Wall Street Journal editorial cites me on "Harriet Tubman is an inspired choice to replace Andrew Jackson"

In an editorial in the Wall Street Journal, they mention a tweet that I had on Harriet Tubman and concerns that her choice may be a politically correct move.

John Lott makes a pithy case for the contrary. An expert on the Second Amendment and sometime contributor to these pages, Mr. Lott notes that Tubman’s life is a rebuke to PC assumptions. As Mr. Lott tweeted after Mr. Lew made the announcement, “On $20 bill, Ds replace Andrew Jackson, a founding father of D Party, w Harriet Tubman, a black, gun-toting, evangelical Christian, R woman.”

More political correctness at universities: "UCLA law professor learns Ferguson-related exam question taboo"

My son Maxim has a new piece up at Fox News:

Professor Robert Goldstein said the exam question was designed to test students’ ability to analyze the line between free speech and inciting violence. It cited a report about how Michael Brown’s stepfather, Louis Head, shouted, “Burn this bitch down!” after a grand jury decided not to indict Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson in the death of Michael Brown.
The question then asked students to imagine that they are lawyers in the St. Louis County Attorney’s office and had been asked to advise the prosecutor “whether to seek an indictment against Head” for inciting violence. The exam reads:
“[As] a recent hire in the office, you are asked to write a memo discussing the relevant First Amendment issues in such a prosecution. Write the memo.”
But students complained, and writer Elie Mystal at the popular legal blog “Above the Law” opined that the test question was “racially insensitive and divisive.” Mystal also incorrectly alleged that the question asked students to “advocate in favor of extremist racists in Ferguson.” . . .
Other law professors say there should be no need to apologize for such a straightforward exam question.
“If there are some law students who are such delicate flowers that merely being asked to assess whether certain controversial speech that's been in the news is constitutionally protected, in a class covering the First Amendment of all things, then maybe they should find another profession,” David Bernstein, a law professor at George Mason University School of Law, told FoxNews.com. . . . .

The rest of the article is available here.  There are other good quotes in the piece.

So what would have been wrong if the test had in fact asked students to make a case in favor of bringing legal action against Louis Head?  Wouldn't students know how best to argue against that position if they first had to figure out what the strongest arguments in favor of it are?

Four new nutty examples of political correctness and the school year is just getting started

-- Student punished and thrown out of class for saying "bless you" to a fellow classmate who sneezed.
-- Boy Arrested and suspended for a week for writing a fictional story about shooting a dinosaur in school project.
-- Cookies served for 40-years in Elyria, Ohio banned from public schools by federal government because "It has too many calories."

-- Now something from a college:  University of Mary Washington's student newspaper has been called "The Bullet" since 1922, but political correctness has caused them to change the name to "The Blue & Gray."

“The editorial board felt that the paper’s name, which alludes to ammunition for an artillery weapon, propagated violence and did not honor our school’s history in a sensitive manner,” the release said. “The board intends to remain faithful to the history our university stands upon, and we continue to honor this history both in a respectful and meaningful way.”

Bullet "alludes to ammunition for artillery weapon"?  Seriously?  Well, there is no violence associated with the Civil War, right? For those University of Mary Washington alumni or others who are disappointed with the decision (it won't be official until sometime this coming week), you can let the school president know your feelings by clicking on the link here.

Very amusing piece by Chris Friend on "Seeing red over Indian nickname debate"

The piece starts this way, but I strongly recommend that you follow the link and read the entire article:

Life is good. 

Summer is in full swing, the Trayvon/Zimmerman soap opera is finally fading away, government is probably reading only half our emails now, and the excitement of football is in the air. 

Most important, though, is that America apparently has solved all of its problems. Otherwise, how could you possibly explain the fact that a cadre of congressman — both Republican and Democrat — recently sent a letter to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, Washington Redskins owner Dan Snyder, every league team, and Redskins sponsor FedEx urging them — demanding, actually — that the Redskins name be changed because it was so racially demeaning to Indians. Oops. Native Americans. 

Sorry. 

Really? That’s the most dominant issue consuming our elected officials? Granted, if we had an Indian nickel for every boneheaded thing Congress does, we’d all be millionaires. But those congressmen need to be scalped for this one, and publicly admonished until they turn red-faced with embarrassment. 

