You are here

Feed aggregator

Below-Freezing Temperatures Don’t Stop Record Numbers of Pro-Lifers From Marching in Chicago

The Stream - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 23:56

Despite frigid temperatures, record numbers of people came out to march against abortion Sunday at Chicago's 2018 March For Life.

More than 6,000 people gathered at Sunday's march, marking the largest pro-life gathering in the Midwest to date.

"This March for Life Chicago drew people of all ages, from across the Midwest," said March for Life Chicago's Board of Directors President, Dawn Fitzpatrick, according to a TCPR press release. "They are from all walks of life, but they have one thing in common, they know that love saves lives and that abortion is one of our culture's gravest ills."

Chicago Bears' co-owner Pat McCaskey kicked off the march with music from Carmel High School Marching Band from Mundelein, Ill.

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream >>

"The deadliest thing in the world is indifference," keynote speaker and former Planned Parenthood director Ramona Trevino told the onlooking crowd. Trevino added that pro-lifers must use love to counter the forces that make it possible for Planned Parenthood to perform more than 300,000 abortions a year. The march also featured remarks from Chicago's archbishop, U.S. congressmen and Illinois legislators.

"[Teens] are being groomed as future abortion patients because Planned Parenthood promotes a promiscuous lifestyle," former Planned Parenthood manager Ramona Trevino recently told TheDCNF in an exclusive interview.

"We're not discouraging them from having sex at a young age. We have monthly quotas to meet. They're just numbers," she said.

Trevino worked as the manager of a Planned Parenthood abortion referral facility in Sherman, Texas, for three years before leaving in 2011.

Chicago will host a Women's March focusing on women's reproductive rights and abortion access Saturday, according to WGN9 News.


Follow Grace on Twitter.

Copyright 2018 The Daily Caller News Foundation

CNN Leaps Into The Toilet: Network Aired 195 Uses of 'S***hole' on Friday

NewsBusters - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 23:37
<p>In the contest for Most Offended News Network after President Trump reportedly referred to African nations as “s***hole” countries, CNN should win hands down. NewsBusters staff combed through CNN transcripts on Nexis for the S-hole word in the 24 hours of January 12 – the first full day after <em>The Washington Post </em>reported the controversy – and found CNN staffers and CNN guests uncorked the profanity 195 times in one day. Compare that to Fox News Channel. Their curse count was zero. FNC told staff and guests not to say it.</p>

Deranged: CNN’s Douglas Brinkley Greenlights Jeff Flake Comparing Donald Trump to Joseph Stalin

NewsBusters - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 22:55
<p>CNN presidential historian Douglas Brinkley surfaced on Monday afternoon’s <em>CNN Newsroom</em> to reprise his role as a far-left sycophant. This time, he condemned Arizona Republican Senator Jeff Flake’s comparison of President Trump to Joseph Stalin and channeled Kayne West to blast Trump as someone who doesn’t care about the “plight of people that aren't white.”</p>

NYT’s Peters: Flake ‘Trying to Save’ GOP By Comparing Trump to Stalin

NewsBusters - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 22:18
<p>Appearing on the 1:00 p.m. ET hour of MSNBC on Monday, <em>New York Times</em> reporter Jeremy Peters proclaimed that Arizona Senator Jeff Flake’s outrageous comparison of President Trump to mass-murdering Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin was actually an attempt by the retiring Republican lawmaker to “save” the GOP.</p>

What Pro-Lifers Can and CAN’T Learn from the Civil Rights Movement

The Stream - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 21:14

Today we mark the legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr. He's not just some ethnic hero, but a true American one. He is even, in critical ways, a conservative paragon. We'll lay out why, and draw out what the pro-life movement can -- and cannot -- learn from King's success.

King a "conservative"? It seems absurd at first. King sparked massive change in American life. He radically unsettled the existing social order. He rejected calls for "prudence" and "gradual change." He pointed to abstract principles to condemn concrete arrangements which had seemed to "work," after a fashion, for 100 years since the Civil War.

His Civil Rights movement, however just its cause, did create a template for a long list of less worthy jihads, on behalf of disgruntled feminists, abortion mongers, and same-sex libertines. On that point, Southern conservatives proved sadly correct: overturning the racial hierarchy in America let a lot of other genies out of the bottle. Some of those spirits are afflicting the black community worse than segregation ever did (i.e., abortion).

