Archie Bunker: You wouldn’t then turn around and do what McNabb was trying to do, would ya?

Jim Bowman: You mean sell to Jews?

Archie Bunker:   Yeah.

Jim Bowman: Oh NO!…These people are Baptists.

All in the Family Lionel Moves into the Neighborhood 1971

At Breitbart they are talking about the sale of the Boston Globe and the fact that the NYT is taking a 93% loss.

After purchasing the Boston Globe in 1993 for a then-record $1.1 billion, the financially troubled New York Times just announced it sold the 141 year-old paper to Boston Red Sox owner John Henry for a mere $70 million. That’s a straight 93% loss. Figuring in two decades of inflation would only make it worse — as does the fact the Times retains the Globe’s pension liabilities, estimated at over $100 million.

That the Globe is being sold at a 93% (not counting inflation) is news.  That it’s being sold to the owner of the Boston Red Sox is bigger news.  Maybe the Globe figures if anyone can turn things around, he can, after all he has a  history of producing Miracles that nobody would have believed possible. (and that doesn’t even include this season).

But the big story of the sale of the paper (and the Worcester Telegram) was a throw away line later in the piece.

In 2011, the Times turned down a $300 million offer from Aaron Kushner, CEO of Freedom Communications, Inc., publisher of the Orange County Register and other newspapers in California. This offer even included the assumption of pension liabilities, which are currently estimated at $110 million.

The Times itself reports that today’s sale to Henry does not include pension liabilities. Apparently, those remain a Times’ responsibility and expense.

Think about this for a second.

The New York Times turned down an offer 4 times as large that included the pension costs in order to avoid selling this paper to the owners of the Orange County Register.

Why?  I think it’s because they read my piece from February:

consider the following:

  • Imagine a Movie section where the liberal themes of a picture were noted and tweaked while the conservative themes were highlighted and celebrated.
  • Imagine a culture section where events of a conservative nature were celebrated while liberals pressed to get the press.
  • Imagine reviews of plays with conservative themes getting web space and print space and liberal themes hoping for a line or two.
  • Imagine stories in the Sunday section celebrating historic places, people and sites that highlight America’s conservative History or people who are conservative doing great things for the community.
  • Imagine a whole slew of conservative Journalists cutting their teeth of straight news instead of news with a liberal spin, imagine the farm team it would create.
  • Imagine an editorial page giving conservative opinion day after day after day.
  • And imagine a web site ranked in the top 1500 worldwide and top 350 nationally, a web site that local papers around New England draw stories from giving that public conservative thought as background noise in the same way that liberals have done for ages.

What’s $230 million dollars and pension costs to the shareholders when it’s held up against keeping those dirty conservatives out of the neighborhood? Particularly with a tough election coming up in 2014.

And they did do better than Newsweek.


Olimometer 2.52

Under 12 hours to go before the end of this week and I’m still $194 short.

If you are hesitating remember Diane Feinstein wants to redefine a journalist as someone who makes a salary. You can help make sure I qualify.


I first heard about Stacy Trasancos from Lisa Graas. Since then I and others have written about this mother of seven who expressed her discomfort over a sight in the park and was bombarded with hate mail and death threats, not only against her but against her children too. A sample:

I lamented the lack of coverage by the MSM of such threats on my radio show last week against a mother of seven so I was pleased to hear that renowned defender of women and children Dianne Williamson writing for the Telegram & Gazette owned by the NY Times decided to comment on it:

Yes, she’s been the target of some truly ugly hate mail and threats. It goes without saying that such responses are reprehensible, but par for the course in the anonymous Internet world.

Well OK I grant you that’s not much of a condemnation, but that’s only two sentences. I’m sure that as a renowned defender of women and children, she opens up on those threatening Stacy’s life and her kids in the other 44 sentences right?

I’m sure it’s a challenge to suffer from homosexually-induced agoraphobia — the term applied by local wag Brendan Melican — and get any shopping done. But Trasancos isn’t afraid to express herself on her blog, “Accepting Abundance,” which has attracted much chatter in the blogosphere, based on her fear of being mobbed by the gays the minute she sets foot outdoors.

OK well that’s not quite defending a mother of seven from people making violent threats, but I’m sure that she as a renowned defender of women and children, she will surely not continue along that line:

Trasancos is obviously intelligent,

See, I’m sure she’s going to stick up for a mom with seven kids over the likes of Perez Hilton and the Guardian Newspaper, you know the weak vs the powerful…

… and of course she has every right to express her odious opinions.

…ah, I guess not:

But it’s a shame that some people continue to spout bigotry and ignorance in the name of religion. And it’s a shame that, somewhere in Worcester in 2011, seven young people are being raised to view love between two people as sick and immoral.

Now forgetting the ambiguity of that phrase (Perhaps Dianne will be invited to make that point at the next B4U-ACT conference.) I find the statement odd because orthodox Christian belief for its entire existence has taught that homosexual acts are sinful.

So apparently according to Dianne Williamson, that renowned defender of women and children, it is a shame that Christians in general and Catholics in particular, are taught orthodox Christianity as has existed for centuries.

Perhaps Dianne as a renowned defender of women and children and religious bigot open minded person can tell us what parts of Christian belief are acceptable for Stacy Trasancos or any other Christian to express publicly and teach their children without expecting to deal with threats of violence against them or their children?

Perhaps I’m over-reacting. It’s just a religious difference it’s not like she’s attacking Stacy personalty in a media organ owned by the most powerful Newspaper in the country just after she and her kids have been threatened. Is she?

Trasancos is a Baptist convert to Catholicism, and it’s ironic that she’s so judgmental, considering her own colorful background. Now a married, 42-year-old stay-at-home mom, she wrote on the website Catholic Online that she got pregnant in college. Her seven children are from three different men. She’s been divorced and has had an abortion. She’s taken drugs and worked as a stripper. She writes a column for the Catholic Free Press.

