he was held for five hours. The Constitution, which Nick seems to have discovered now that it suits his ACLU lawsuit, allows for reasonable curtailments of people's liberty. The Constitution is not a suicide pact.

Jesse Jackson Post Picked Up By FoxNation

My piece on Jesse Jackson's visit to Claremont McKenna got picked up by FoxNation -- and receives nearly three hundred comments, including those on the original post.

It's time to keep exposing some of the Athenaeum's radical guests to the harsh light because, as Justice Brandeis put it, "sunlight is the best disinfectant."

No 7-Eleven? What's Wrong With The Town of Claremont Part II

Reason number 622 why the Town of Claremont is financially insane.

The Town of Claremont wants to increase taxes (or have a bond measure) to pay for their school system, but they don't want to attract businesses that'll pay for them? Instead, they'd rather forgo the $12,000 to $21,000 annual sales tax revenue from a 7-Eleven, thanks to the Planning Commission's 6-1 no vote on a 7-Eleven at the corner of Foothill Blvd. and Mills. (hat tip: Claremont Insider.)

The grounds for their no vote seems the height of NIMBYism.

I quote from The Daily Bulletin:

Commissioner Jeff Hammill said one of the letters he received was against the project because it would bring people who drink alcohol, eat junk food and smoke cigarettes.

Gasp! You mean, college students?! (My bet, this being Claremont, what the letter writer really meant was low-class people and we absolutely cannot have any of those dirty, dirty low-class people in this town, can we?)

Of course, do remember, you tax things that are inelastic (i.e. addictive goods) because the burden of it will fall more heavily on the consumers, than the producers, meaning a more stable tax revenue for the town of Claremont, than say, expensive dinners or Yogurtland. (Which, by the way, is more addictive than cigarettes.)

Are Parts of the ASCMC Constitution Illegal?

California's Leonard Law gives the same free speech protections to students at private colleges that it does to people on the street.

So why does ASCMC's Constitution ban campaigning on the internet? And allow such a huge advantage to incumbents who get to use the distribution lists to up their name recognition?

Here's the selection:

iv. Candidates may not generate and/or use distribution lists over any Claremont McKenna College e-mail system.

v. Candidates may not use any online social networks (for example, Facebook, or MySpace) to encourage others to vote for themselves or to vote in general.

As I've already mentioned, this first rule benefits incumbents, who curiously enough seem to have a big party that coincides right with election day nearly every year. In effect, they are spending a lot more than the $50.00 limit to elect themselves by using other people's money on parties that they run.

I wonder if I announced to run for ASCMC office, does my writing on a private blog violate this ASCMC rule? I hope not, but if it does, I'm willing to challenge it.

Jesse Jackson Says "Unenforced Civil Rights Law" To Blame For Economic Woes

I wrote another op-ed for Big Government. This time it was about Jesse Jackson and his speech before Claremont McKenna. Here's a selection from it.

Naturally, Jackson ignored his own role in housing crisis. That he made his argument against banks at one of the schools that produces the most investment bankers in the country did not go unnoticed – however. Those hoping to listen to watch his entire speech can watch it here.

Jackson decried the “biggest shift of wealth in American history in the last 9 months.” He assailed Obama’s so-called spending freeze. “We’ll freeze the rich in their wealth and the poor in their poverty. . . . Freeze? They have already frozen modifications of home foreclosures.” And he applauded Roosevelt’s “direct investment in the poor” and for “breaking up their ability to be indifferent to the poor.” “Banks serve at the privilege of the state and their mission is to lend and invest,” he said, not presumably to get paid back.

Of course much of the speech sounded like the usual socialist rhetoric, which he claimed Martin Luther King Jr. was trying to “take us there” – wherever there is.

Some of my favorites of these sorts were:

• “Today, too few got too much”;
• “The wealthy are wealthy not because they are working hard, not because they are smart, but because there is simply a shift of wealth from working class people to the rich.”
• The first step [to ending poverty] at home is to enforce the law. Some of the poverty is driven by unenforced civil rights law. If the banks were not allowed to circumvent fair lending laws and the community reinvestment act, to target communities on the basis of race. If they had had to honor Title 6 of the Equal Employment Act, contract compliance, affirmative action, we’d have a fairer distribution of resources.”