This is no time for peace pipes. We must, without reservation, not just hold down the fort but go to war with those riding roughshod over hallowed American traditions — fighting the people who love nothing more than to chop away at things no one actually finds offensive. As with most issues though, we lack a political chief brave enough to tackle this type of political correctness. The biggest irony? If a leader painted this picture as the insanity that it is, it wouldn’t be his last stand, but a feather in his cap, because the vast majority of Americans recognize that using Indian names isn’t offensive, but complimentary. . . . 

 The rest of the piece is available here.

Seriously? Father faced criminal penalties for having a disobedient son walk an entire mile home

Is it really a horrible punishment to make a son who is misbehaving have to walk for an entire 15 to 20 minutes?  How can that be so horrible?  Are children considered by the courts to be so sensitive that they can't walk for that long of a period of time?  From Fox News:

A judge sentenced a Hawaii man to one year of probation and a $200 fine for making his son walk a mile home from school as a form of discipline.
Judge Kathleen Watanabe called the punishment "old-school" and no longer appropriate, the Garden Island newspaper reported Thursday.
Robert Demond of Kilauea said he picked up his son from school and asked about a matter that had been brought to his attention. When the son didn't respond, Demond made him walk home to think about his actions.
The age of the boy is unclear. Demond's attorney and a prosecutor didn't immediately respond to a request seeking comment from The Associated Press.
Demond was also ordered to attend a parenting class after being convicted of endangering the welfare of a minor, a misdemeanor. Demond pleaded no contest and said he would handle the situation differently now after the case went through two courts. . . . .

Can someone name me one college where faculty have protested over a Democratic administration figure giving a commencement address?

From Fox News:

"An overwhelming number of the students were disappointed in Condoleezza Rice no longer being the commencement speaker after a small minority of the student body and intolerant faculty members at Rutgers University protested loudly over the past month ... A university should be a place where free ideas are exchanged and a diversity of opinions are encouraged," Coughlan said in the letter. 

Rice withdrew her name as speaker on Saturday following protests from a group of Rutgers University students, who staged a sit-in at a school administration building in New Brunswick last week to protest the school's decision to invite Rice to speak at the university's commencement later this month. Rice made the announcement via Facebook on Saturday. 

The school's Board of Governors voted to pay the former secretary of state under President George W. Bush and national security adviser $35,000 for her appearance at the May 18 ceremony, where she was expected to be awarded an honorary degree. 

But several faculty members and students wanted the invitation rescinded because of Rice's role in the Iraq War. Rutgers' New Brunswick Faculty Council passed a resolution in March calling on the university's board of governors to rescind its invitation. . . .

If the university is serious about free speech, they will pick someone who is viewed as even more conservative than Miss Rice. 

Jake Tapper points out that there was a case at the University of Notre Dame, though as he points out it was primarily something involving students.

WSBT correspondent John Paul reports that students attending the vigil reflected on their last days on campus, with some saying the protests have led to healthy discussions and debates, and that the attention hasn't taken away from their achievements. 

"It hasn't overshadowed it too much anyway," said student Brian Desplinter, who attended the vigil. "I think our student body on campus has handled the controversy particularly well, in contrast to some of the outside parties. . . .

So who made a more hate filled statement?: 'Duck Dynasty's' Phil Robertson or Obama senior advisor John Podesta?

Do I think that a guy sleeping around with multiple women as being on the same level as bestiality?  Hardly.  'Duck Dynasty's' Phil Robertson probably says something that could upset a lot of different people.  To me the strange thing is that those who believe in a consenting adult being able to do whatever he wants seem to be the most offended.  So here are the statements that Robertson made to GQ when he was asked about what he thought was a sin.

“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.” . . .

“It seems like, to me, a vagina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man’s anus. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying? But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical.” . . . 

By the way, how is what Robertson point any different than Pope Francis would say?  Yet, Pope Francis is Time magazine's Man of the Year.  But compare that to John Podesta's statement about Republicans.  This is from Politico:

Podesta, whose official mandate includes enforcement of numerous executive orders on emissions and the environment, suggested as much when he spoke with me earlier this fall about Obama’s team. “They need to focus on executive action given that they are facing a second term against a cult worthy of Jonestown in charge of one of the houses of Congress,” he told me. . . .

