Easy Co vs UVA, UGH Canada, Censoring Praise, Invisible Video and Seeing it Young Under the Fedora

Rewatched “We Stand Together Alone” about Easy Company of the 101st Airborne, the companion piece to Band of Brothers.

When I watch it and then see things like this:

The University of Virginia has canceled the 21-gun salute for its Veterans Day ceremony over concerns that firing weapons on campus could cause “panic” among students.

The salute previously came at the end of the school’s 24-hour vigil and Veterans Day ceremony, a tradition for a decade, although it’s commonly seen in the U.S. as an honor for visiting dignitaries.

I thank God that my father and his generation fought World War 2 instead of this one.


Apparently in Canada these days you don’t need to guns firing to trigger people.

As the good folks at HotAir put it.

Poor guy. If only he’d done something more innocuous, like repeatedly wearing blackface as an adult, he’d have qualified to earn the support of millions of Canadian liberals who are happy to see him booted off the air today.

I think that’s really why the 85 year old Don Cherry was fired from is announcers post after decades of being a Hockey Icon. He reminded people of what Canadians once were when they had a beach at Normandy to attack vs where they are now.


The folks of the left today don’t like to be reminded of realities, that’s also why when they can’t cancel someone they edit them:

“It’s super cute when journalists/interviewers for magazines leave out the massive part where I give God the glory for the success/ achievements in my life,” Wright tweeted last month. “Haha I still love you and God will still be praised.”

As a very attractive black African woman on one of the best grossing pictures she pushes to many diversity buttons to cancel her but none of that God stuff is getting into those pieces if they can help it.

I’m reminded of what Saint Faustina said after recording her visit to Hell in her diary. Most of the people there didn’t believe there was a hell.


Sometimes even video that anyone can see

and front page headlines that graced the paper isn’t enough to change the official narrative

I guess Baghdad Bob must have had plenty of children who came to America and became journalists.


Of course there are some who never fell for this stuff even in their youth:

When I was around nine years old, my parents and three younger siblings moved from a leaky roofed ghetto to a new 11-story government project in Baltimore. Everything was brand new, kitchen appliances and so on. Extremely excited, we were among the first families in the building of all-black residents. Within a short time, that building became a huge ghetto. The elevators were routinely out of service due to vandalism. Our apartment was on the 6th floor. Entering the pitch-black stairwell to walk up to our apartment was like walking into the shadow of death, as the sound of stepping on broken wine bottles echoed off the concrete walls. I suspect my fellow residents were Democrats. They believed every problem was always the fault of white racism.
At nine years old, I sarcastically said, “How can we stop mean white people from sneaking into our building at night, breaking light bulbs in the stairwells, peeing, breaking the elevators and smashing wine bottles?” Even at that young age, commonsense told me whitey was not responsible for problems we could fix ourselves.

I would be really interested in hearing what is being said on Black radio and podcasts about Trump, because I suspect that he is going to take an awful lot of the black vote in areas where even a small swing in said vote will make a huge difference.

Realities: Voldemort Media Values, Rescorla or Thunberg and Incel dreams Under the Fedora

The fuss about Molly Hemmingway saying aloud on the air what everyone in the room already knows, namely that the so called “Whistleblower”  Eric Ciaramella is a perfect symbol for the culture the left has given us. The inability to speak aloud the truth, particularly truth that everyone knows, is the hallmark of repression. He has become the media’s Voldemort media (he who must not be named).

We have have won the cold war but I’m becoming increasingly convinced that the Communists won the peace.


One of the aspects of the Voldemort media are the choices to be made. The entire Jeffrey Epstein / ABC /CBS coverup and the firing of someone who they thought was an actual whistleblower has become that which must not be talked about. What I find really interesting is the supposed motive:

ABC was exposed this week for killing a story about Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged pedophile ring, which anchor Amy Robach claimed was due to an upcoming interview the network had with the royal family.

emphasis mine

As a practical matter the amount of stories you would get out of exposing Epstein, particularity in 2016 before the metoo movement and the subsequent number of eyeballs online and ratings on the air that such a story would produce would undoubtedly eclipse the value of an interview with the British Royal Family or even future interview that might be denied the network. I would think that Robach would have been able to make that case with ease.