Yikes! I hope you like it.

HMC Alum Dead at 31 From Tesla Plane Crash

Andrew Ingram, 31, of Harvey Mudd and Tesla, died in a horrific plane crash earlier this week.

I didn't know Andrew and I don't know anyone who did, but there was much to admire in him, thanks to this portrait of him in Palo Alto Online News.

It was at Tesla where the young engineer finally got a chance to combine all three of his passions: music, cars and "green" technology. His assignments at Tesla included, but weren't limited to, making sure the car's elaborate electrical systems didn't interfere with the stereo sound.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk described Ingram on the company's website as "passionate about electronics and exquisite audio systems" and "eager to lend a hand wherever it was needed, from marketing to manufacturing."

Brusco, who last saw Ingram on Monday, agreed. Two days before the crash, they took a 20-mile bike ride near Morgan Hill. Brusco said Tesla was the dream job for the young, green-minded engineer. Ingram has always been eco-conscious, Brusco said. Once, in junior high, he even created a model house powered entirely by windmills.

"He was totally in his element at Tesla," Brusco said. "He was working with cars, working with audio and doing something that was good for the world."

CMS Women's Golf Team Responds to Tiger Woods' Statement

CBS had a two-minute segment which featured some of the women of the CMS golf team, responding to Tiger Woods statement the other day. The reaction was very, very strong, with at least one of them crying. Have a look here.

I wonder, sometimes, if we might be better off if we all shed ourselves of our role models when we hit adolescence. Perhaps it is easier said then done, but we might avoid a lot of heart break. Tiger is only a man, and men make mistakes. What is it about our culture that tries to elevate them above ourselves? Talent is not license, much as some might believe it to be.

Poor Scoring, Shenanigans at Hub Quiz

My team the other night actually did well in Hub Quiz -- we had 41 points -- but for whatever reason our last two rounds were not scored at all. Worse yet, we had two points deducted because someone didn't come and pick up our score sheet. Seems rather selective to me, but I let it go. (Kenley Turville, the organizer of the event, initially said that she was going to dequalify that entire round for us -- it was the music round, so there were double the points -- but we were about to leave in protest and she walked back from that.)

So instead of the 41 points we had last night, we were scored at only 32. My team was so disgusted that they just got up and left. We know this because we score every single question after the fact. We were also pretty upset that we still haven't received the gift cards we won last week.

Correction: Nico says that he wasn't cheating and that he had been studying up on the Olympics. I find that plausible, but I think that they should have avoided the improprieties of it. I regret using the words "straight up" cheating and apologize to Nico and his team.

I understand that we're not a particularly popular team given our domination of Hub Quiz last semester. But what I can't figure out is that we have another team -- Nico Brancolini's team that was straight up cheating. They were using a computer throughout the first two rounds and should have been disqualified, but Nico went up and whispered to Kenley and lo and behold, they wound up winning.

Kenley says she checked their history after the fact, but apparently she hasn't considered that they could have deleted it, used Firefox instead of Internet Explorer or Safari (or vis versa) or searched incognito on Chrome.

What makes this so tough to deal with is that Kenley is a friend of mine. I helped her last semester multiple times in a class of hers that she took. When I explained to her at the end of the night that we, in fact, had tied for second place, she told me to go away. She said, "You didn't win this week, Charles, go away."

I wish Hub Quiz would bring back the whiteboard so we could see things much more fairly and efficiently. We deserve it.

Chuck DeVore CMC '85 at CPAC

Chuck DeVore gave a great 3 minute or so speech to CPAC the other night about how progressivism, sent to the rest of the country by California, has been so dangerous to our constitutional liberties. Have a look above.

CMC Alum Marlo Lewis Skewers Al Gore With Song

My Big Government Piece on Nick George; Janet Napolitano Speaking at Pomona Commencement

According to The Student Life, part of the reason Janet Napolitano is being brought is L'affaire George. 

