This study, with its unique approach, supplements other recent findings. Elaine Povich ... found that only 7 percent of all Washington correspondents voted for George H.W. Bush [in 1992]. More recently, John Tierney ... reported that only 8 percent of New York Times Washington correspondents thought George W. Bush would be a better president than John Kerry. As pointed out by Milyo and Groseclose, these studies further demonstrate that Washington correspondents are more leftist than any congressional district in the country."

Matthew A. Roberts

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21669

--

New Consensus?

 
From a court where intellectual harmony in recent decades could be measured on a range from fractured to feuding, an intriguing unanimity suddenly is springing forth. In Rumsfeld v. FAIR, the court on March 6 unanimously rejected the claim of some liberal law schools that having to choose between forgoing certain federal funds and allowing military recruiters on campus violated the schools' free speech rights. Writing his first high court opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts ruled that FAIR had 'attempted to stretch a number of First Amendment doctrines.' ...

Only the latest in a string of unanimous opinions, the Rumsfeld ruling sparked discussion: Is Justice Roberts ushering in a new era of collegiality on the court? ...

In 12 of its last 14 opinions, the court has either issued a unanimous or 'per curiam' (an opinion issued by the court as a body) ruling. In two more cases, all justices agreed with the majority, though separate, concurring opinions were filed. And in another two cases, only one justice -- Clarence Thomas -- dissented.

Lynn Vincent
World Magazine

http://www.worldmag.com/webextra/11637

--

Scalia’s Good Sense

Long known as the most quotable of the nine justices on the Supreme Court, Antonin Scalia turns out to be just as refreshing off the bench.

Speaking last week to a dinner of students and faculty at the New England School of Law, Scalia weighed in on the subject of judicial activism - especially on issues of societal values.

And some of the things he said about the collective wisdom of the nation's judges are surely things you don't hear every day from jurists.

"Anyone who thinks the country's most prominent lawyers reflect the views of the people needs a reality check," said Scalia. Today's judges, he said, are no more qualified than "Joe Sixpack" to decide the kind of moral questions that have roiled political debate for decades.

Which is why, he rightly noted, the proper entity to resolve such issues isn't the courts, but state legislatures - which (quite appropriately) better reflect the popular will.

Case in point: The battle in the early 20th century to give women the vote was won not in the Supreme Court but via a constitutional amendment, adopted by a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress and approved by two-thirds of the state legislatures.

And though it reflected a fundamental change in the nation's laws, that reform was nowhere near as radical a redefinition of society's long-held values as, say, same-sex marriage.

Decisions about such core social cornerstones, Scalia said, should be made by the elected voices of the people - not by a panel of robed justices, who have no inherent qualification to render judgment on issues of morality.

Yet "judicial hegemony," warns Scalia, "has replaced the public's right to decide important moral questions."

New York Post

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/editorial/61229.htm

--

Rediscovering the Renaissance

This is not a great century for the humanities. The great works that once were essential to define the educated man are barely tolerated in our great universities…
 
There are several reasons why…The humanities faculties…are usually riddled with political correctness, with courses taught by priggish tenured professors who are determined to persuade their students to think left rather than to think critically. This was the concern of Lawrence Summers, who was deposed as president of Harvard for trying to impart actual learning into the humanities as taught on the Charles….

Harvard is typical. David Horowitz describes in his new book, "The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America," how the problem has become pandemic on campus. "In the university in the social sciences and humanities there is no bottom line for bad ideas," he says. "In the real world a Marxist would be regarded as flat-earthist, yet in the university they occupy positions as professors of history,  political science and even (at the University of Massachusetts) economists."

Suzanne Fields
Townhall

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/suzannefields/ 2006/03/20/190449.html