Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D.

Here.

Here is Robin Wright's report on the Ohio terrorist attack.

To the Editor:

We all know sore losers, but President-elect Donald Trump has reflected an unusual form of behavior, that of a sore winner. We try to teach our children to accept defeat with dignity as well as disappointment, and I wonder what they think of our future leader who cannot even bring himself to be gracious in victory.

DAVID NOCHIMSON

Santa Monica, Calif.

Note from KBJ: What in the world is this man talking about? It would help if he gave even one example, but perhaps he cannot.

Double Vision (1978). John Sullivan's favorite band.

This is hilarious. (Thanks to Mark Spahn for the link.)

I had another safe and productive month on the bike. I rode 14 times in 30 days, for a total of 480.2 miles. That gives me 5,807 miles for the year, which is only 398.9 miles from my goal of 6,205.9. I'm on track for my best mileage year ever (out of 36). I need only 12 more rides of 34.3 miles (in 31 days) to break the record, which I set in 1990 at the age of 33. Piece o' cake.

Addendum: Conditions today were quite nice. The wind chill was 51º when I left my house and 59º when I returned. The sky was clear blue. The only thing I would change is the wind, which was stiff (11 to 13 miles per hour) out of the northwest. I listened to Rush Limbaugh for about two hours and then switched to music.

Here.

Here.

Donald Trump tweeted the following:

Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag – if they do, there must be consequences – perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail!

The mainstream media are in a tizzy. "Doesn't Trump realize that the First Amendment of the Constitution protects flag-burning?" In 1989, in Texas v. Johnson, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the First Amendment of the Constitution protects flag-burning. Four of the nine justices, including liberal icon John Paul Stevens, dissented. The question is far from closed. Just as the Supreme Court may one day overrule Roe v. Wade (1973), and just as it overruled Bowers v. Hardwick (1986), it may one day overrule Texas v. Johnson (1989). I read Trump as saying two things: first, that the Supreme Court was wrong (as a legal matter) to interpret the Constitution so that it protects flag-burning; and second, that he will appoint justices who will overrule Texas v. Johnson. There is nothing radical or even unusual in what he tweeted.

Addendum: Anyone who thinks that Kid Rock is desecrating the flag needs a dictionary.

Addendum 2: Charles Krauthammer just conflated (1) 'x is unconstitutional' and (2) 'x has been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court'. By that logic, the Court could never overrule itself without acting unconstitutionally! What a moron. Krauthammer is a medical doctor with no legal credentials. He literally doesn't know what he's talking about.

Addendum 3: Hillary Clinton supported a ban on flag-burning. This will make leftist heads explode.

Nate Silver thinks it's inaccurate to describe Donald Trump's electoral-college victory as a landslide. The Oxford American Dictionary and Language Guide (1999) defines "landslide" as "an overwhelming majority for one side in an election." Trump received 56.8% of the 538 electoral votes, compared to 43.1% for Hillary Clinton. That's a gap of 13.7%. Is it overwhelming? I don't know. It's impressive, at the very least. I mean, it could have been 270 to 268, or 50.1% to 49.8%. What I find odd is Silver's resort to comparisons with other presidential elections. There is nothing in the concept of a landslide that prevents every election from being a landslide, so why would the fact that Trump's victory ranks 44th of 54 elections have any bearing on whether his victory is a landslide? Silver is grasping at straws. By the way, what was Silver's prediction? Did he foresee the Trump victory? No. Why anyone would pay attention to this dolt is beyond me.