Here's what Oxtoby had to say: 

“She’s going to be an interesting and timely person to be speaking at graduation because of the issues around immigration and, from a Pomona perspective, the Nick George story about homeland security,” Pomona College President David Oxtoby said.

Of course we already know that Pomona offers tuition breaks to illegal immigrants, but not legal immigrants, so we likely know how this is going to shake out. 

As for George, well, have a look at a piece I wrote for Big Government titled, "Dear T.S.A: Please Profile Liberal Arts Students." Here's a short selection. I begin by quoting Daniel Rubin.

A federal agent sizing up Nick George might peg him as Most Likely to be Recruited by the CIA. He’s a physics major at a top college, is minoring in Middle Eastern studies, speaks Arabic, has lived in Jordan, and is adventurous enough to have backpacked through Sudan and Egypt.

Or rather, here’s what the federal agent could have thought instead.

• Physics major? Possibly knows how to make a bomb.

• Went to Sudan? One of the world’s most vibrant terrorist training camps is located there. (Mahmoud Ahmadinejad once called Sudan the second home of the “dear, pious and revolutionary brothers.”)
• Middle Eastern studies? Right, because Columbia’s Middle Eastern studies department isn’t a hotbed of radicalism. Oh wait? It is?

New Poll Shows DeVore Narrowly Trailing Boxer

People have long maintained that I am insane for believing that Chuck DeVore will win the California U.S. Senate race. People said the same thing to me when I said that Scott Brown would win or that Marco Rubio would win in Florida. (Yes, I know it's pending, but have you seen the polls?) People don't really say that I'm nuts, at least as far as political predictions are concerned anymore.

Today, Rasmussen released a poll showing Chuck DeVore down by only 5 points -- which compares very favorable to Campbell and Fiorina, each down four points. With such a close difference, can Republicans really afford to elect R.I.N.O.s like Fiorina and Campbell? I hope not. Here's the mention from Rasmussen:

Boxer leads still state Assemblyman Chuck Devore, 47% to 42%. Six percent (6%) prefer some other candidate in that match-up, and five percent (5%) are undecided. In January, Boxer held a 46% to 40% advantage over Devore. In November, she led Devore by 10 points.

George Will has already laid out how he thinks he's going to win the nomination, which I wrote about here.

Here's how I think it's going to happen.

The California primary is in the summer. Add in the fact that there's a closed primary, and you have a very, very good chance that the tea party movement of which DeVore's affiliated will get the turnout we need to nominate DeVore. In a debate, DeVore will crush Boxer.

Phi Beta Cons Mentions My Zaid Shakir Post

The 220 comment blog post I wrote for Big Government about how the Muslim Student Association and Arabic Department-sponsored speaker, Zaid Shakir thinks guns, not jihad, caused the Ft. Hood Massacre got a mention on National Review's Phi Beta Cons, my favorite education blog today, thanks to George Leef.

My Big Government Op-ed on Jamaica Kincaid's Anti-Christian, Nonsensical Remarks

Here's a brief excerpt from the op-ed I wrote for Big Government. (I can't wait until Andrew Breitbart starts Big Education!)

[Kincaid's essay], A Small Place, is written about her native Antigua and attacks British civilization and capitalism itself. The most revealing selection from that essay? Here it is, from pages 36 to 37 as she is discussing that the white colonizer is to blame for the very corrupt government of Antigua.

You will forget your part in the whole setup, that bureaucracy is one of your inventions, that Gross National Product is one of your inventions, and all the laws that you know mysteriously favour you. Do you know why people like me are shy about being capitalists? Well, it’s because we, for as long as we have known you, were capital, like bales of cotton and sacks of sugar, and you were the commanding, cruel capitalists, and the memory of this is so strong, the experience so recent, that we can’t bring ourselves to embrace this idea that you think so much of. As for what we were like before we met you, I no longer care. No periods of time over my ancestors held sway, no documentation of complex civilizations, is any comfort to me. Even if I really came from people who were living like monkeys in trees, it was better to be that than what happened to me, what I became after I met you.

And so yes, she teaches writing at a college whose motto is “civilization prospers with commerce,” even though it looks like she’s in favor of neither.