This tells me that even years later Robach doesn’t see the truth, namely that protecting the friends of the Clinton’s who were expected to be back in the White House trumped everything else in that election year, but to acknowledge that truth is more than some can bear.


Speaking of dealing with truth, stumbled onto James Stewart’s long New Yorker piece from 2002 about Rick Rescorla who died getting folks out of the World Trade Center and re-read it. The final paragraph says a lot:

“What she doesn’t understand is that she knew him for four or five years. She knew a sixty-two-year-old man with cancer. I knew him as a hundred-and-eighty-pound, six-foot-one piece of human machinery that would not quit, that did not know defeat, that would not back off one inch. In the middle of the greatest battle of Vietnam, he was singing to the troops, saying we’re going to rip them a new asshole, when everyone else was worrying about dying. If he had come out of that building and someone died who he hadn’t tried to save, he would have had to commit suicide.
“I’ve tried to tell Susan this, in a way, but she’s not ready yet for the truth. In the next weeks or months, I’ll get her down here, and we’ll take a  walk along the ocean, and I’ll explain these things. You see, for Rick Rescorla, this was a natural death. People like Rick, they don’t die old men. They aren’t destined for that and it isn’t right for them to do so. It just isn’t right, by God, for them to become feeble, old, and helpless sons of bitches. There are certain men born in this world, and they’re supposed to die setting an example for the rest of the weak bastards we’re surrounded with.”

There was a time in our country, a time in my memory where every school boy would know who Rick Rescorla was and dream of being him. Thanks to having a father born in 1921 who served in the pacific I was regularly exposed to men like this and taught to revere them. Not anymore Once or twice a year men like this are spoken of fondly but today our schools and the media which shapes society would condemn Rick Rescorla as a man seething with toxic masculinity and white privilege.

God help us those who do when they need such men again, and they will.


In San Francisco a mural of Greta Thunberg is going up so that all can look upon her stern gaze and repent. At Front Page Magazine Jason Hill a Philosophy professor at DePaul has penned an open letter to this media proclaimed hero:

First, we did not rob you of your childhood or of your dreams. You are the legatee of a magnificent technological civilization which my generation and the one before it and several others preceding it all the way to the Industrial Revolution and the Renaissance, bequeathed to you. That growth-driven, capitalist technological civilization has created the conditions for you to harangue us over our betrayal. It is a civilization that eradicated diseases such as small pox from the word, and that lifted millions out of abject poverty in a universe you think is dying and decaying. It assured you a life expectancy that exceeded that of your ancestors. Most likely by focusing on economic growth which you demonize, and scientific advancement, that civilization will further enhance a robust quality of life and health for your descendants.


Here is a hard truth to ponder, Greta: if the great producers of this world whom you excoriate were to withdraw their productivity, wealth and talents—in short—their minds from the world today, your generation would simply perish. Why? Because as children you have done nothing as yet, with your lives besides being born. This is what we expect of children until such time as they can be producers by learning from their elders. You are understandably social and ecological ballast. You are not yet cognitively advanced to replicate the structures of survival of which you are the beneficiaries.

Greta Thunberg is a useful idiot which is why our cultural betters given the choice of her or Rick Rescorla their hero will always go for the former. Men like Rescorla did not play the idiot for others.


I laughed when I saw this story at the Daily Sun:

Sex robot factory ‘looks like Westworld’ after producing ‘hyper-realistic’ dolls
EXCLUSIVE: Silicone Lovers told Daily Star Online it is using a workshop that mirrors fictional HBO hit Westworld to produce sex robots with advanced human-like technology

The mirth comes from three things that instantly came to mind.

  1. Odds are if you can afford such a robot (as opposed to a lower end one that goes for say 2-10 grand) you’re likely rich enough to be able to attract a real woman. But I’m sure the prices will eventually drop so that every incel can have one.
  2. These will never be “hyper-realistic” until they can say no and enforce that statement.
  3. I don’t care how realistic these things are, until they are self cleaning and self disinfecting you couldn’t pay me enough to try one let alone own one.

Some advice for the ladies, if you discover your date has one of these in his apartment or house, run, this guy is a loser.


