The practitioners of Freedom of Speech and of the Press criticize other people exercising their Freedom of Speech

From Donald Douglas:

Los Angeles Times Pushes ‘Extremist’ Moral Equivalence Attack on Pamela Geller in #Garland Jihad Shooting

A particularly odious comparison at today’s Los Angeles Times front-page, claiming moral equivalence between Pamela Geller and the Islamic jihadists who attempted a Charlie Hebdo attack in Texas.

I tweeted the photo of the piece this morning, and here’s the online article, “Texas attack refocuses attention on fine line between free speech and hate speech“:

Pamela Geller is a 56-year-old Jewish arch-conservative from New York, a vehement critic of radical Islam who organized a provocative $10,000 cartoon contest in this placid Dallas suburb designed to caricature the prophet Muhammad.

Elton Simpson was a 30-year-old aspiring Islamic militant from Phoenix who fantasized to an FBI informant about “doing the martyrdom operations” in Somalia and was convicted in 2010 of lying to the FBI about his plans to travel to the volatile eastern African nation.

Their lives intersected Sunday in this small town in north-central Texas, an unlikely venue for a violent collision of cultures. After a Sunday evening shootout outside the contest site between police and Simpson and another man firing assault rifles, both gunmen lay dead in the street. And Geller quickly posted a defiant blog: “This is a war on free speech. … Are we going to surrender to these monsters?”

The Texas showdown was America’s Charlie Hebdo moment, erupting just four months after gunmen shot and killed 12 people at the Paris offices of the satirical newspaper that had published cartoons of the prophet considered blasphemous by many Muslims. The Garland attack refocused public attention on the fine line between free speech and hate speech in the ideological struggle between radical Islam and the West.

So, the editors of The Los Angeles Times understood enough about freedom of speech to draw the comparison to the Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris — you know: the ones where the leaders of every liberal democracy in the world attended a free speech rally except President Barack Hussein Obama — but somehow, some way, just couldn’t understand that there is no “fine line between free speech and hate speech.” Speech is speech, and freedom of speech means absolutely nothing if it is limited only to speech to which no one has any objection.1

The cartoon contest was organized by Geller as a rallying point for cartoonists and conservatives united in their belief that verbal attacks on radical Islam are a form of free speech.

Did you note that: it is somehow “their belief” that criticizing Islam, “verbal attacks on radical Islam,” are part of the freedom of speech. One wonders what the editors of the Times would say if Christians objected to atheist propaganda or tried to shoot people who advocated same-sex “marriage.”

OK, that’s a lie: no one really wonders what the editors’ response would be. They would be aghast, because freedom of speech is only for the left; as William F Buckley once noted, “Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”

Geller has posted bus ads and billboards condemning Islam. In 2010, the same year the FBI was investigating Simpson’s vows to fight “kafirs,” or nonbelievers, Geller cofounded American Freedom Defense Initiative, also known as Stop Islamization of America. The organization, considered a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, hosted the Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon contest, offering $10,000 for the best cartoon of the prophet.

I asked yesterday, on Twitter:

I think it would be an honor to be listed as a hate site by the Southern Poverty Law Center!

“We know the risks,” Geller wrote in a blog promoting the event. “This event will require massive security.”

Still more at that top link.

As Pamela always says, “truth is the new hate speech.”

Actually, there’s no such thing as hate speech. As the FIRE notes, ““Hate speech” is not a category of speech recognized under current constitutional law. It is merely a convenient way to pigeonhole speech that some people find offensive.”

Yeah, well, Muslims and regressive leftists don’t like being called out with the truth. Hence, as soon as shots rang out virtually the entire media establishment and the left’s terror-enablers blamed Pamela for the attack. It’s an enormous perversion of reality, but this is the nature of the war we’re in. Obviously, the reporters at the Times are down with a sick moral equivalence that smears a freedom fighter who calls Islam for what it is — a political ideology seeking to eliminate all opposition, using any means necessary, including murderous jihad. Ironically, our mass media overlords truly believe that genuinely speaking your mind, quoting the words of the jihadists themselves, and courageously standing up for your right to do it, is extremism. It is, according to the Times, exactly the same as launching an armed attack on peaceful citizens attending a political convention about drawing cartoons. It’s so absurd it’s to die for.