Which statement is most offensive?  It at least seems to me that calling some akin to a mass murder is worse than concerns about who someone is having sex with.  Remember Democrats constant refrain during the Clinton administration that it was just about sex?

Secondly, Robertson was asked about what he thought was a sin.  It may bother some people that the Bible views a man sleeping around with many women or homosexuality as sins, but there is a lot discussion about "hate" that seems inaccurate here, especially since Robertson has gone out of his way to say the standard hate the sin but love the sinner line.

Larry Taunton has a very useful discussion about all this at The Atlantic:

Robertson spoke in explicit terms of the homosexual and heterosexual options available to men and concluded: “She’s [i.e., women in general] got more to offer.” But he didn’t end there. Robertson suggested homosexuality is a sin that could lead to sexual anarchy, the nadir of which is bestiality: “Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there.”  (He did not actuallyequate homosexual behavior with bestiality, as many have been saying, and tellingly, his catalog of sinful sexual behavior also included heterosexual promiscuity.) . . .  

Robertson wasn’t expressing “his personal views,” but principles that are intrinsic to his religion.  You see, Robertson didn’t simply attack and disparage the sexual preferences of a minority, as Alec Baldwin recently did in a hateful rant. No, Robertson’s opinion—couched as it was in scriptural references that suggest he not only owns a Bible, but also reads it—reflects the teaching and practice of historic Christianity and, by extension, the opinion of a sizable portion of the American public. Indeed, according to a June 2013 Pew Research Center survey, roughly half (45 percent) of Americans polled said they believe homosexual actions are a “sin.”  

In an apparent effort to convince this demographic that homosexual actions are not sinful, GLAAD spokesperson Wilson Cruz said Robertson’s views are not Christian. The strategy here seems to be “divide and conquer”—separate Robertson from his religion and let public opinion do the rest. . . .

There seems to me a third point.  Podesta is a senior advisor to the president of the United States.  Robertson is someone who is on a TV show.  In addition, Robertson's TV show focuses heavily on his Christian values.  Yet, the calls for Robertson being fired were overwhelming.  Where are the similar calls for Podesta to resign.  For Robertson, the calls for his removal were almost instantaneous and covered extensively by everyone from Time magazine, Fox News, Mediate, the Hollywood Reporter, and numerous local TV and newspapers.  Searches conducted between 1 and 2 AM on Thursday, December 19th.

Take this statement from GLAD: "Phil and his family claim to be Christian, but Phil's lies about an entire community fly in the face of what true Christians believe. He clearly knows nothing about gay people or the majority of Louisianans – and Americans – who support legal recognition for loving and committed gay and lesbian couples."  I guess that I am not sure what the "lies" are in Robertson's statements.  Can one disagree with them?  Sure, but where are the lies?

A Google news search over the last 24 hours came up with nothing for Podesta.  A Bing search came up with one hit that is relevant, something from the obscure Patriot Post.

Now Robertson was fired (or put on indefinite suspension, which implies he will only be allowed back if he disavows his Christian views) so that might have generated more coverage.  But groups such as GLAD and others called openly for his firing.  Where are the similar calls for Podesta?  If one is concerned about the coarseness of the political debate, won't Obama be setting an example if he removed Podesta?

Finally, both Robertson and Podesta have issued follow up statements.  Podesta wrote: “In an old interview, my snark got in front of my judgment. I apologize to Speaker Boehner, whom I have always respected."  An "old" interview from just months ago?  "My snark got in front of my judgment"?

Yet, in the same interview with GQ Robertson made this statement: "We never, ever judge someone on who's going to heaven, hell. That's the Almighty's job," Robertson says. " We just love 'em, give 'em the good news about Jesus – whether they're homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort 'em out later, you see what I'm saying?"   Again, I am sure that probably just makes it worse for those from the organized lobbying groups such as GLAD.  

UPDATE: This is pretty amusing, but it gives some insight into the type of person Robertson is.

UPDATE: So what does Jesus and the Bible say about homosexuality?

The entire segment is available here.

