“‘You’re next!’ This chant, at the victory celebration of the Democratic Socialists this week, was a message not for the oligarchs or the billionaires, but for House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and the Democratic establishment. They were threatening that Jeffries would be the next to lose his House seat to a socialist candidate. It was a scene that has recurred throughout history, as establishment leaders are overtaken by the very mobs they sought to use for their own purposes.” (06/27/26)
“Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic said on Saturday he would resign within weeks and the country will hold early presidential and parliamentary elections, following 18 months of anti-government protests. The announcement by Vucic, who has been in power as president or prime minister for 12 years, came amid persistent anti-corruption demonstrations led by students and triggered by the collapse of an awning at a railway station in the northern city of Novi Sad in November 2024, in which 16 people died. Protesters, opposition and rights groups allege the railway station disaster was a sign of broader government mismanagement of construction projects and corruption.” (06/27/26)
“Matthew Yglesias, Claire Ainsley, and Yascha Mounk debate whether progressives have abandoned the working-class voters they once claimed to represent.” (06/27/26)
“Most, if not all, libertarians know the parable of the wolves and the sheep: what Hawai’i did was that very thing: supposedly, a majority of Hawaiians don’t want to be around guns. And therefore, elected a majority of conscript parents (senators) and people’s representatives that also don’t like to have guns around, either. In a democracy, anything is theoretically possible if a majority votes for it. Even if that majority, for example, consists of 5,000,001 out of 10,000,000 voters. (And since there are no quorums for voting, and so many people either don’t vote or have their votes ignored, that ten million voters would be ‘served democratically’ if only 10% of the voters turned out and the vote was 500,001 to 499,999.) The wolves (well, voters) get to enjoy their choice: veal Parmasan or veal stew, but the sheep are dead and eaten regardless.” (06/27/26)
“Uber is adopting a more stringent background check process for its drivers, which will expand the kinds of criminal convictions that will disqualify them from driving or delivering for the company. The ridesharing firm has announced its new standard for background checks, shortly after its shareholders sued the company’s board of directors and executive officers. … The company will start implementing its updated background check, which it believes is the strongest in the industry, starting on Monday. Under the new rules, violent felonies that involve armed robbery, aggravated assault and arson, as well child abuse and endangerment, strangulation and stalking, will disqualify drivers, even if their record was more than seven years ago. Uber already doesn’t sign on interested people who had been convicted of sexual assault, sex crimes involving minors, sexual offenses, murder or homicide, kidnapping and terrorism.” (06/27/26)
“The Labour Party is united behind Andy Burnham as its next leader, two senior party figures have told the BBC. The party set out a timeline for a leadership contest following Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer’s resignation earlier this week, but there is scant evidence of support for any contenders other than Burnham. Former defence minister Al Carns has said a speech on Monday, in which Burnham will set out his economic policy, will decide whether he challenges him for the Labour leadership. Labour deputy leader Lucy Powell and Housing Secretary Steve Reed, who had stayed loyal to Sir Keir, both said that Labour MPs were backing a coronation of Burnham, rather than a contest.” (06/28/26)
Source: Washington Monthly
by Orville Vernon Burton & Armand Derfner
“The president’s challenge to birthright citizenship is more than unconstitutional, as the Supreme Court will probably hold—it’s crazy. Why? Because it would affect not just children born in the future—as it claims—but would threaten the citizenship of every living, native-born American, whether aged 25, 50, or 75. It would also mean that a U.S. birth certificate would be inadequate to prove American citizenship, thereby becoming almost useless. How can this be? It is all about two words: ‘prospective’ and ‘retrospective.’ The executive order may be ‘prospective,’ but the Constitution of the United States is not.” (06/26/26)
“So much about the technology has been draped in doomsday scenarios and Terminator movies. It’s hard sometimes to separate the impossible from the improbable. Even more difficult if you can’t tell if the technology is meant for the good of all or just aiming to be good for someone’s bottom line. Maybe, unlike in the ‘marihuana’ prohibition era, the scary warnings are valid. But now just as then, we need to separate fact from myth before setting policy.” (06/26/26)