The Bill of Rights

It was not so very long ago that I was in college, at the University of Kentucky, and it were the left who were so very, very adamant that freedom of speech was an absolute, that the First Amendment meant that anybody could say whatever he wished, and that was protected by the law. The “Free Speech Movement” began with campus protests at the University of California at Berkeley. But today it is the left which objects to the freedom of speech, the left including Hillary Clinton, who would pass a constitutional amendment to limit the freedom of speech on the very subject which concerned the Framers the most, political speech.

Is Pamela Gellar’s speech offensive? At least to some people, yup, it sure is.2 Then again, I find some of what Amanda Marcotte writes to be offensive, but I wouldn’t try to use the power of government to shut down what she says, nor urge that someone shoot her; her speech should be responded to solely with other speech, criticizing what she says, and mocking her.3 I find almost everything that Hillary Clinton says to be offensive, but I would not use the power of government to shut her up, nor suggest that someone ought to shoot her. To me, the freedom of speech is, and ought to be, an absolute: the government ought not have any power to regulate speech, or the press, or religion, exactly as the First Amendment specifies.

What has led to such a change? I’d say that a large part of it is due to the fact that the left have lost control of the media of publication. It wasn’t so very long ago that professional media gatekeepers had the power to decide what would and would not be published, what would and would not be heard beyond the sound of the speakers’ voices. Rush Limbaugh broke that with the national success of his show on talk radio, and it wasn’t long after that that the internet allowed other voices to self-publish, inexpensively or without any costs at all.4 Having lost their gatekeeping functions, the left seek to impose some form of control on what conservatives can say through other means; it hasn’t worked out well for them.

Now they are trying the “hate speech” meme, hoping that such will prevent some people from listening to speech that the left cannot simply prohibit outright. But, for the left, “hate speech” is really uncomfortable speech, speech which challenges what they think simply must be good and right and true, but is speech which they cannot refute, and they’d rather stick their collective fingers in their ears and yell “hate speech!” rather than have to do the harder work of examining what is said and disproving it . . . or accepting what they cannot disprove.
__________________

  1. Your Editor did ban one very frequent commenter for individual attacks on other commenters, but I did not restrict his freedom of speech; I simply decided that I would no longer publish his personal attacks on this site. His personal site, Bridging the Gap, which The First Street Journal actually sponsors, remains open, and Perry is free to write whatever he wishes there, though it appears that he hasn’t chosen to actually say anything there since December 13, 2014.
  2. Your Editor is not one of those offended by what she says or believes.
  3. Miss Marcotte has blocked me from following or viewing her tweets; it appears that she does not appreciate my criticisms. :)
  4. This site is inexpensive, less than $200 per year, while Dr Douglas’ site, on blogger.com, is actually free. Of course, we still have to pay for internet access.

As usual, Hillary Clinton gets it wrong

From The Washington Post:

Hillary Clinton hopes to undo the mass incarceration system Bill Clinton helped build
By Philip Bump | April 29, 2015

On Wednesday morning, Hillary Clinton appeared at New York’s Columbia University to discuss crime and criminal justice in one of the first speeches of her 2016 campaign. She advocated putting cameras on police officers and changing mandatory minimum sentences. And she put a fine point on the number of people in our prisons. “It’s time to end the era of mass incarceration,” she said. “We need a true national debate about how to reduce our prison population while keeping our communities safe.”

The “era of mass incarceration” didn’t begin the last time the Clintons were in the White House, but the administration of Bill Clinton was integral to its scale.

The Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics tracks the country’s prison population over time. Historic data is maintained by the University of Michigan, and it provides a look at the boom in America’s prison population over the last several decades.

Between 1983 and 2011, the number of people in federal and state prisons sentenced to a year or longer grew from 405,000 to over 1.3 million — a jump of 225 percent during a period that the population only grew by about a third.

We’ve marked the administrations of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush to offer a contrast that we’ll return to below. We have to note, of course, that the rate of violent crime peaked shortly before Clinton took office, and many of those who went to prison during his first few years in office entered the criminal justice system in the previous administration.

There’s a lot more at the link, but the two tables show just how very, very wrong Mrs Clinton is: as incarceration rates increased, violent crime rates decreased. The obvious reason is that more of the violent criminals were stuck in prison, and not out on the streets and able to commit more crimes.

The former Secretary of State was, naturally, pandering to the left following the death of Freddie Gray while in police custody. The problem is that she, and the rest of the race-pandering left learned exactly the wrong lesson: if Mr Gray had been in jail, as his rap sheet1 shows he should have been, he wouldn’t have been out on the street, wouldn’t have run from the police, wouldn’t have been arrested — again — and wouldn’t have been in that police van when he was injured; it is almost certain that Mr Gray would be alive today if the state’s attorney and the criminal justice system in Baltimore and Maryland had done their jobs and had him in jail.

From Wikipedia:2

Gray had a criminal record, mainly on drug charges and minor crimes.3 Gray had been involved in 20 criminal court cases, five of which were still active at the time of his death, and was due in court on a possession charge on April 24.4 In February 2009, he was sentenced to four years in prison for two counts of drug possession with intent to deliver and was paroled in 2011. In 2012, he was arrested for violating parole but was not sent back to prison. In 2013, he returned to prison for a month before being released again.

Mr Gray should have been in prison until 2013, but a oh-so-sympathetic criminal justice system turned him loose. Even after that, he violated his parole, and should have been sent back to prison to complete his sentence; he wound up in jail for just a month. Just this year, a man who was, in the euphemism, “known to the police,” was arrested four times, including for a violent offense (second-degree assault), and when law enforcement had him in their hands, the criminal justice system, run by the same State’s Attorney who filed charges against six police officers involved in Mr Gray’s death, let him go again.5

It ought to be obvious even to a liberal: a criminal who is in jail cannot commit crimes out on the street. Had Mr Gray been locked up for the full duration of his sentences, many of the offenses with which he was subsequently charged would never have occurred. The documented drop in the violent crime rate after imprisonment rates increased indicates that something caused violent crimes to decrease.6

What the former Secretary of State would like to do, should the votes be so foolish as to give her power, is to stop treating criminals like criminals. Her policies, were she in office to put them into effect, would make our cities more dangerous, not safer, would endanger law-abiding people, and turn the inner-city neighborhoods she says that she wants to help into worse places than they are today.
___________________________

  1. Freddie Gray’s rap sheet:

    • March 20, 2015: Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance
    • March 13, 2015: Malicious destruction of property, second-degree assault
    • January 20, 2015: Fourth-degree burglary, trespassing
    • January 14, 2015: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute
    • December 31, 2014: Possession of narcotics with intent to distribute
    • December 14, 2014: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance
    • August 31, 2014: Illegal gambling, trespassing
    • January 25, 2014: Possession of marijuana
    • September 28, 2013: Distribution of narcotics, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, second-degree assault, second-degree escape
    • April 13, 2012: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, violation of probation
    • July 16, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession with intent to distribute
    • March 28, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
    • March 14, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to manufacture and distribute
    • February 11, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance
    • August 29, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, violation of probation
    • August 28, 2007: Possession of marijuana
    • August 23, 2007: False statement to a peace officer, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
    • July 16, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance (2 counts)