I must say I'm getting somewhat addicted to writing for Big Government. It is such change to have people actually say positive things about me and my writing style, compared to the usual acrimony that my detractors stir up here on campus. Not that I condone all of the comments -- I certainly don't -- but it is nice once and awhile to realize that outside of this bubble, I might even be liked for what I write. But on second thought, that might reduce some of the fun of goring sacred (but oh, so secular) cows.

James Fallows on Ex-CGU Prez's Haiti Work

James Fallows recently blogged about former CGU president Robert Klitgaard's paper on the prospects of Haitian reconstruction.

Fallows (and by extension Klitgaard) makes the usual fallacy of the broken window when he suggests that this earthquake could give Haiti a fresh start.

I guess, but only if you believe that somehow government rebuilding efforts can be directed toward "good" ends. Public choice 101 would suggest otherwise.

ASMC Wastes More Money on White Party, Wedding Party

I already wrote about the $50,000 that the school is blowing on Lupe Fiasco. Agree or not about the performer -- why is it that all the performers are rap or hip hop, anyways? -- that's a lot of money. At $20 a ticket and 2500 seats, the concert barely breaks even -- and these things have a way of going far over cost.

Sources on the ASCMC budgeting committee say that the White Party will cost $15,000 and that the Wedding Party will cost between $25,000 and $30,000. (I happen to think that the White Party is money better spent for the entertainment purposes, especially if it includes a certain Scripps dean calling all of the members of the Class of 2010 racist. And the Wedding Party seems a ploy on behalf of a certain promoter to get elected VP than it does a genuine party. If I wanted to dress up and go to a Wedding-like thing, I would, you know, go to all of my weird Bostonian friends weddings. I digress.)

Oh, and the money allocated for Senate this semester? A whopping $8000. Yes, the group that funds most of the clubs on campus receives only $8000. Now I have my criticisms of Senate -- namely that people who show up once get to vote money out of other people's pockets, giving a premium to people who don't value their time or to clubs to stack the Senate with people that'll vote for their causes without regard to the common good.

But doesn't anyone else find this dispartity more than a little odd?

No Walgreens For Us

An ordinance may stop a drive-through Walgreen's from being built in this town.

More evidence that the town of Claremont is ridiculous, if you needed any after they banned beauty shops from having a larger store front windows.

Why No Mention of George's Other Major?

I have just finished watching the ACLU video where Nick George just mentions that he is studying physics. Have a look at it here.



Could it be that there have been a lot of radicals who have been trained in Middle Eastern Studies?

Mark Steyn Discusses Pomona Student Nick George's Airport Imbroglio

Mark Steyn, who was recently heralded as one of the best writers on the Right, wrote a rather scathing column for National Review in which he took up the case of Nick George. I'll have something in the coming days or so about my views on the Nick George situation, but I thought I'd leave you with a few paragraph selections from Steyn's column. I have bolded the best sections. Thanks to everyone who directed this column to my attention.

Let’s turn to an item from the Philadelphia Inquirer. A young American with a white-bread name (“Nick George”) and a clean-cut mien returns from Jordan to resume his studies at Pomona College in California, and gets handcuffed and detained for five hours by U.S. Immigration and Philly police. Why? Well, he had Arabic-language flash cards in his pocket. Also, upon his return to the United States, his hair was shorter than on his Pennsylvania driver’s license. “That is an indication sometimes,” explained Lt. Louis Liberati, “that somebody may have gone through a radicalization.” Really? As Nick George’s boomer mom remarked, once upon a time long hair was a sign of radicalization. But now it’s just a sign that you’re an all-American spaced out doofus who’ll grow up to congratulate himself for driving an Audi TDI.

At any rate, the coiffure set off a Code Red alert, and Nick George found himself being asked: “How do you feel about 9/11?”

According to the Inquirer’s Daniel Rubin, “He said he hemmed and hawed a bit. ‘It’s a complicated question,’ he told me by phone.” However, young Nick ended up telling his captors, “It was bad. I am against it.”

My, that’s big of you.