Harvard student making bomb threats was peace essay winner

From the Harvard Crimson:

Eldo Kim, the Quincy House sophomore who was charged Tuesday in connection with Monday’s unfounded bomb threat, lived as a freshman in Thayer Hall, one of the four buildings in which he allegedly threatened to place explosives, according to former Thayer residents.
Kim’s entry in the freshman register for the Class of 2016 says he hails from Seoul, South Korea, and attended Kamiak High School in Mukilteo, Wash.
On the website of Harvard’s Institute for Quantitative Social Science, a profile of Kim from last academic year described him as a prospective psychology concentrator, while a cached version of Kim’s taken-down LinkedIn profile identifies him as a psychology and sociology concentrator. The Crimson could not immediately confirm Kim’s concentration. . . .
In 2009, Kim's essay, "Cultural Genocide: A Look into the Unknown," was the 1st place winner for the state of Washington in the U.S. Institute of Peace essay contest.
Edward Cho ’16, an Adams House resident who lived in Thayer with Kim last academic year, said it is “pretty surprising to hear that [Kim] went to such great lengths to avoid a final that he probably would have done well on anyway.” . . .

There are two ironies here: 1) That Kim was the peace essay winner and 2) that in a lot of classes most people get an A.  A humorous take on grade inflation at Harvard is available from the New York Times:

A longtime government professor at Harvard lashed out Tuesday at what he deemed a system of rampant grade inflation after learning that students are receiving mainly A’s.— The Boston Globe, Dec. 4From: The Dean of Harvard CollegeTo: The FacultyIn light of the controversy regarding so-called grade inflation, please take a moment to review the grading guidelines rubric, reproduced below:¶ The A+ grade is used only in very rare instances for the recognition of truly exceptional achievement.For example: A term paper receiving the A+ is virtually indistinguishable from the work of a professional, both in its choice of paper stock and its font. The student’s command of the topic is expert, or at the very least intermediate, or beginner. Nearly every single word in the paper is spelled correctly; those that are not can be reasoned out phonetically within minutes. Content from Wikipedia is integrated with precision. The paper contains few, if any, death threats.A few things can disqualify an otherwise worthy paper from this exceptional honor: 1) Plagiarism, unless committed with extraordinary reluctance. 2) The paper has been doused in blood or another liquid, unless dousing was requested by the instructor. 3) The paper was submitted late (with reasonable leeway — but certainly by no more than one or two years).An overall course grade of A+ is reserved for those students who have not only demonstrated outstanding achievement in coursework but have also asked very nicely.Finally, the A+ grade is awarded to all collages, dioramas and other art projects. . . . 

Obama administration rejects reasonable person standard in determining what represents sexual harassment.

The Obama administration apparently views an unwelcome request for a data as serious as rape? In a letter to the University of Montana, the Obama administration defined sexual harassment this way:

"an unwelcome request for a date . . . need not be 'objectively offensive' . . . regardless of the reasonableness of her feelings, and school administrators may be legally required to discipline her 'harasser.'"

Seriously?  From the WSJ:

The letter rejects the requirement, established by legal precedent and previous Education Department guidance, that sexual harassment must be "objectively offensive." By eliminating this "reasonable person" standard—which the Education Department has required since at least 2003, and which protects the accused against unreasonable or insincere allegations—the right not to be offended has been enshrined in a federal mandate. 

The letter further states that campuses have "an obligation to respond to student-on-student harassment" even when that harassment occurs off-campus. In some circumstances, the letter says, universities may take "disciplinary action against the harasser" even "prior to the completion of the Title IX and Title IV investigation/resolution." In plain English: Students can be punished before they are found guilty of harassment. . . .

Public School "tells Mother to get Daughter Breast Reduction after Harassment"

If the daughter is supposed to get her breasts reduced so that the harassment can be stopped, what is the recommendation for the boy who has severe scars from his surgery?  This extreme recommendation seems to indicate that the school is admitting defeat.  From Moline Acres, Missouri:

. . . Tammie Jackson says her daughter Gabrielle is being sexually harassed because of her large breasts at Central Middle School in Moline Acres. She says the sixth grader has been dealing with bullying since last semester. 

Jackson called the Riverview Gardens School District to complain and was shocked by what she was told. 