The Flood and the Shield

by baldilocks

A short history on the Edifice of Lies in our midst, built by perverts, mountebanks, bandits and/or their enablers — also known as the Mainstream Media.

For decades, ABC and other media outlets have hidden the truth about the serial abuse of women and young girls by the powerful Clintons, Weinstein, and Epstein.  The cover-up was to protect the Clintons from scrutiny as they sought to elect and re-elect Bill and to put the corrupt Hillary in the White House in 2016.  All these people pretending to be journalists didn’t care about all the women who were physically and mentally abused.

Now, with the “Me Too movement,” we are told they really care, but only some of the time.  How many women and young girls have been abused by powerful men while the media looked the other way — as long as they supported the Clintons and wanted Democrats in power?

The media do not want any investigation into the massive corruption and collusion by the Obama administration and other Democrats in 2016 as they sought to take out Trump and elect the corrupt Hillary.  Instead of media outlets wanting the public to learn the truth, they seek to impeach Trump for investigating the criminal activity.

The media absolutely hide the truth about the massive kickbacks by foreign entities and others to the Clintons and Bidens as they pretend no one is above the law.

The media know that Trump gave aid to Ukraine with nothing in return and Obama/Biden withheld aid and gave a loan to Ukraine only after they demanded and got a prosecutor fired, but they say Biden/Obama did nothing wrong and Trump should be impeached.

There’s more in the op-ed, but as good as it is, it barely scratches the surface. And it should make you wonder how many successful cover-ups there are – the things which we think are true, but are not — waiting to be exposed.

The thing which should give us all pause, however, is the shaping of narratives: how MSM stories are often twisted, mixing truth and lies. This is their most toxic practice.

In 2017, I called this flood of fallaciousness the Kingdom of Lies and posited that it is a parody of the Kingdom of God/Heaven.

There is only one defense against being overwhelmed by the flood of lies. But you have to take up the Shield of Faith willingly if you want to be protected.

It’s very easy and very hard.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on FacebookTwitterMeWePatreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!

If You’ve Ever Wondered Why I Never Got a Job in What Some Call “Actual Media”

…It’s likely because I was willing to write about Jeffrey Epstein while stuff like this was going on.

Amy Robach, ‘Good Morning America’ Co-Host and Breaking News Anchor at ABC, explains how a witness came forward years ago with information pertaining to Epstein, but Disney-owned ABC News refused to air the material for years. Robach vents her anger in a “hot mic” moment with an off-camera producer, explaining that ABC quashed the story in it’s early stages.  “I’ve had this interview with Virginia Roberts (Now Virginia Guiffre) [alleged Epstein victim]. We would not put it on the air. Um, first of all, I was told “Who’s Jeffrey Epstein.  No one knows who that is.  This is a stupid story.”
She continues, “The Palace found out that we had her whole allegations about Prince Andrew and threatened us a million different ways.”
Robach goes on to express she believes that Epstein was killed in prison saying, “So do I think he was killed? 100% Yes, I do…He made his whole living blackmailing people… Yup, there were a lot of men in those planes. A lot of men who visited that Island, a lot of powerful men who came into that apartment.”
Robach repeats a prophetic statement purportedly made by Attorney Brad Edwards “…[T]here will come a day when we will realize Jeffrey Epstein was the most prolific pedophile this country has ever known,” and Disgustedly Robach states “I had it all three years ago.”

That’s via James O’Keefe and Project Veritas who had hot mic info that was so explosive that he actually activated a “dead man’s switch” to make sure that this came out in the event of his death.

It was so big that for once the MSM didn’t ignore what he was saying. ABC responded thus:

ABC News executives say their journalists were simply not able to corroborate the details of the reporting sufficiently for broadcast.
“We would never run away from that,” Chris Vlasto, head of investigations for ABC News, tells NPR. The network has filed approximately two dozen digital and broadcast stories on Epstein since early 2015, when ABC started talking to the accuser, Virginia Roberts Giuffre

For the sake of the few who might actually buy that argument let me remind you of something I wrote in 2014.