No surprise that when King was organizing marches and sit-ins, most of the existing conservative movement opposed him. William F. Buckley and most of the writers at National Review were among them. But Buckley and NR came around as did most Americans. Here's why:

More than almost any other political leader since Lincoln, King sought to polish the Golden Egg of liberty and equal opportunity, without doing violence to the Goose -- that is, America as an orderly nation of laws. Both his arguments and his tactics bear that out.

Martin Luther King, Patriot

Arguing for civil rights, King did not appeal to the Marxist dialectic that so many of his allies had accepted. Nor did he latch onto the bastardized and racist pseudo-Islam that Malcolm X was peddling. No, King cited St. Thomas Aquinas and pointed to "natural law" that can overrule any legislation a nation passes -- be it the Nuremberg Laws in Germany, or segregation in America. King pointed to the words of our nation's founders, and called them a "promissory note" to America's black citizens. And there really was no rational counter-argument to all that. He left his enemies weaponless, except for fire-hoses and truncheons.

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream >>

Such thuggish means backfired on white supremacists, and turned the nation against them. But that need not have happened. The whole Civil Rights movement could have gone sidewise, and sparked mass civil conflict. That happened in Northern Ireland in the early 1970s, and it could well have happened here. There were three key factors that made the difference:


King knew that one of the key psychological factors that had undergirded white supremacist laws since the days of slavery was fear of mass black violence. For centuries, some states had lived in the uneasy knowledge that in their midst were millions of strong, angry black men with grievances. The slave revolt in Haiti had terrified U.S. slaveholders. Nat Turner's rebellion led states to outlaw manumission, and crack down on preachers who were teaching slaves how to read the Bible. So King insisted that every one of his activists who would violate unjust laws would not resist any violence. Not by police, and not by white vigilantes. Men underwent hours of training, taking blows and abuse from civil rights organizers, to learn how not to fight back.

This tactic was both principled and brilliant. But there was no guarantee that it would work. There's nothing magical about non-violence. It doesn't work in every situation. Gandhi famously made a fool of himself when he counseled Europe's Jews to apply his non-violent methods against the Nazis. Such tactics can only prevail if two other factors stand in place:

A Nation with a Christian Conscience

In the mid-twentieth century, Britain was still largely Christian. English culture treasured a deep-seated sense of fair play and justice. Gandhi knew that when he confronted its colonial policies. His tactics would not have prevailed against the Germans. Hitler once offered Britain the unsolicited advice that it should "Hang Gandhi," then every week hang more of his supporters until the Indian independence movement collapsed. No English government could have faced its voters if it had used tactics like that. That was true for one final reason. This factor was key to the success of both the Indian national struggle and the civil rights movement. Most of America was still Christian in some sense in the early 1960s as well.

A Free and Fair Press

Atrocities committed by British commanders were sure to be reported in the British national press. That gave the British public the chance to be outraged and demand a change of course. In the U.S., local Southern papers might have been committed to segregation. But national papers opposed it, and so did national TV and radio networks. They would cover the violence that segregationists and police used against non-violent demonstrators. And that would spark a moral backlash across the country.

Arguing for civil rights, King did not appeal to the Marxist dialectic that so many of his allies had accepted. Nor did he latch onto the bastardized and racist pseudo-Islam that Malcolm X was peddling. No, King cited St. Thomas Aquinas and pointed to "natural law".

With all these pieces in place, the moral violence of segregation would be seen in the public mind for what it was -- because it was backed by physical violence. The bogeyman of black men as dangerous potential predators faded away, as dignified young black men in coats and ties patiently suffered abuse, without fighting back. Instead of new Nat Turners, they seemed like images of Christ. And a still-Christian nation began to be ashamed of itself.

Why Operation Rescue Failed

What happens when not all these crucial pieces are in place? Non-violent witness can be blunted, or silenced. In the 1980s, thousands of courageous pro-lifers across the country tried, via Operation Rescue, to apply King's tactics to defending unborn children. They saved some babies, but as a national movement, they failed.