  2. Internal Wikipedia footnotes converted into footnotes in this article.
  3. Muskal, Michael (April 22, 2015). “The death of Freddie Gray: What we know – and don’t know”Los Angeles Times (in en-US). ISSN 0458-3035. Retrieved April 26, 2015.
  4. “What we know, don’t know about Freddie Gray’s death”. CNN. April 22, 2015. Retrieved April 29, 2015.
  5. If Mr Gray was out on bail from his arrests in January, his arrests in March, including an arrest for a violent offense, should have seen his bail revoked.
  6. It is a post hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy to state, with absolute certainty, that the effect of having fewer criminals out on the street was directly responsible for the decrease in violent crime, because something else could have been responsible, but anyone with the slightest amount of common sense would conclude that such was almost certainly the main reason the violent crime rate dropped.

Rule 5 Blogging: Women with Weapons!

It’s the weekend and time, once again, for THE FIRST STREET JOURNAL’S version of Rule 5 Blogging. Robert Stacy McCain described Rule 5 as putting pictures of pretty women somewhat déshabillé, but, on this site, our Rule 5 Blogging doesn’t put up pictures of Megan Fox in her summer clothes, but women, in full military gear, serving their countries in the armed forces. The terribly sexist authors on this site celebrate strong women, women who can take care of themselves and take care of others, women who have been willing to put their lives on the line in some not-so-friendly places, women who truly do have the “We can do it!” attitude.

We were talking to our younger daughter last weekend, and she said that she’d be horrible at golf. I asked her, “Well, how good were you with a rifle when you started?” She said she was terrible. But, after instruction, and practice, she qualified as a Marksman in Basic Combat Training, and, after that, both daughters have subsequently qualified as Sharpshooters. My point to her was that it doesn’t matter too much how bad you are at something when you start, with training and practice you can get good. She noted that she doesn’t get much chance to practice, at which point I noted that she still scored as a Sharpshooter on her last quals. Her response was that all she did was go through the procedure taught in BCT concerning sighting, squeezing the trigger, and breathing technique. I replied, well they must have taught you those things pretty well if that’s what’s keeping you qualified! So, this week, Basic Combat Training at Fort Jackson!

Basic Combat Training, Bravo Company, 1-61st Infantry Battalion, 165th Infantry Brigade, Fort Jackson, SC

Continue reading ‘Rule 5 Blogging: Women with Weapons!’ »

From Around the Blogroll

So, what’s the point?

Curfew continues in Baltimore; arrests made
By Ray Sanchez, Ralph Ellis and Faith Karimi , CNN | Updated 11:10 PM ET, Sat May 2, 2015

Baltimore (CNN) Hundreds of Baltimore residents rallied peacefully Saturday following the arrest a day earlier of six police officers in the death of Freddie Gray.

A smaller number remained in the streets when the city curfew went into effect at 10 p.m., CNN reporters in Baltimore said. Some protesters were arrested a brief time later, CNN’s Nick Valencia said.

Community members had urged the curfew, which has started Tuesday night, be ended.

“For five days now people have been under curfew,” said Jay Morrison of the YMC Community Coalition. “I think we need to put trust in the people. This curfew should be lifted.”

Brandon Scott, a Baltimore City Council member, predicted people would defy the curfew as they have in past nights. Police detained 53 people late Friday, including 15 who violated curfew.

More at the link.

The six Baltimore police officers (three of whom are black) who were involved in the arrest of the criminal Freddie Gray have been arrested and charged with various crimes, including, in one case, second degree murder, so why are the good citizens of the Charm City still protesting? CNN ran yet another sympathetic story, asking where all of the older black men were, chalking up part of their absence to “long prison sentences,” but long prison sentences are the result of criminals getting caught and convicted of committing crimes. It’s pretty simple: if you don’t break the law, you won’t go to jail.