“It makes me feel like now you are telling me it’s my fault, it’s God’s fault the way he made her. The lady on the phone said they could transfer my daughter and said her boobs were so large she will always get teased. And the only suggestion she had for me is to have my daughter get a breast reduction,” said Jackson. 

FOX 2 stopped by the school district for a response and we’re told they’re working to counsel students to resolve the bullying issue. As for the claims about the surgery, we’re told they are still looking into it. 

Jackson also says her 9-year-old son Elijah has bullying issues. He has a rare heart condition and she says kids make fun of his surgical scars, causing him to make suicidal comments. . . .

Should target shooting games be sold to children?

I am not sure how this game in anyway encourages violence.  From Mac Daily News:

Democratic Senator Chris Murphy is all upset about the app, but it isn't clear that he has even tried it.

“The NRA seems intent on continuing to insult the families of the victims of Sandy Hook,” the Connecticut Democrat said in a statement. “How could they think it was a good idea to use the one month anniversary of the tragedy at Sandy Hook to release a game that teaches four year olds to shoot assault weapons? No matter what outrageous new tool they use, the NRA cannot make a straight-faced case that sport shooters need military-style weapons to enjoy their hobby.” . . .

Sun News appearance where I am discussing media hysteria on guns

The appearance with Brian Lilley on Sun News.

More political correctness in movies?: "Red Dawn" movie changes villain from China to North Korea

I guess that it just isn't politically correct to make the Chinese look like the bad guys.  China was the original bad guy, but after the movie was shot it had to be redone to make the North Koreans look bad. As the discussion at Box Office Mojo makes clear, this change hurts the plot and has made selling the movie more difficult "since the central conflict is blatantly absurd."  From Box Office Mojo (emphasis added):

Nearly three years after completing principal photography, the Red Dawn remake is finally reaching theaters (2,679 theaters, to be exact). The lengthy delay is being blamed on producer MGM's bankruptcy issues, though there was also the minor issue of having to change the invading force from China to North Korea in post-production. In comparison, the 1984 original (which earned $38.4 million, or $90.7 million adjusted for ticket price inflation) featured Russians as the villains, which brings to mind the biggest issue with this remake: in 1984, the notion of Russia invading the U.S. was far-fetched, but they were at least a global power, and the Cold War was still technically going on. While North Korea has been antagonistic towards the U.S., they don't even have the wherewithal to cause much trouble in Asia, much less stage an invasion of the U.S.  

Since the central conflict is blatantly absurd, the marketing has instead relied on vague patriotism, which just isn't as compelling. It's also emphasized the presence of Chris Hemsworth (Thor, Huntsman) and (to a lesser extent) Josh Hutcherson (Peeta), though star power tends to be an overrated indicator of box office potential. Distributor FilmDistrict is hoping for a debut in the high-teen-millions for the five-day weekend. . . .

"Conservative Iowa Woman Sues Law School Claiming They Didn’t Hire Her Because of Her Politics"

Fox News has this story:

The trial of Teresa Wagner against the University of Iowa Law School is underway in Washington, D.C., after Wagner claimed she was passed over multiple times for a job based on her conservative political background; in the past, Wagner worked for pro-life causes such as the Family Research Council and the Right to Life Committee. . . .

Black Gallaudet College Official put on leave because she signed petition to let Marylanders vote on homosexual marriage

From Fox News: 

. . . Angela McCaskill, a 23-year veteran of the university, was placed on paid leave as the university investigates her support for traditional marriage.“It recently came to my attention that Dr. McCaskill has participated in a legislative initiative that some feel is inappropriate for an individual serving as Chief Diversity Officer; however, other individuals feel differently,” wrote Gallaudet president T. Alan Hurwitz in an email sent to the campus community. 

McCaskill’s attorney said they will hold a press conference on Tuesday — stressing that his client is not “anti-gay.” 

McCaskill was one of 200,000 residents who signed a petition to put “Maryland’s Question 6” on the ballot. The measure is a referendum on same-sex “marriage.”
The Washington Blade published the names and addresses of every person who signed the petition. An anonymous faculty member spotted McCaskill’s name in the newspaper and immediately notified authorites. . . .