Pro-lifers held sit-ins in abortion mills. They went limp when police arrested them. They chained themselves to the front doors of Planned Parenthood clinics in the ghetto, and handed out leaflets about that group's racist heritage. When police used violent tactics against old women and teenagers, pro-lifers didn't resist. We know women whom burly cops subjected to "pain compliance" holds. The cops dislocated 14-year-old girls' wrists with nun-chucks. In West Hartford, Connecticut and Los Angeles, California, the violence was especially bad -- and it was all caught on videotape.

A pro-life demonstrator under assault by police in Los Angeles, 1989.

But you would have to watch it at some pro-lifer’s house on a VCR. Because none of that footage was aired. The media were lockstep pro-choice, just as white Southern newspapers had been rabidly segregationist. There were no outside media who could pick up the story. So an epidemic of violence, and punitive jail sentences, against pro-life non-violent demonstrators fell into the memory hole. The movement failed.

Today, pro-lifers make extensive use of alternative, social media. The pro-life stings of James O' Keefe, Lila Rose, David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt have been seen by millions of people. Students for Life of America, Movie To Movement, and the Susan B. Anthony List have leveraged social media to become enormous, effective movements.

But now these activists face open censorship by those social media platforms. Billion-dollar media corporations once again, as in the 1980s, could shut down a mass non-violent movement for human rights. If these companies get away with this abuse of power, we face the same national shame we would have deserved if Martin Luther King had died, obscure, in some Alabama prison.

Al Sharpton: Donald Trump's 'Agenda Is to Race-Bait and Bring Us Backwards' '100 Years'

NewsBusters - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 20:46
<p>On Monday’s <em>Morning Joe</em>, as part of their nearly three-hour long marathon of anti-Trump hate in reaction to the President’s alleged comments describing Haiti, El Salvador, and African nations as “shithole countries,” co-host Joe Scarborough brought on just the right person to attack Trump as a race-baiter–the Reverend Al Sharpton himself. Apparently unaware of the intense irony, Scarborough presented Sharpton as a legitimate voice of moral authority on questions of racism and both MSNBC pundits went on at length about how Trump’s true political “agenda is to race-bait and bring [America] backwards” “100 years.”</p>

Confirmed: Twitter Shadowbans Conservatives

The Stream - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 20:45

Twitter has been “shadowbanning” conservative accounts, as some have recently charged.  Project Veritas secretly videotaped several Twitter employees admitting to hiding conservative tweets from other users.

Run by conservative videographer James O’Keefe, Project Veritas filmed Abhinov Vadrevu, a former Twitter software engineer, explaining how shadowbanning works. “The idea of a shadow ban is that you ban someone but they don't know they've been banned, because they keep posting and no one sees their content. So they just think that no one is engaging with their content, when in reality, no one is seeing it." Tweets will show up in the news feeds of users’ followers, but not anywhere else on Twitter such as in search results.

A former content review agent for Twitter, Mo Norai, says Twitter bans accounts for political reasons. "If they said this is pro-Trump and I don’t want it because it offends me, this, that. And I say I banned this whole thing." Content reviewers would let a lot of the left-leaning or liberal stuff go through unchecked.

Twitter Under Fire

Twitter has come under fire for other types of censorship.

There are claims that it is quick to suspend or ban accounts from those on the right. Journalist Megan Fox reports getting silenced for the kinds of things everyone says in normal political arguments. Twitter banned prominent blogger Robert Stacy McCain, known for his acerbic, witty criticisms of feminism, in February 2016. It seems to give those on a left a pass who act the same way toward conservatives.

There are also complaints about favoritism. Twitter provides an  blue checkmark on accounts of prominent people it’s authenticated. The checkmark makes others more likely to follow them.

However, little known accounts on the left with barely 1,000 followers are awarded blue checks. Prominent people on the right with well over 20,000 followers are not.

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, famous for exposing the left, has over 673,000 followers. Twitter will not give him a blue check.

Something on the left “would come through checked and then I would be like, oh you know what? This is okay. Let it go.” Twitter, he admits, is “probably about 90 percent anti-Trump, maybe 99 percent anti-Trump.”

Shadowban for Control

Vadrevu admits Twitter’s interest is not free speech, but controlling the platform. “One strategy is to shadow ban so you have full control.” He acknowledges, “It’s like, unethical in some way.”