Now I thought we weren’t supposed to make any judgement about “love between two people” but that whole paragraph sure sounds to me like an attack based what Dianne Williamson, renowned defender of women and children, considers poor choices Stacy has made in her life.

Well it’s funny, turns out that Stacy Trasancos would agree that she made bad choices in her life. In fact she tells the whole story of a woman who was lost and had done some really self-destructive things who found Christ and the church and turned herself around as her conversion testimony. You can read it here.

Now me I’ve only been writing for a short time and I found it riveting but for Dianne Williamson, renowned defender of women and children, it permanently disqualifies Stacy’s moral judgement.

One might think that the warnings of someone who has actually pulled themselves from a bad path (drugs, stripping, multiple children from multiple partners) to a good path (faithful and clean mother of seven) might be a person to be admired. In fact one might think that if such a person said: “Don’t make the mistakes I made.” you would heed and respect that advice, particularly tolerant liberals. But nope, to that renowned defender of women and Children, Dianne Williamson, that’s makes her even more worthy of attack.

Of course if Stacy was still stripping or using drugs and had aborted say, the last 4 kids I’m sure Dianne Williamson, as a renowned defender of women and children, would have managed a sympathetic column on a single mom with three kids stripping to make it in a tough economy. I’m sure she would have waxed poetic and there wouldn’t have been a dry eye in the newsroom.

I wonder, Stacy’s two oldest children are 22 and 16, they remember they old Stacy, they were raised by her. I wonder if they would prefer the old Stacy that Dianne Williamson renowned defender of women and children, would have found more sympathetic or the new Stacy that Dianne considers a bigot?

How about you? Which one would you rather have watching your kids, in your house or as your neighbor? Which one’s judgement on right and wrong would you trust more?

Exit Question: If I remember right Dianne Williamson has been writing for quite a while, at least two or three decades, I wonder when her first column defending Gay Marriage was? Was it before the whole civil unions debate? Before the Court case when it was imposed on Massachusetts in 2003 or after? I think it would be interesting to see if she found it a worthy topic before it became a cause celeb for the left. Wouldn’t you?

Update: How it it that I find this story so similar to Stacy’s tale:

San Juan Capistrano Fines Family for Reading Bible without Permit

Well of course they should need a permit, look at what all that Bible stuff did to Stacy! Hey if Dianne every decides to go west, I can think of one city government that might have a job for her.

Mini update great line from Tina Kobe:

Where two are three are gathered in His name, there good ol’ California city government is in the midst of them.

Update 2: Ok now it’s spreading to the schools, have a Christian Opinion get suspended:

A Fort Worth high school student was sent to the principal’s office earlier this week for telling another classmate he believes homosexuality is wrong.

Fourteen-year-old Dakota Ary spent most of the day Tuesday serving an in-school suspension. It was punishment for discussion in his German class at Fort Worth’s Western Hills High School.

“We were talking about religions in Germany. I said, ‘I’m a Christian. I think being a homosexual is wrong,’” he said. “It wasn’t directed to anyone except my friend who was sitting behind me. I guess [the teacher] heard me. He started yelling. He told me he was going to write me an infraction and send me to the office.”

Via Michael Graham who asks the $64,000 question:

Question: Why the heck was this kid suspended at all? What did he do wrong?

The school has not contradicting his account of what happened. So is the school saying that merely expressing an opinion about homosexuality is wrong? If so, do you think he would have been suspended for saying “I’m a Unitarian and I think homosexuality is great?”

I wish I was a tort lawyer in that district.

You might recall the Worcester 6th race, the shenanigans we talked about concerning recounts, the judge ruling that a man who claimed his vote wasn’t counted could vote after the fact to tie the election, the Democratic legislature instead of having a new head to head election allowing independents to cut down on the GOP vote. Now the Worcester Telegram this morning report on the icing on the cake.

Town Clerk Madaline I. Daoust was in the process of selling her house to a key figure in the disputed 6th Worcester District election during the same time period she testified twice under oath that she did not know the man.

Run that through your head a second, the Southbridge Town Clerk, the person who makes sure elections are honest, testifies under oath, not once but twice. that she doesn’t know the man claiming to have been “disenfranchised” when she’s selling her house to him?

How do you get to such a point? Easy, you have an election where every state office is returned to the one party state. She is not afraid of the Attorney General, She is not afraid of the Secretary of State, she certainly isn’t afraid of the state Legislature. As the Telegram is a paper that leans left she likely didn’t fear them either. Lucky for us they are honest.

Corruption thrives when people are not afraid of the law or it being enforced. In Southbridge the Democratic machine is not afraid of the law, of the state and are certainly not afraid of the voters.

Now the question becomes what will the judge do? Will he throw out the previous ruling and declare Durant the winner? Will he cite the clerk and claim it’s too late to change things” 3 weeks before the re-election. My guess is the latter.

Who is to blame for this? It’s us, the Voters. The voters of Southbridge voted for their city government, the voters of the district for sending Alicea to the General court and the voters of Massachusetts sending the same tired crew back as Governor, Attorney General, and Sec of State year after year. We had our best chance to change things last time and we did not.

And it will be up to us the voters again. Until and unless we demand a change we won’t get one.

Or to put it another way, we always get the government we deserve. We will shortly find out what we deserve.

Update: A classic bit, The telegram asked Ms. Daoset why she didn’t tell the court that Mr. Miranda was buying her house her answer was: “They didn’t ask” saying you don’t volunteer information that’s court 101.

Now I’m Sicilian and maybe that is the answer I might expect to hear from people in certain family businesses, but if you are the City Clerk I would have thought that the court and the city would not have to pull answers out of you concerning clean elections.