And the death of Mr Gray can be chalked up to two things: his long criminal history,1 through which he became, as the euphemism goes, “known to the police,” and the fact that with his long rap sheet, he should have already been in jail on the night of the fatal arrest. Had he been in jail, where he belonged, instead of out on the street, he’d almost certainly still be alive today.

From around the blogroll:

That’s all for this week!

  1. Freddie Gray’s rap sheet:

    • March 20, 2015: Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance
    • March 13, 2015: Malicious destruction of property, second-degree assault
    • January 20, 2015: Fourth-degree burglary, trespassing
    • January 14, 2015: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute
    • December 31, 2014: Possession of narcotics with intent to distribute
    • December 14, 2014: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance
    • August 31, 2014: Illegal gambling, trespassing
    • January 25, 2014: Possession of marijuana
    • September 28, 2013: Distribution of narcotics, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, second-degree assault, second-degree escape
    • April 13, 2012: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, violation of probation
    • July 16, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession with intent to distribute
    • March 28, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
    • March 14, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to manufacture and distribute
    • February 11, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance
    • August 29, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, violation of probation
    • August 28, 2007: Possession of marijuana
    • August 23, 2007: False statement to a peace officer, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
    • July 16, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance (2 counts)


Bernie Sanders is running for President. At least we have a socialist who admits he’s a socialist!

From The Wall Street Journal:

Bernie Sanders Campaign to Highlight ‘Immoral’ U.S. Economic System
Remarks come hours after Sanders launches his presidential campaign
By Rebecca Ballhaus and Siobhan Hughes | April 30, 2015 2:41 p.m. ET

Sen. Bernie Sanders said Thursday he would build his presidential campaign around a promise to remake an economic system he said rewarded the wealthy at the expense of ordinary Americans struggling to make ends meet.

The liberal Vermont independent’s remarks came hours after he launched his presidential campaign, with a pledge to harness a grass-roots movement of Americans fed up with that model.

“That type of economics is not only immoral, is not only wrong—it is unsustainable,” Mr. Sanders said at a news conference outside the U.S. Capitol on Thursday. “The major issue is how do we create an economy that works for all of our people, rather than a small number?”

Mr. Sanders, who routinely sounds populist themes on the Senate floor, said that Americans were working longer hours for low wages and struggling to send their children to college and to pay for health care. He said that the richest Americans now owned a disproportionate share of the country’s wealth, and he made clear he would use a presidential bid to flesh out policy ideas for reversing that trend. Some of those approaches are likely to be unpopular with businesses.

Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT)

What, he hasn’t already “flesh(ed) out policy ideas for reversing that trend”? He’s been in Congress since January 3, 1991; shouldn’t 24 years have been enough time to have gotten that done? And I find it somewhat amusing that Senator Sanders, who has never run as a Democrat before, but as an independent who caucuses with the Democrats, now thinks that he should have the Democratic presidential nomination. Jason Scott thinks that Mr Sanders should win, so we know that the Vermonter has the stupidest of the Democrats on his side.

With Senator Sanders’ entry into the race, the average age of the Democratic presidential candidates is now 70, but it’s apparent that age has failed to bing wisdom to either of the Democratic candidates. But at least Senator Sanders is honest enough to admit hat he’s a socialist. Clearly, he’s a fan of other strong socialist economies, like Venezuela.

But, most amusing to me is that Senator Sanders is announcing that he wants to become our President, just as we are seeing how badly socialist/liberal/progressive policies have failed in Baltimore. Forty years of Democratic government, aided and abetted by a Maryland state government which has also been controlled by the Democrats for decades, and now Mr Sanders wants to remake the rest of the United States into Baltimore’s image. What a great plan!

Cargo Ship MÆRSK TIGRIS Captured by IRAN

US Navy called in after Iran fires at cargo ship in Persian Gulf Pentagon says Iranians board Marshall Islands-flagged Maersk Tigris; Iran claims ship is owned by US, held over financial dispute
BY AFP April 28, 2015, 5:53 pm

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards seized control of a Marshall Islands-flagged cargo vessel in the strategic Strait of Hormuz on Tuesday, prompting the US Navy to dispatch a destroyer to “monitor” the situation, officials said.