Take it as read that the bozos at the airport called this one wrong. The problem is not that Nick George, his radical haircut notwithstanding, is a jihadist eager to self-detonate on a transatlantic flight. The problem is that he is an entirely typical American college student — one for whom 9/11 is “a complicated question.” After all, to those reared in an educational system where the late Howard Zinn’s People’s History of the United States (now back in the bestseller lists) is conventional wisdom, such a view is entirely unexceptional. It’s hardly Nick’s fault that the banal groupthink of every American campus gets you pulled over for secondary screening when you’re returning from Amman.

America can survive a few psychotic Islamic terrorists flying planes into skyscrapers. Whether it can survive millions of its own citizens mired in the same insipid conformo-radicalism as Nick George is another matter.

Pomona Student's Lawsuit Won't Make Us Any Safer

In the coming days, I'll have something on Big Government about Nick George PO '10 and the ACLU, but until then, you'll have to read this absolutely masterful op-ed that was featured on RealClearPolitics.com. The title pretty much says it all, "A Sure-Fire Legal Recipe for Airport Insecurity," but here are three paragraphs that must be read.

Last August, Nicholas George, 22, was getting ready to fly from Pennsylvania to Pomona College in Claremont, Calif., when TSA agents found Arabic-English flash cards in his pocket -- the 200 cards included such words as "bomb" and "explosive" -- two stereo speakers in his carry-on bag, a Jordanian student ID card and a passport that showed he had visited Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Malaysia and Sudan. TSA agents detained George for questioning. They determined he was not a security threat and released him less than five hours later. Now, he is suing.

Of course the ACLU is representing George. The group explained in a press release that episodes like George's "may actually make us less safe, by diverting vital resources and attention away from true security threats."

Nonsense. If ever there was a person you want the TSA to look at very carefully, it's a young male who has Arabic flashcards with words like "bomb" in his pocket, studied in Jordan and recently spent time in Sudan, a country that the State Department believes to sponsor terrorism. Add the fact that George had stereo speakers -- remember an explosive-laden tape recorder was used to bring down Pam Am Flight 103 in 1988 -- in his carry-on luggage, and it would amount to professional malpractice if TSA and FBI agents did not search and question George.

Well said. Commentators, you can now begin calling me a "racist," an "Islamophobe," or whatever else your multicultural masters tell you to call people who think.

My Big Government Post on Bill Delahunt

I wrote a post for Big Government today about the corrupt Massachusetts congressman, Bill Delahunt, who may be retiring this year and what it means for the rise of the Massachusetts Right. Have a look at it and tell me what you think. Oh, and did I mention that it was linked to by Instapundit?!

Resident Advisors In College Park? Claremont Conservative Confirms

The administration has apparently purchased an apartment block at College Park where it will house students next semester. Sources tell The Claremont Conservative that students not living in the school-owned building will not have to submit to the R.A.'s rules.

There are several problems with this purchase, as I see it.

1. Current applicants for R.A. had no knowledge that they would be contenders for a potential posh apartment just a stone's throw from campus, with all expenses paid. Many more students would likely have applied to be an R.A. if they knew of this. Have a look at the amenities here. The video tour is rather cool and makes me wish I had given R.A.-dom a thought, not that I would ever get it, of course.

2. How might this affect our 1400 students policy? If the students are not housed on campus, do they still count towards the total? Is the school-owned block campus or not campus? What rules will apply? Which rules will not?

3. What will happen to overall room and board tuition? We all know that the college dorms are not run the most efficiently. How will this affect the College Park dorms?

Jamaica Kincaid's Anti-Christian Remarks

Hate against Christians is not OK

It's becoming increasingly clear that Jamaica Kincaid embarrasses herself and this institution whenever she opens her mouth. (Before you insist that I call her Professor Kincaid, remember she only has a high school degree.)

That's a pretty tough charge, but her most recent comments to students at Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne highlight why she should never have been brought to teach her. Here are a few paragraphs from an article describing her visit.

While speaking to the media Thursday, the author and professor started reflecting on a trip to Haiti two years ago and wondered why it took an earthquake for the United States to pay attention to the impoverished nation.