If there is one thing the media that loves to play the War on Women® card doesn’t want to touch it’s a story about people using their own private island to get laid that involves Bill Clinton.
What could the media do if this story involving the former 
father of the year? They would call it old news, not relevant, dirty tricks from a salacious lawsuit that doesn’t even involve him and an attack on Hillary that crosses the line. In fact the left will deploy a plethora of adjectives to discourage further discussion of this story from antiquated to zany, but there is one adjective that could not come out of their mouth to dismiss this story:
Unbelievable
The last few years have proven that the left can convince a low information voter of a lot of things, but even the full power of the mainstream media and the strongest zealots from the War on Women® brigade would not be able to convince the American public that Bill Clinton would have no interest or business on a private island where orgies took place.
That’s why you didn’t see this story in the news last month and why as the case moves forward you’ll not see it covered period.

And a piece I wrote during the 2016 campaign:

as I was watching Jake Tapper on Monday discussing this and the security implication of blackmail for the husband of a top aide of Hillary Clinton my head started spinning.
We are seriously talking about the security implication of Anthony Weiner due to his sexual peccadilloes when we are talking about letting 
Bill freaking Clinton back into the White House?
I know the MSM is still trying to pretend that this is no big deal but I have two words to say to such people:
Jeffrey Epstein

Along with some video from MSNBC at the time with this key exchange

Video that MSNBC suppressed once the Free Beacon linked to it

Maybe it’s just me but given how often we see stuff at mediaite et al it seems rather unusual for a news network to make a copyright claim over a clip from a news story that used as “fair use” by another news organization. Could this suggest that NBC wants to keep this clip out of the public view because it might hurt Hillary?


I can see the NBC reaction now: Nonsense, we’re not censoring the clip at all. The seven minute clip IS available IF you

  1. Go to the Morning Joe site
  2. Hit search taking you to the MSNBC search engine
  3. Search for Donald Trump
  4. Narrow the field to Morning Joe
  5. Narrow the field to May 16th 2016 and sit through all the videos till you find the right one.
  6. And skip ahead to the 12 minute mark on that video.

If you do so you CAN find the clip

Incidentally the clip does not work from the MSNBC site anymore as but the Free Beason has since found another Youtube account with it that is no longer suppressed as the election is long over and the Epstein Story is now public knowledge.

Apparently they aren’t so worried about their copyright after all.

So when ABC tells you they didn’t have the story, look at the faces around that Morning Joe table who all knew what was being said and then try to make that case.

I suspect writing about this type of thing when everyone wanted it suppressed might have something to do with me not making it bigger in the business but then again if I was bigger and writing about it perhaps it might have lead to a sudden heart attack.

Baseball and Game-Playing

Boston Red Sox 2018 World Series Championship ring that I’m sure Peter likes seeing again.

by baldilocks

Yesterday, a goodly portion of the Washington Nationals visited the White House in celebration of their victory in the 2019 World Series and at least two of the players were pummeled on Twitter for openly being fans of President Trump. I’m sure the two players will console themselves with that beautiful ring they get to wear.

In contrast, there were several players who skipped the White House visit. I didn’t notice much talk about them. But, of course it was their choice to make.

It’s a safe bet, however, that the latter received a digital pat on the back from the usual suspects. We know that it’s a safe bet because we have some comparative information

[R]etired Boston Bruins goaltender Tim Thomas and New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady turned down Obama’s invitation to come to the White House and were met with strong criticism from media.

Thomas’s decision not to visit the White House in 2012 was widely criticized. U.S. News & World Report writer Susan Milligan headlined a story on the incident that said his decision was not brave, “it was just rude.” ESPN writer Joe McDonald wrote that Thomas chose to put himself above the team through his decision not to attend.

“When the president of the United States invites you and all your teammates to the White House to honor your Stanley Cup championship, you go and represent the team,” McDonald wrote.

Emphasis mine.

Hahahahahahaha!

Of course, we know that this only applies when the president is a Democrat and it double applied in the lone case in which the president was of African descent.

And then there is a whole other category of rules for Orange Man Bad.

If I were a team owner, I’d make it mandatory (in the contract) for all players and coaches to attend a White House gathering in the wake of a championship victory – unless there’s a life or death emergency — regardless of who the president is. That or get fined/traded.

But I guess that’s why I’m just a broke blogger.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on FacebookTwitterMeWePatreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!

The First Amendment under attack

The First Amendment should undergo significant changes, including jail time for hate speech and false news reports.