Iranian military ships fired across the bow of the Maersk Tigris when the captain initially refused a demand to head towards Iranian territory, US government and cargo company officials said.

Moron this Here: http://www.timesofisrael.com/iran-reportedly-seizes-us-cargo-ship-holds-crew/

As of 10PM EDT Tuesday 4/28/15 the ship is stopped according to the “Live Ship Map”

If you want to track it follow this link: http://bit.ly/MaerskTigris

My question is, does BO Care, and what does this do to his giving the Farm Away to Iran?

BTW, It was a Maersk ship the ALABAMA stolen by Somali Pirates

For the left, what’s sauce for the goose is never, ever, sauce for the gander!

From The New York Times:

Gay Businessman Who Hosted Ted Cruz Event Apologizes

Senator Ted Cruz’s appearance last week at a New York dinner hosted by two gay hoteliers, in which the topic of same-sex marriage was discussed, created a stir. Credit Ian Thomas Jansen-Lonnquist for The New York Times

Ian Reisner, one of the two gay hoteliers facing boycott calls for hosting an event for Senator Ted Cruz, who is adamantly opposed to same-sex marriage, apologized to the gay community for showing “poor judgment.”

Mr. Reisner put the apology on Facebook, where a page calling for a boycott of his properties, the gay-friendly OUT NYC hotel and his Fire Island Pines holdings, had gotten more than 8,200 “likes” by Sunday evening.

“I am shaken to my bones by the emails, texts, postings and phone calls of the past few days. I made a terrible mistake,” wrote Mr. Reisner.

The New York Times first reported on the event, a dinner and on April 20, at the duplex Mr. Reisner and his business partner Mati Weiderpass co-own on Central Park South in Manhattan. The event was a “fireside chat” for about a dozen people, but was not a fund-raiser.

The two men are prominent figures in the gay rights community, and Mr. Reisner has been especially vocal about same-sex marriage. He’s also a staunch supporter of Israel, as is Mr. Cruz.

But Mr. Cruz has also introduced legislation to try to preserve the rights of states to maintain their bans on same-sex marriage and he has called for pastors to hold prayer services while the Supreme Court hears arguments on April 28 over the legality of the bans.

Last week, Mr. Reisner and another attendee said Mr. Cruz didn’t explicitly say he opposed same-sex marriage at the catered dinner, but said that the issue was best left to the states. Mr. Cruz, who is hoping to appeal to evangelical voters in the Iowa caucuses, said he had voiced his strong religious opposition to same-sex marriage at the dinner.

More at the Times original.

So, if a homosexual hotelier must apologize for allowing Senator Cruz to hire his facilities for a campaign event, doesn’t this mean, inter alia, that the homosexual community accepts the idea that a businessman can refuse to provide facilities or goods or services to people or events with which he morally or ethically disagrees?

Well, no, of course not! Why, these things work in only one direction: liberals may, and should, refuse to provide facilities, goods or services to people who have traditional, conservative or Christian ideas, but conservatives may not and must not ever refuse anything to anyone on the left.

From Around the Blogroll: NBC News and a culture of dishonesty

From CNN Money:

NBC finds at least 10 Brian Williams embellishments

The in-house investigators assigned to look into Brian Williams’ past reports have documented at least 10 instances of exaggerations and embellishments by the NBC anchorman.

The investigation is not yet complete, according to a person with knowledge of it, who described some of the findings on condition of anonymity.

Translation: NBC has already decided to fire Mr Williams — there really is no other choice — and had someone leak the results of the as-yet-incomplete investigation to set the stage for Mr Williams’ dismissal. It is my guess that he will be allowed to retire, with some form of golden parachute, in exchange for a deal not to sue NBC.

