They Don’t Give a Damn About the Children, Exhibit #3,972

It’s now been revealed that James Holmes’ psychiatrist warned school authorities he was dangerous a month before the Aurora theater massacre. Every time one of these massacres takes place, it turns out that someone recognized the killer’s derangement and tried to warn officials (often academic) – only to be ignored. Every time.
If our leaders really cared about “the children,” this is what they’d be screaming about, not how to take even more guns from normal Americans.

Around the Web

Yes, thanks to the ol’ college grindstone, blogging has been, and will probably continue to be, a little on the light side. But I’ll still try to update every now and then.
It would appear Barack Obama has executive experience after all—an 8-year stint as director of the Joyce Foundation. David Hardy dissects the organization’s attacks on the Second Amendment during Obama’s tenure.

The vile Alan Colmes (who received
a well-deserved berating at the hands of Dick Morris the other night) has stumbled across the story of Greg Howard, a Florida middle-school teacher who told his students that Obama’s “Change” tagline was an acronym for “Can you Help a N***** Get Elected.” Howard has betrayed the public trust, is unfit to educate the community’s children, and should be fired. Period. Not that the Left will recognize intellectual consistency, or abandon their double-standards on public-school propagandists.

More evidence that Michelle Obama is going to be just a terrific First Lady.

Peggy Noonan
isn’t sure who she’s voting for. Sorry, Peggy. We’ll have to ask you to turn in your Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy ™ membership card and decoder ring.

The UW Madison Marching Band “
has been suspended while allegations of hazing, alcohol abuse and sexual misconduct are investigated.” I did competitive marching band in high school, and almost went to Madison. While I miss marching, I’m gladder than ever that I chose Hillsdale instead.

Guess the Obamas
knew Bill Ayers a little better than they claimed (just don’t tell anyone about it. What are you, a racist?).

Recap: Huck, Mitt & Fred

Looks like I spoke too soon about the potency of Mike Huckabee’s campaign—his standing has improved pretty dramatically in recent weeks. I still can’t see him winning the nomination, but I can see him further dividing the cultural Right, thereby helping Giuliani’s chances.

Of course, once people take notice of you, the warts get noticed too—and Huck’s got warts in spades.
This Hot Air post links to a lot of the details, and there’s even reason to question his credibility on his main/only selling point, social conservatism. Most recently, Huck’s been taking flak for his foreign policy vision, which is peppered with complaints to the effect of “George Bush has been too mean,” both to the international community and to Iran (yes, that Iran).

Meanwhile, Mitt Romney has picked up a couple major endorsements: National Review
makes a compelling argument that not only is he the best man for the job, but his nomination is necessary to keeping the Republican coalition together; and Judge Robert Bork trusts Romney to shape the Supreme Court as President. Mitt’s much-speculated-about “Faith in America” speech (transcript here, video here) was outstanding, as well. From religion’s actual role in our nation’s past to its proper role in her present, he brought these truths to the public eye with eloquence and passion.

It hasn’t all been clear skies for Mitt, though. Romney’s recent Meet the Press appearance
highlighted his past willingness to consider a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, as well the fact that he stands by his support for an assault weapons ban and the Brady Bill.

On immigration, I’d be lying if I said Romney’s changes of opinion don’t give me pause, and I don’t begrudge anyone for mistrusting him. But again, there are also reasons to be wary of his opponents (check the Hot Air link above for the dirt on Huck, and my archives for Fred Thompson). Speaking of immigration, though, Romney’s not the only one who’s seen the light—here’s the “consistent conservative”
arguing for a path to citizenship, every bit as recently as Mitt, if not more so.

As for guns, Romney is wrong. But every member of the Republican field is lacking in some way. It’s our job, then, to take a hard look at our priorities as conservatives. If gun rights are your number-one issue, then by all means, vote for Fred. I’m a full-spectrum conservative who understands and values the right to bear arms as well as the next guy. But I consider one million abortions annually a greater injustice than assault weapon bans, so the right to life takes precedence—and
there (as well as marriage), Thompson is lacking. Further, as I’ve argued before, the fact that Mitt is sticking to his guns (no pun intended) seems to run counter to the idea that he’s a phony who abandons his opinions for expediency.