From the Washington Post:

. . . By mid-afternoon Friday, more than 15,000 people had signed an online petition calling on the university for the deaf and hard of hearing to reverse itself and bring back Angela McCaskill, its chief diversity officer. The school disciplined McCaskill on Wednesday, saying her signature on a petition for a referendum on same-sex marriage was “inappropriate.” . . .   

Lee P. Washington, pastor of Reid Temple AME Church, one of the largest churches in the Washington region and a hub of social and political activity, encouraged Gallaudet to take back McCaskill, who is a member of his church. In a statement, Washington said that McCaskill and her family had withstood “threats and intimidation” related to her signing the ballot petition and being placed on leave.   

McCaskill was among more than 200,000 Maryland residents who signed a petition for a referendum on same-sex marriage. The public vote was favored by opponents of a same-sex marriage law that O’Malley signed in March. . . .

These videos examine the widely held belief that Thomas Jefferson fathered a child with his slave, Sally Hemings.

Norton Internet Security 2012 is apparently blocking my website

Mell Bishop from Tennessee sent me a screen shot of this from his computer.

UPDATE: Steve in TN informs me that Norton is blocking blogspot.com, not me per se.  Thanks, Steve.

"Mad Men" and drinking

Anyone who has seen an episode of the TV series "Mad Men" knows about how much these creative advertising types are depicted as drinking alcohol. Well, there is now some research that indicates that drinking enhances creativity.

Drinking alcohol may enhance a person’s problem solving skills, according to a new study. Scientists found that men who either drank two pints of beer or two glasses of wine before solving brain teasers not only got more questions right, they also were quicker in delivering correct answers, compared to men who answered the questions sober. While the latest findings go against the traditional beliefs that alcohol impairs analytical thinking and rational thoughts, lead author Professor Jennifer Wiley of the University of Illinois at Chicago discovered that alcohol may enhance creativity problem solving by reducing the mind’s working memory capacity, which is the ability to concentrate on something in particular. “Working memory capacity is considered the ability to control one’s attention,” Wiley told the Federation of Associations in Behavioral and Brain Sciences (FABBS). “It’s the ability to remember one thing while you’re thinking about something else.” While the latest study found that alcohol may enhance creative problem solving, previous research found that increased working memory capacity actually led to better analytical problem-solving performance. . . .

What is this world coming to?: "TSA Stops Passenger Over Purse Design"

Can anyone possibly even for an instant think that this design on this purse is a real gun? This story and the picture are from News4Jax.com in Jacksonville, Florida (they have a video of the news story available here). I love the part of the story where it says "after agents figured out that the gun was a fake."

"She was like, 'This is a federal offense because it's in the shape of a gun,'" Gibbs said. "I'm like, 'But it's a design on a purse. How is it a federal offense?'"

After agents figured out the gun was a fake, Gibbs said, TSA told her to check the bag or turn it over.

By the time security wrapped up the inspection, the pregnant teen missed her flight, and Southwest Airlines sent her to Orlando instead, worrying her mother, who was already waiting for her to arrive at JIA.

"Oh, it's terrifying. I was so upset," said Tami Gibbs, the teen's mom. "I was on the phone all the way to Orlando trying to figure out what was going on with her. It was terrifying. I don't ever want to go through it again."

Vanessa and her mom said it's hard to believe anyone could mistake the design on the purse for a real gun because it's just a few inches in size and it's hollow, not to mention Vanessa has taken it on planes before. . . .

Hollywood tries to rewrite History: J. Edgar Hoover

I trust that too many people don't take the new Eastwood film seriously. From the Washington Post:

Many former FBI agents share Schwartz’s pique with the film’s dropped hints of an abiding love between Hoover and aide Clyde Tolson, who is buried a few grave sites away. Historians agree that there is no evidence that either man was gay, and a request for comment from either Eastwood or screenwriter Dustin Lance Black was declined. . . .
The widespread unhappiness over Hollywood’s imagined rendering of Hoover’s rumored-but-never-proven personal life largely comes from men who started their FBI careers when Hoover was still in charge. Their devotion is undimmed almost four decades after his death. . . .
John Fox, the FBI historian, said speculation about Hoover’s sexuality never got very far. “Hoover was single all those years,” Fox said. “His closest friend and associate was another man. Periodically through the history of his tenure, there was an innuendo here, an innuendo there that he was homosexual. But that was the extent of it.” . . .