Former Twitter engineer Conrado Miranda is asked by a Project Veritas reporter on video whether Twitter shadowbans conservatives and Trump supporters. He responds, “That’s a thing. Yeah.” He explains how a filter removes those kinds of tweets.

Pranay Singh, Twitter Direct Messaging Engineer, explained on January 5 to Project Veritas how Twitter set up the algorithms to censor right-leaning content. The system looks for key words, then evaluates the message. He claims the company does it to catch bots from Russia.

“Yeah you look for Trump, or America, or any of, like, five thousand, like, keywords to describe a redneck. Then you look and parse all the messages, all the pictures, and then you look for stuff that matches that stuff." He went on, "the majority of it [the algorithms] are for Republicans." 

Twitter software engineer Steven Pierre explained further on video how the censorship algorithms work, "Every single conversation is going to be rated by a machine, and the machine is going to say whether or not it's a positive thing or a negative thing," Pierre said. "It's going to ban a way of talking."

In another video, a senior network security engineer revealed the company is turning over to the DOJ President Trump’s direct messages. Clay Haynes said, Twitter is "more than happy to help" by providing "every single tweet that [Trump] has posted, even the ones he's deleted. Any direct messages, any mentions."

He admitted, “I’m pretty sure every single employee at Twitter hates Trump.” He says “you got to go to Google to find the conservative.” He says because the company is located in a blue area, employees see plenty of unwritten rules about censoring the right.

Twitter’s Defense

Twitter denied shadowbanning. In a statement to Fox News, the company declared, “Twitter does not shadowban accounts. We do take actions to downrank accounts that are abusive, and mark them accordingly so people can still to click through and see these Tweets if they so choose.” Twitter downplayed Haynes’ remarks. It said he does not speak for the company. Twitter clarified that it only speaks with law enforcement in response to a valid legal request.

The company also attacked Project Veritas “selective editing.” The group edits its videos to cut out irrelevant portions but says it doesn’t distort the message. Twitter disagrees. "We deplore the deceptive and underhanded tactics by which this footage was obtained and selectively edited to fit a pre-determined narrative.”

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream >>

While Twitter is a private company, it is now so dominant in public life that Steve Bannon and others call for it to be regulated it like a public utility. Its reach over the news continues to grow. Eleven percent of Americans now get news from Twitter.

Facebook employees changed its trending topics section to downplay right-leaning news. Public outcry forced the company to stop the practice. Facebook fired the employees.

A spokesman for Project Veritas said there are more videos coming. Twitter would be wise to emulate Facebook or risk regulation like a public utility.



Follow Rachel on Twitter at Rach_IC

Pro-Life Leader Invites ‘Out of Touch’ Justin Trudeau to March for Life

NewsBusters - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 20:43
<p>On Friday, more than 100,000 Americans are expected to march in the nation’s capital to celebrate life and condemn abortion. While the networks often overlook the March for Life, it exemplifies the strength and youth of the pro-life movement – something one leader wants the Canadian prime minister to grasp.</p>

Trump Honors MLK’s Legacy in Weekly Address to Nation

The Stream - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 20:43

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) -- President Donald Trump says the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream of a colorblind society is the American dream.

Trump dedicated his weekly address to King, the civil rights leader who was assassinated 50 years ago in April. Trump spent Monday’s King federal holiday in Florida with no public appearances on his official schedule, but he tweeted the radio and video address to his followers.

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream >>

Trump says in the address that King’s dream of a colorblind society offers dignity and hope to every American, regardless of color or creed.


"Dr. King's dream is our dream. It is the American Dream. It's the promise stitched into the fabric of our Nation, etched into the hearts of our people, and written into the soul of humankind."