These findings come from a recent poll and analysis by the Campaign for Free Speech. See https://www.campaignforfreespeech.org/free-speech-under-dire-threat-polling-finds/

The organization found that 51% of Americans think the First Amendment is outdated and should be rewritten. 

The poll found that 48% believe “hate speech” should be illegal. (“Hate speech” is not defined but left up to the individual participant.) Of those, about half think the punishment for “hate speech” should include possible jail time, while the rest think it should just be a ticket and a fine. More millennials and Gen-Xers think hate speech should be made illegal—as do women, blacks, and Hispanics. The various regions in the United States think roughly the same.

The fundamental problem with regulating hate speech is who defines it? The courts have generally shied away from restricting hate speech because of that issue. The most important U.S. Supreme Court case that could be applied is Chaplinksy v. New Hampshire, a 1942 decision in which the court put forth the “fighting words” restriction on speech.

Chaplinsky was arrested for provocative statements made in the town square. While being transported to the local police station, he called the town marshal “a damned fascist and a racketeer.”

Justice Frank Murphy defined fighting words: “There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting, or ‘fighting’ words, those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality.”

But some legal scholars think the lower courts have defined fighting words in an inconsistent way, while others think the decision remains a threat to free speech.

Whatever the case, an arrest for using fighting words is a rarity. One happened a few years ago here in Philly when a local teacher got in a cop’s face and threatened him and his family.

An estimated 57% think that the government should be able to take action against newspapers and TV stations that publish content that is biased, inflammatory, or false. Only 35% disagree with the statement, with the rest undecided. Men and women poll about the same—as do various sections of the country. The only slight difference is that millennials rise to a level of 61%.

Surprisingly, in my view, the poll found that many think the government should impose jail time for those who publish fake news. A total of 56% said that journalists should only face a fine, but the other 46% said that actual jail time should be imposed on the offenders.

The implications of the poll seem obvious, but the ramifications not so much.

The poll does underline the antipathy of the public toward the media, and it comes from all age groups, geographic regions, income brackets, and races.

The media would be well served if they did not ignore the bitterness toward news organizations from just about every group.

The Media/Left’s most Churchillian Moment

As I watched things from the left media like this:

and this

and this

and of course this

Old friend Neo is a tad upset at these developments and so was I, then it hit me, there is one word that can be used to describe the reaction of the professional and media left to the successful raid to kill the head of ISIS

Churchillian

In fact this may be the most Churchillian thing thing the left has done in decades. Why? To understand my argument you have to remember that to the left Trump is Hitler, he’s Goebbles etc etc etc.

And if there is one thing that we all know about Sir Winston, is that as long as you are fighting Hitler you get a favorable reference, I quote:

“If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil in the House of Commons.”

So it’s simple logic

  • Churchill makes favorable references to those who Hitler attacks
  • Trump = Hitler
  • Trump attacks Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi
  • Media makes favorable references to Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi
  • Media = Churchill

It’s a simple rational deduction.

I predict this is the last Churchillian thing that the left will ever do.

Under the Fedora: Stein’s Sin, Mayor Pete’s Dodge, MSNBC holds the line, as does Twitter, but the pros do it best

I was rather shocked when I saw this from Jill Stein:

You know, you can’t just slander people. You have to present some basis and fact.

I’m shocked SHOCKED as must be many regular CNN viewers who watched this at the concept that you have to actually have a basis of fact to accuse people of things. That’s contrary to the entire gameplan of Democrats and their media allies for decades.

How DARE she invade the CNN safe space and suggest such a thing!


If this wasn’t bad enough Jake Tapper pressed Mayor Pete Buttgieg on the same network on the question of Tulsi Gabbard in the same context:

“Right. But do you think Tulsi Gabbard is a Russian asset?” Tapper pressed again, asking directly.


“I don’t know what the basis is for that,” Buttigieg sidestepped again. “But I consider her to be a competitor. I respect her service and have very different views than she does on foreign policy and I would prefer to have that argument in terms of debates and going forward.”


Tapper pushed back, asking why Democrats defended people when Trump smeared them but didn’t seem motivated to defend Gabbard from similar attacks from other Democrats, no matter how wild.