An IPFW employee responded by saying there were a number of American church groups and mission organizations that had been in the country for years trying to help.

“I think, on the whole, church groups should be banned from these places,” said Kincaid, a native of Antigua.

1. The United States and the international community has spent $4 billion in foreign aid payments to Haiti since 1990. U.S. contributions from 1990 to 2005 totaled $1.5 billion. There are only 8 million Haitians, so you do the math. And that's not talking about all the money given since. So the idea that the U.S. hasn't given Haiti anything is just not true. You can argue -- and believe me, I do -- that foreign aid hasn't done anything of good in these places, but you can't argue that it hasn't been tried.

2. There have been million pouring into Haiti from church groups. As of January 21, 2010, some $305 million has been raised to help Haiti, much of it from religious sources. Allow me to quote from the Chronicle of Philanthropy's editor, Stacy Palmer,

"You've got a bad economy and a disaster outside of the U.S.," said Stacy Palmer, editor of the Chronicle of Philanthropy. "It makes sense that lots of people gave to the Katrina disaster in the U.S., but to give outside of the U.S. like this is remarkable, especially at a time with 10% unemployment."

Just imagine how bad it would be if religious groups weren't giving. But that's not all.

Many Haitians follow Voodoo as their religion. Christian groups don’t like it and are only in the country to try to spread Christianity, she said.

“Their main reason for going there is to eradicate this belief,” Kincaid said.

Kincaid said she was worried her sentiments would offend people. She said she hadn’t planned to talk about Haiti at all but couldn’t help herself.

No, their main reason is concern for the poor. "Couldn't help herself" to be bigoted against an entire group of people trying to do the right thing?

Of course the truly laughable moment comes at the end of the article:

One student asked Kincaid how she balances writing with the job of getting published and making appearances. She advised the students they need to write for themselves, not an audience or money.

That's funny. Why is it then that curriculum committee approved a course with the idea of leveraging Ms. Kincaid's contacts as they position themselves in the publishing world?

George Will Predicts CMCer Chuck DeVore to Win Republican Nomination

Here's the relevant selection from his Townhall.com article. He outlines how DeVore can -- and I happen to think -- will win.

Campbell leads Fiorina 30 to 25 in the Field Poll, with 39 percent undecided. A third candidate, Chuck DeVore, a state assemblyman from Southern California (Orange County), had just 6 percent, but might be the nominee.

California's electorate is about 45 percent Democratic, 31 percent Republican, 20 percent "decline to state" and about 5 percent affiliated with minor parties. The June primary will be open to Republicans and "decline to states," but probably about 15 percent of those unaffiliated voters who will participate in the primary will request Republican ballots. So, incandescent conservatives among California's 5.2 million Republicans are apt to determine the Senate nominee. The most conservative candidate is DeVore, 47, an aerospace executive and lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserve.

Last year, Campbell supported Proposition 1A, which would have extended for two years the largest state tax increase in U.S. history. This lost 2-to-1; it lost in every county and even in this collectivist city. Campbell also favored increasing the gas tax by 32 cents. Fiorina has cited the "cap-and-trade" legislation of John Kerry D-Mass., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., as praiseworthy bipartisanship. DeVore has no such deviations from conservative orthodoxy.

No right-to-life candidate has won statewide since 1998 (for secretary of state). A crusty contributor who has been supporting California Republicans since Richard Nixon in the 1960s recently told DeVore, who is pro-life, that social issues should be peripheral. DeVore replied that when the GOP was born in the 1850s, it resembled the Whig Party except for a large social issue -- slavery, the practice of allowing some people to choose the status of other people. DeVore thinks abortion involves the same practice.

Boxer supports an "absolute right" to abortion -- public funding, partial-birth abortions, no requirement of parental notification, all positions opposed by majorities. But because of California's parlous fiscal condition and other emergencies -- a water shortage aggravated by government solicitude for a supposedly endangered smelt has caused the destruction of tens of thousands of fruit and nut trees -- social issues will, DeVore thinks, lose some saliency.

Boxer is arguably the most liberal senator and her job approval is under 50 percent. DeVore thinks voters generally are biased against someone seeking a fourth term -- California has had only three four-term senators -- if there is a credible opponent.