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) January 15, 2018


Copyright 2018 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

MRC's Bozell Hammers 'Intellectual Fraud' Flake 'Working Overtime to Curry Favor' with the Liberal Media

NewsBusters - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 20:39
<p>Media Research Center President Brent Bozell was on fire ripping Republican Senator Jeff Flake (Ariz.) during Monday afternoon’s <em>Cavuto: Coast to Coast</em>, telling FBN host Neil Cavuto that Flake is an “intellectual fraud” “who is working overtime to curry favor with” the liberal media. Bozell’s comments were directed at Flake in reaction to an upcoming speech in which Flake will compare President Trump to the evil, murderous, and communist Soviet leader Joseph Stalin. </p>

#MeToo, Times Up Feminists: Wage Inequality Is ‘Violence’

NewsBusters - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 20:34
<p>Feminists and activists are always eager to build a victim narrative. So it should come as no surprise that the feminists behind the trends “Times Up” and “#MeToo” have decided to re-define terminology in order to better fit their narrative. Activists Tarana Burke, Ai-Jen Poo, and Monica Ramirez wrote, in a guest-column for the <em>Hollywood Reporter</em>.</p>

Washington Post Finally Admits Socialism Led to Venezuela's 3,000% Inflation

NewsBusters - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 20:11
<p>Venezuela’s socialist government hopes increased tourism will help replace oil revenue, in their “collapsing” economy. But even the <em>Washington</em> <em>Post </em>was <a href="" style="text-decoration-line:none">skeptical</a> on Jan. 12, writing, “Yet for a country saddled with the world’s highest inflation rate and rampant violence, Becoming a tourist paradise may be as improbable as a new Disney theme park in Damascus.”</p>

Condoleezza Rice Warns of #MeToo Hype: ‘Let’s Not Turn Women Into Snowflakes,' 'Infants'

NewsBusters - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 19:50
<p>In a move that has some on the left outraged, Condoleezza Rice urged caution in embracing the #MeToo and #TimesUp movements and their witch hunt-like methods in ousting sexual harassment in the workplace.</p> <div> </div>

Beyond the Iran Nuclear Deal - AEI - American Enterprise Institute: Freedom, Opportunity, Enterprise

American Enterprise Institute - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 19:22

President Trump seemingly served notice Friday that the days are dwindling for Barack Obama’s Iran agreement. Although deal proponents also gained time to pursue “fixes,” this is a forlorn option. No fix will remedy the diplomatic Waterloo Mr. Obama negotiated. Democrats will reject anything that endangers his prized international contrivance, and the Europeans are more interested in trade with Tehran than a stronger agreement.

There is an even more fundamental obstacle: Iran. Negotiating with Congress and Europe will not modify the actual deal’s terms, which Iran (buttressed by Russia and China) has no interest in changing. Increased inspections, for example, is a nonstarter for Tehran. Mr. Obama gave the ayatollahs what they wanted; they will not give it back.

Most important, there is no evidence Iran’s intention to obtain deliverable nuclear weapons has wavered. None of the proposed “fixes” change this basic, unanswerable reality.

Full content is available to Wall Street Journal subscribers here.

Morning Joe: 'Tyrannical' Trump Turning America Into 'Real S-Hole'

NewsBusters - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 18:55
<p>After nearly three hours of hyperventilating about President Trump’s purported comments last Thursday describing Haiti, El Salvador, and African countries as “shitholes,” Monday’s <em>Morning Joe</em> brought on author and NBC Political Analyst Anand Giridharadas to discuss Trump’s “radical,” “reactionary,” and “racist” comments. Predictably, Giridharadas did not have many kind words for the President, declaring that it was, in fact, America that was being turned into the “real s-hole” by Trump.</p>

MSNBC: Dems ‘Draw Line’ on DACA, GOP Will ‘Own’ Shutdown

NewsBusters - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 18:37
<p>On Monday, MSNBC was already working hard to make sure Republicans would be solely to blame for any possible government shutdown at the end of the week and proclaiming that Democrats “fed up” with the GOP were ready to “draw a line” on maintaining the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.</p>

Journalist? Oprah Winfrey Skips Celeb’s Petition for Admitted Rapist

NewsBusters - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 18:30
<p>It’s unclear what kind of presidential candidate Oprah Winfrey would be, but she’s not much of a probing journalist. On CBS's <em>Sunday Morning</em>, the“special contributor” talked to celebrity women in the Time’s Up movement about sexual harassment. One member of the all-female panel was Natalie Portman. While talking about Woody Allen, Winfrey managed to forget that Portman appeared in one of his filmsand that the movie star also signed a petition in defense of admitted child rapist Roman Polanski. </p>

Pro-Life Groups at Odds Over Which Pro-Life Bill Should Go Before the House for Vote During March for Life

The Stream - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 18:01

On January 19, the U.S. House will vote on H.R.3504, also known as the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. January 19 is also the day of the March for Life. Another pro-life group believes the House should vote on their bill, H.R.490, also called The Heartbeat Protection Act, on the day that thousands are expected to demonstrate against abortion.