Not only do we have the spectacle of CNN viewers having the sacred concept of Democrats smearing opponents challenged twice in one week but you have an interviewer directly challenging a liberal gay man running for high office on his position. Unthinkable!

Maybe these O’Keefe CNN videos are having an effect after all.


Of course if you are a liberal snowflake and unable to cope with this kind of direct challenge to the liberal smear machine you till have MSNBC

A panel on MSNBC Live mocked Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard for not explicitly denying Hillary Clinton’s accusation that she is a Russian asset.
Clinton, 71, 
said that the Hawaii congresswoman is being groomed by Moscow to run as a third-party spoiler candidate in 2020 to help President Trump win reelection. Gabbard has since hit back at the 2016 presidential candidate.
“One thing that was interesting about Tulsi Gabbard’s response, I mean she went after Hillary Clinton strong, she said she wasn’t going to run as a third party candidate, she never denied being a Russian asset,” Kimberly Atkins of WBUR said while beginning to laugh on the show Saturday morning. “That was the one aspect that was missing from her response, which you think that would be in the first line or two. It was not there.”

At least the traditions and standards of the left’s attack machine are still sacrosanct somewhere.


I should also note said liberal standards are being held up by Twitter as well:

Maybe it was this next post that did him in. Everyone knows you’re not allowed to challenge the new gender theology. “These are both me. Sometimes I like looking like and androgynous emaciated albino space vampire. Sometimes I like looking like a strung out 90’s computer hacker. Sometimes I feel more gay vampire, sometimes I feel more sk8r boi. Guess what? That doesn’t make me my own special gender.”

That’s gay writer and model Mike Harlow before being permanently banned from twitter supposedly for “harassment” but more likely for being part of the #walkaway movement. Some think this is an attack on gays thinking for themselves but I object to that characterization:

There are plenty of straight folks that Twitter has banned for thinking for themselves, but generally it’s not so much a question of them thinking for themselves but for having the potential to influence others to do so as well.


Finally when it comes to seeing how properly repressing speech one doesn’t like is done you have to go to the pros:

A Facebook post that criticized Islam’s Prophet Muhammad sparked a riot in southern Bangladesh on Sunday that left at least four people dead.
Hundreds of Muslims took to the streets in the town of Borhanuddin, 195 kilometers (120 miles) from the capital Dhaka, to protest the offensive social media post allegedly written by a Hindu man.
A local official said a meeting was held on Sunday to try to defuse the tensions that began Friday as the Facebook post gained traction.

But the angry protesters started attacking security officials, prompting them to retaliate.

Now in fairness to the left’s minor league Rasputins with Islam becoming more and more a force in the Democrat party the day will likely come when posts like this are the excuse for Democrats to riot become the norm

Of course you have to disarm the targets of your violence first.

Why doesn’t the left cheer when they’re wrong about bad things too?

A few days ago I lead with a post about some apparent insanity in a school district in NH that I had seen at a site I frequent. Turns out the info in question was incorrect & I missed an email warning me of same so the post in question went up as scheduled.

When I saw the email I added an update as follows:

Update: Got a heads up that suggests there might be less to this than meets the eye, While that might be embarrassing for me it would be delightful as it would indicate that insanity does not reign at the school in question and that’s more important that a post getting hits. I don’t believe in pulling posts as it changes the record so for now I’m going to put the base post under a “more” tag until I get more data. For now we’ll wait and see and if a correction is warranted I’ll update the post with it.

Long story short the info was incorrect the author apologized to the people in question. I provided a 2nd update joining in said apology and rejoicing that the school in question was not in fact insane. As it’s likely who saw the 1st post but might never check it again a fresh post linking to the mea culpa was the proper and honorable thing to do which was the primary reason for this post.

Then it hit me. The reason why I wrote the base post was I don’t want public schools to be acting insane and the purpose of said post was to hold up a light to such behavior to stop this school & others from acting that way.

Thus when it turned out this school wasn’t doing so I was very happy regardless of any embarrassment from an erroneous post because my primary goal is schools not acting insane.