Furthermore, DeVore believes some ballot initiatives this November might help him. If there is another vote on gay marriage, that could energize conservatives. And a referendum on "paycheck protection" (requiring unions to seek members' permission to spend dues on political activities) would cause labor to spend many millions that would thus be unavailable for the Senate contest.

When addressing Tea Party audiences, DeVore asks how many of his listeners have ever been politically active before. Only about 10 percent raise their hands. Conservatives everywhere were dispirited by the Bush administration; California conservatives are doubly demoralized as the failed Schwarzenegger experiment expires. Politics is supposed to be fun and for California conservatives, voting for DeVore would be the first fun in many a moon.

My Interview with Future U.S. Congressman Craig McPherson CMC '06

A Clear-Headed Heartland Conservative: Craig McPherson CMC ’06

Craig McPherson’s running for Kansas’s third congressional district with a generous helping of the education he picked up at Claremont McKenna and at the Henry Salvatori Center, where he was an RA. Combing with a healthy love of the American Founding, the rigor that comes with PPE tutorials, and a law and economics education from George Mason, can the 26-year old from Kansas win the nomination and the seat in a crowded primary field?

In 2006, McPherson served as the campaign manager of Republican Kansas Third congressional hopeful, Chuck Ahner. Ahner was trounced by incumbent, Dennis Moore by the widest margin of Moore’s 10 year political career.

But 2010 is not 2006. McPherson is running for the seat his old boss lost in what is shaping up to be a national referendum on the big government schemes of the Obama administration and its Democratic allies in Congress.

The race to replace Democratic incumbent Dennis Moore is heating up. At last count, eight Republicans have emerged, with McPherson announcing in late January.

CJ: You were a PPE student at Claremont. Do you feel as if that prepared you for a congressional run?

CM: PPE is really excellent for delving very thoroughly into subject matters with tutorials with professors. There’s that interdisciplinary connection. A lot of what our current congressman lack is an understanding of what leads to economic growth.

They might be strong on some issues, but they don’t really have any core philosophy. A lot of them don’t understand economics and what they can do becomes limited when they get into office. Without core principles, it is easy for them to become corrupted by the ways of Washington.

In addition to that, there’s also the CMC curriculum, particularly the study of the founding of the nation, which I got through my government major, and taking classes with the government department. That core philosophy of how the country was founded, the ideals that were a part of it, will help give me a background that will keep me rooted as a congressman.

CJ: You and I share something in common – we were both Junior Fellows of the Salvatori Center. Who did you work with at Salvatori and what would you say about that experience?

At the time, there were three professors affiliated with Salvatori – Professors Kesler, Bessette, and Ralph Rossum and I worked with all three of them. We worked on a lot of different stuff, but one that stands out right near the beginning was a project of applying the Federalist papers to Iraq and the efforts to form a new government there. We dealt with the questions of whether or not the American principles of self-government and democracy could be translated into a developing world where the United States, with its allies, was trying to establish a republic.

The Salvatori center stands out as a place where they apply the principles of the American founding to a more practical reality. We often don’t look back to what the American founding was all about – liberty and individual rights. Salvatori does excellent work integrating the modern political world with our history.

CJ: George Mason Law School is known for its free-market, libertarian approach to issues of the law. How does that inform the kind of work you would be doing were you elected to congress?

CM: That’s one of the things that attracted me to George Mason. One of the big questions that seldom gets asked is is a law efficient? What are the incentives created? Ultimately how the actors will react to the legislation. That’s something that’s missing at most of our law schools. They feel as if they are entitled to special treatment from the law. Different sides all have legitimate purposes. George Mason really looks into those kinds of questions.

Law and economics will definitely influence my actions when I’m elected to Congress. It will help me think about the trade offs that occur with every piece of legislation and not to get carried away by the emotion, as we craft law that is both equitable and efficient.

CJ: What did you do while working for the White House and the Department of Justice?