While the original Born-Alive bill became law in 2002, the current version seeks to expand anti-infanticide protections for babies born alive during abortions, LifeSiteNews reported.

Susan B. Anthony List's (SBA) National Campaign Chair Jill Stanek was once a nurse who witnessed babies who survived abortion left to die. She said:

Horrific crimes are taking place in abortion facilities around the country. Children born alive are denied medical care and left to die -- cold, alone, abandoned and discarded like medical waste. From Kermit Gosnell's 'house of horrors,' to a D.C. abortionist admitting he would not intervene to save the baby, to a former Planned Parenthood medical director stating that the main consideration when determining whether to provide lifesaving care is who's watching, pleading ignorance is not an option. This is infanticide, plain and simple. Everyone should be able to agree on equal protection under the law for these children.

On the other hand, supporters of the Heartbeat Protection Act want their bill before the House that day. Faith2Action's Janet Porter, an organizer of the bill said, "It's the most protective incremental bill in existence." The Heartbeat Protection Act would outlaw any abortion where the heartbeat can be detected -- even in cases of rape. The only exception as outlined in the bill is an abortion "that is necessary to save the life of a mother whose life is endangered by a physical (but not psychological or emotional) disorder, illness, or condition.”

Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, sponsor of the Heartbeat Protection Act told LifeSiteNews “it's a pro-life ‘turf battle.’"

King and Porter believe that National Right to Life (NRLC) and House Majority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., are preventing a vote on the Heartbeat bill.

"Can you believe it?" King said in a Facebook post. "A 'pro-life' activist group is actually attempting to block a pro-life bill! This is absolutely insane and they need to be called out on their hypocrisy ASAP."

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream >>

NRLC disputes King’s claims. In an interview with LifeSiteNews, NRLC’s deputy press secretary Tatiana Bergum said NRLC’s president Carol Tobias told King she does not oppose the Heartbeat Bill. “We don’t understand why he is singling out National Right to Life for his unfair attacks.”

"The only organization that we can identify that's not publicly endorsing and supporting the bill is National Right to Life," said King. "I think National Right to Life needs to decide to lead, follow, or get out of the way."

King and Porter believe that if NRLC, SBA and Family Research Council supported the Heartbeat bill it would go to the floor for a vote.

"National Right to Life has been arguing that the Supreme Court won't uphold" the Heartbeat Bill, said King. "I think the argument's stronger in upholding the Heartbeat Bill than it is in upholding the Pain-Capable Bill." 

"I don't wanna disparage [the] Pain-Capable" Bill, King said. King was one of the bill’s co-sponsors. "But that bill was written during the Obama era with the idea that Obama could be convinced to sign it. It wasn't written with the expectation that we would have a president that would actually sign a pro-life bill … the Heartbeat Bill is written with that" understanding.

"I know if I have to answer to God which one He'll tell me I need to do," King said. "He'll say, 'save the babies. Don't worry about people's feelings; save the babies.'"

"I'm not interested in people's egos; I'm interested in saving the lives of babies," he continued. And if the Heartbeat legislation doesn’t go to the floor? "I'll be obligated to do everything that I can do that is within the rules and within the morals and ethics and standards that each of us should have."

#Nutso: Check Out This Far-Left CNN Article on MLK’s Socialism; Compares Him to a Phone App

NewsBusters - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 18:00
<p>To mark Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, uncorked a stunningly crazy piece by CNN enterprise writer John Blake about modern day lessons from King such as his supposed status as “an environmental hero” and the need to embrace socialism since “[h]e was a socialist before it was cool.”</p>

Is Google So Far to the Left That it Has Lost Touch With Reality?

The Stream - Mon, 01/15/2018 - 17:48

This is certainly a scary proposition, given the power of Google. But is Google is so far to the left that it is virtually out to lunch? Does it largely exist in a parallel universe? Is Google is so far beyond politically correctness that it has abandoned reality? If the allegations of fired employee James Damore are true, the answer to these questions is yes. At least among many Google employees and executives.