This is not the case with the Democrat/left media. Think about it for a second

  • The media/left went all in on the idea of a Supreme Court Nominee being a sexual predator, then the evidence showed the accusations were not credible
  • The media/left went all in on the idea that the President of the United State was colluding with Russia to steal an election, and even with an independent council, a staff full of partisans, the assistant AG working against the president it turned out their suspicions were unfounded.
  • The media/left went all in as various colleges being bastions of “rape culture with claims that as many as 25% of the women attending were assaulted but it turned out that the methodology of the studies and the definitions of assault were so stretched as to be meaningless.
  • The media/left went all in on various race hoaxes being furious that various individuals, some involving celebs, particularly at colleges were a bunch of racists and white supremacists, yet over and over these turned out to be hoaxes.

Now supposedly the left and media and the guests they brought in did this because they didn’t want a serial sexual predator on the supreme courts or a President conspiring with Russia, colleges being bastions of rape, gay black TV starts threatened with nooses or racist acts being committed all over the nation. That being the case all of these things turning out to be false should be cause for celebration for the left who can breathe a sigh of relief that none of these things that they considered beyond the pale had happened.

Yet instead their reaction has been at best been too ignore when such hoaxes are exposed as such or at worst to continue to insist they are true despite evidence to the contrary.

Now if you work under the assumption that the goal of the media/left is to prevent such behavior then you might be utterly confused at this reaction as it makes no logical sense.

However if you work from the assumption that the primary goal of the left/media is POWER and or WEALTH and that in search of said power & wealth the events and actions that they supposedly deplore are used to generate both the funds to gain them and the means to retain them, well it makes perfect sense.

To them the the only “crisis” in government is when they don’t control it and the only “abuse” of power is if it not in their hands. Work under that assumption and all the left/media does and you will never be shocked or surprised by anything they do ever again.

Fake news and me

One of my daughter’s colleagues recently asked me if I worked as a journalist.

“No,” I replied. “Neither am I a mass murderer.”

It wasn’t exactly like Peter denying Christ three times. But I am no longer proud of the job I did for more than 20 years and have taught students to do for nearly 25 years.

Although I have had a variety of difficulties with the mainstream media in recent years, I hadn’t jumped completely on the fake news bandwagon until the Ukrainian phone call and impeachment. The media in American have become so shrill–a partisan press without a purpose other than to attack Trump. That doesn’t apply to all reporters and editors, but I think it applies to a significant number, particularly among the media elite.

As a result, journalism has fallen on hard times in the eyes of the public. It’s been a long time since journalists have been held in high esteem, but many people looked to the news media to provide some insight into the issues of the day.

Every morning, I start my day by reading several websites, including The Philadelphia Inquirer, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post. I’ll usually check CNN and Fox News and may listen to the radio talk shows for 30 minutes or so.

I don’t read many opinion pieces because I find the analysis wanting, particularly from DaTimes and DaPost. It seems like all they want to do launch a new screed against Donald Trump.

Over the past decade or so, I have been advocating a change in how news organizations go about their business. The old standards of fairness, balance, objectivity, and a few others have been long gone from what I see.

In my view, the tenets should emphasize accuracy, transparency, and professionalism.

Transparency is one that sticks in the craw of most journalists. I want their political views, campaign contributions, past history of advocacy, and even tax records available to readers and viewers—much of which reporters and editors ask of politicians.

Michael Schudson, the noted analyst of journalism, wrote recently in The Columbia Journalism Review, that the issues transcend the current battle between the press and Trump.

“[T]he old days of ritually objective news reporting (he said/she said) are not gone but have been reduced in importance from the 1970s on, as mainstream outlets have increasingly emphasized analysis in news coverage—not quite so much ‘who, what, when, where’ as ‘why.’ There has been a profound cultural shift in journalism during this period. The limitations of straitjacketed objectivity came to be understood and journalism began to embrace the necessity of interpretation, as both quantitative studies and journalists’ recollections attest,” Schudson wrote.

“News organizations should have to explain themselves—to communicate the difference between the news department and the editorial page (more than a quarter of Americans do not understand the distinction); to show how they gather their news; to clarify why they sometimes cannot divulge their sources,” he added.

I hope journalists will listen to Schudson because I have failed in my mission to convince my former and current colleagues.

Whatever the case, I am no longer proud to call myself a journalist. I don’t think I am alone.