CM: In 2004 election cycle, I worked at the White House under Associate White House Political Director Paul Dyck. I worked on eight Southern states – from Florida to Texas. I wrote policy briefs, updates on the political environment in each of those states trying to look at what the important questions were and what the constituents there were concerned about. Those briefs would ultimately go through the chain and then to either cabinet level secretaries or the vice president or president so that they knew what was going on on the ground and what the people of those areas cared about.

In the Department of Justice, I worked in the Office of Legal Policy. In legal policy, I worked with people who were affiliated with each of the DOJ subdivisions. Another important part of my work there was to look into the background and issues surrounding potential judicial nominees and United States attorneys.

CJ: If elected, you will be one of the youngest congressmen in history, what makes you qualified to be a U.S. congressman? What do you say to criticisms that could be made of you is that you are too young?

I think a lot of what the people of the Third District want to know is what I offer and what I bring to the table. There are some 25 year olds who should not be congressman, and there are 35 year olds, and 50 year olds who should also not be congressmen.

I, however, have had a set of experiences that would be an asset to the people of Kansas.

For instance, I grew up in an entrepreneurial household where we were all wrapped up in that family business. Our dinner table conversations dealt with what they were dealing with in their business and it gave me an appreciation for how the government can effect small business, how certain regulations can be over burdensome, and how it affected the basic struggles that my parents had. That definitely informs my philosophy. It is part of the reason I went to law school, to help understand just how important the law has become in an overly litigious society. I would ask voters to look not so much at my age, but at those experiences in the private sector, as well as my study of the American founding that will make me a good advocate of the people of Kansas.

The name of my parents firm was Aviation Systems Maintenance Incorporated. The firm is no longer in existence, as it was sold, but it installed and maintained instrument landing systems at airports. Basically, the landing systems tell the planes how to land and the exact place and angle at which to land. On the job, I became factory certified on Automated Weather Observation Systems, which help the pilot know for example when the winds are gusting or what the visibility is like. I also literally did construction. I went out on teams and we installed these Automated Weather Observation Systems. I operated heavy equipment, did masonry, some electric work, really a little bit of everything. I did all that in addition to the business side of the company.

CJ: The field is pretty crowded for Kansas’s Third Congressional district. Why should voters look to you, instead of someone else?

I think one thing we are definitely going to see. Regardless of what happens with the GOP – whether or not we recapture the House, a lot of the country is going to be turning to the Republicans to produce alternatives to the “big government is always the answer” policies of the Obama White House.

It’s important for Republicans to craft those alternatives so that they can become a strong party with strong ideas. The Republicans had control of both branches and the public lost their trust. The Republicans became Big Government Republicans and helped bring about the meteoric rise of Obama and the recapture of Congress. Republicans had not done a good job and the American public lost their trust in Republican. It is time to bring the GOP back to their fiscal roots, and remind them that they are the Party of limited government.

Looking at the primary field, voters have to analyze what they get. They have to analyze what they can get by nominating each of the contestants. There are several individuals that have been career politicians and have little to show for it.

My background is in small business, in law and economics, and in the American founding and its principles. When I am a congressman, I plan to be a leader of that new ideal of that Republican Party that isn’t wrapped up in that normal politics and moves the party forward for the kind of progress we need to see. We need a leader to know what it’s like to be outside of the political system.

CJ: You wrote your thesis on President Bush’s response to 9-11 and American exceptionalism, with Elizabeth Edwards Spalding. Do you agree with the president’s handling of national security issues since inauguration? What would you do differently?

The current president is far too apologetic. America needs a strong sense of self and a strong vision for its place in the world.

Obviously I support the president as leader of our nation. As a congressman, I will help shape a stronger foreign policy, by emphasizing the importance of national defense by investing in new technologies and U.S. policies that strengthen ourselves and our allies. America really always has been a shining city on the hill. We are an example for the world to follow, with our emphasis on individual rights and liberty. Free market principles and the American ideal can be translated throughout the world, not necessarily through force, but through the force of their example. The president should understand those principles, not run away from them. He should look to those principles as a means of helping bringing about prosperity and progress.

CJ: Anything else I should know?

CM: That’s about it. Look into the race. I welcome the support of all fellow CMCers.