It is unclear whether Williams had had a chance to defend himself to his bosses. NBC has not allowed him to do so publicly.

NBCUniversal CEO Steve Burke was briefed on the current findings at a Thursday morning meeting in New York. The meeting suggests that the network is nearing a decision about Williams’ future.

Williams, the anchor of “NBC Nightly News” for the past 10 years, was suspended nearly three months ago when a scandal erupted about his recounting of an Iraq War mission in 2003.

And further down:

But The New York Times and The Washington Post reported new details on Friday night that painted Williams in a decidedly negative light.

The Times reported that Esposito’s team has uncovered “discrepancies” in Williams’ accounts of his reporting from Tahrir Square in Cairo, Egypt in 2011.

The Times said it was one of a “half-dozen instances” that have raised eyebrows internally.

The Post reported that the investigation has “turned up 11 instances in which the anchorman publicly embellished details of his reporting exploits.”

It also said Thursday’s meeting was attended by Burke; the man he recently appointed to oversee NBC News, Andy Lack, and the president of NBC News, Deborah Turness.

But Mr Williams and his serial “exaggerating” is hardly the only problem at NBC. We have previously noted that popular1 MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry, who has persistently advocated higher taxes on the top producers, has had a tax lien filed against her husband and herself by the Infernal Revenue Service, and National Review has noted that Dr Harris-Perry is only one of four MSNBC hosts who haven’ paid all of their taxes.2 3 Why, it’s almost as though NBC News’ problems aren’t just that Brian Williams lied on the air, but an ingrained climate of dishonesty.

And now, on to the blogroll!

____________________________________________________

  1. Given MSNBC’s in-the-toilet ratings, perhaps labeling any MSNBC host as “popular” is an exaggeration, at best, on my part.
  2. One of them, Joy-Ann Reid, had her MSNBC show cancelled in February due to lousy ratings.
  3. I suppose that it would be considered raaaaacist to point out that all four of the MSNBC hosts who are in trouble with the IRS are black.

Rule 5 Blogging: United States Marine Corps!

It’s the weekend, and time, once again, for our version of Rule 5 Blogging. Robert Stacy McCain described as putting pictures of pretty women somewhat deshabille, but, on this site, our Rule 5 Blogging doesn’t put up pictures of Anne Hathaway in her summer clothes, but women, in full military gear, serving their countries in the armed forces. The terribly sexist authors on this site celebrate strong women, women who can take care of themselves and take care of others, women who have been willing to put their lives on the line in some not-so-friendly places, women who truly do have the “We can do it!” attitude. Click on any picture to embiggen. This week, United States Marines!

CAMP BLUE DIAMOND, AR RAMADI, Iraq -- Corporal Teresa T. Fernandez received a combat meritorious promotion this month for her work as a 2nd Marine Division Headquarters Battalion armorer. She is one of only a few Marines responsible for the maintenance and repair of several units’ weapons. U.S. Mar by Sgt. Stephen D’Alessio (RELEASED)

Continue reading ‘Rule 5 Blogging: United States Marine Corps!’ »

The Asylum Is Here, And It SUCKS

‘POOP EQUALITY’: STUDENTS HOLD ‘SH*T-IN’ AT PUBLIC CALIFORNIA UNIVERSITY

Whats True

The Queer Student Union at California Polytechnic University recently orchestrated a three-day “shit-in” at which students preached “Gender Diversity” and encouraged students to use solely gender-neutral bathrooms on campus.
“Put yourself in the shoes of a trans*/gender non-conforming student and take the pledge to use only all gender bathrooms,” a post from the organization’s Facebook page read.

Students reportedly created a staged toilet in the middle of campus, which students signed and decorated with several banners, one of which read “We’ve got shit to deal with,” according to images acquired by Campus Reform.

Moron this here:

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2015/04/21/poop-equality-students-hold-sht-in-at-public-california-university/