Apparently Google Endorses “Living as a Plural Being”

In a January 8, 2018 tweet, Tucker Carlson pointed to page 27, footnote 3 of Damore's lawsuit. "For instance, an employee who sexually identifies as ‘a yellow-scaled wingless dragonkin’ and ‘an expansive ornate building’ presented a talk entitled ‘Living as a Plural Being’ at an internal company event."

Page 27, Footnote 3: "For instance, an employee who sexually identifies as 'a yellow-scaled wingless dragonkin' and 'an expansive ornate building' presented a talk entitled 'Living as a Plural Being' at an internal company event."

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) January 9, 2018

I personally believe this claim to be accurate. First, Damore was meticulous in documenting his claims. Second, who could possibly make up something like this?

Can you imagine Damore thinking, "I'll make Google look bad by coming up a ludicrous accusation that no thinking human being could possibly take seriously. That's what I'll do! Moreover, I'll include it in a lawsuit that will be challenged by the most expensive lawyers money can buy!" Right!

What does it mean to sexually identify as a “yellow-scaled wingless dragonkin?” What in the world is that?

Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream >>

Aside from the insanity of identifying as such a being, what does it mean to sexually identify as this make-believe creature? And then what does it mean also to identify as "an expansive ornate building"? The last time I checked, buildings were inanimate objects.

Google for Furries

But I think I got ahead of myself. I inserted logic into the mix. How silly of me! After all, this person was lecturing on "Living as a Plural Being." So why not be animate and inanimate? Why not be a building and a wingless dragonkin at the same time?

Damore also alleged the following:

Google furnishes a large number of internal mailing lists catering to employees with alternative lifestyles, including furries, polygamy, transgenderism, and plurality, for the purpose of discussing sexual topics. The only lifestyle that seems to not be openly discussed on Google's internal forums is traditional heterosexual monogamy.

What are "furries?" Writing for PJ Media, Tyler O'Neil explained that they "dress up and act like animals. A movement of 'human pups' mixes BDSM and gay sex with the 'lifestyle' of grown men dressing up and acting like dogs."

And Google, Damore claims, furnishes mailing lists catering to employees into this “lifestyle.”

Powerful Company, Scary Problem

All this would be frightening enough if Google was merely a small company in your hometown. It would be wacky, bizarre, and even sick. But it wouldn’t be particularly harmful.

That is not the case. Google is one of the most powerful companies in the world. And it has come under increasing criticism for censoring views it does not like.

In June, 2016, Robert Epstein wrote in U.S. News that "Google, Inc., isn’t just the world’s biggest purveyor of information; it is also the world’s biggest censor." He added:

The company maintains at least nine different blacklists that impact our lives, generally without input or authority from any outside advisory group, industry association or government agency. Google is not the only company suppressing content on the internet. Reddit has frequently been accused of banning postings on specific topics, and a recent report suggests that Facebook has been deleting conservative news stories from its newsfeed, a practice that might have a significant effect on public opinion -- even on voting. Google, though, is currently the biggest bully on the block.

Censoring Conservatives

Just last week, Eric Lieberman reported at The Daily Caller:

Google, the most powerful search engine in the world, is now displaying fact checks for conservative publications in its results. No prominent liberal site receives the same treatment.

And not only is Google's fact-checking highly partisan -- perhaps reflecting the sentiments of its leaders -- it is also blatantly wrong, asserting sites made “claims” they demonstrably never made.

And last October, Prager U YouTube channel announced it was taking "legal action against Google and YouTube for Discrimination." As founder Dennis Prager explained,

Watch any one of our videos and you'll immediately realize that Google/YouTube censorship is entirely ideologically driven. For the record, our videos are presented by some of the finest minds in the Western world, including four Pulitzer Prize winners, former prime ministers, and professors from the most prestigious universities in America."

Damore’s allegations support the above assertions. Of Damore’s allegations, I’ve only highlighted some of the most bizarre. In the alternative universe where Google appears to live, furries, dragonkin and plural beings are accepted. But conservative-minded "Pulitzer Prize winners, former prime ministers, and professors" are a threat.

Did I say that this was scary?


Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer