Protectors of Duopoly

Another election is upon us and we hear the cries about a democracy in peril. This is done to obfuscate that we are in fact a republic and their intention is to do away with our republic and replace it with a pure, raw democracy. Democracy as the Founders knew is a dangerous and unstable form of governance. It seeks a lowest common-denominator majority in order to grant rash and undue powers to those in office. Constitutional protocols and limits are to be ignored in order to implement the "will of the people" or more so the vast ignorance of today's low-information voters (Swift, Cher, Lizzo, Beyoncé). Progressives push this democracy narrative to obtain their agenda which is in the end unconstitutional. They know that the best way to rid ourselves of the constitutional republic is to convince everyone that we live in a democracy.

Calls for getting rid of our constitutional rights, proper adherence to or of the Constitution altogether emanate from the progressive sector. Their politicians call for ending the Second Amendment or for putting stringent limits on the right to bear arms. They oppose free speech with their never-ending list of words to ban or their punitive actions against those whose speech is deemed offensive or as micro-aggression. They even demand that you use particular pronouns as their title when you address them. They have invoked impeachment powers frivolously and waged lawfare against their opponents while neglecting to activate the 25th Amendment upon a noticeably impaired president. They violate 8th Amendment rights by the imprisonment of January 6th protestors for indefinite periods in squalid conditions with excessive charges and bail yet dismissing the long injuries and destruction of the BLM and Antifa (BLAMtifa) riots for months on end. They are no friend to powers reserved to the states or delineation of power between government branches as demonstrated in their want of preserving ROE V. WADE (a case of federal judicial activism) as opposed to regulating abortion more appropriately within the states which gives variety and flexibility on an issue that cannot be agreed upon nationally -- a method of approach as is done in many other areas. They obsess and constantly revisit that case which was overturned by the Court in just fashion. They are simultaneously saying Trump will support a federal edict over it which he has repeatedly denied all the while criticizing him for revisiting the 2020 election anomalies.

The old mainstream legacy news media is an enabler toward the progressive narrative as they love to portray it via the spin in their coverage. We've seen this in their reporting between Trump and Harris, on COVID and in the attitudes or contradictions regarding the Aurora CO apartment gangs story. In a similar vain as according to the establishment news media -- all election irregularities of the 2020 presidential election are purely mythical and of no substance where anyone who believes contrary is pushing a lie. While not all claims and players about the allegations over a stolen election were credible, the old news media concentrates more upon stories involving discredited accounts or picks and chooses court cases and legal opinions to that effect and then declares that any 2020 presidential election questionableness is merely conspiracy theory. They do this despite the sudden appearance of mail-in Biden ballots at 3 a.m. altering the count, sworn affidavits of reliable citizens over improper ballot counting and being denied observation of counting procedures with bolstering video evidence submitted. The Texas attorney general's case against other states' violation of the Article II, Section 1, second clause provision (legislature-mandated electors), its dubious dismissal and the other dubious dismissals by leftist-leaning or timid courts plus the obvious and factual Maricopa County, AZ history of ballot corruption shows that the old news media is biased in their reporting and cannot be trusted.

Those media sources are not here to inform the voters of all the facts in order to result in a best decision but they are there to manipulate and massage the news into a position that favors their progressive narrative. These news massagers are apparent to anyone with an overall open and informed mind that does not rely only upon the old-school news networks such as ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, New York Times, Washington Post (or most newspapers), NPR/PBS national news coverage plus the likes of Rolling Stone, Huffington Post and even modern digital behemoths like Facebook, Google and YouTube who have been found filtering or outright censoring content in the progressives' favor. Fox News does get credit for showing the other sides of a story ignored or denied by the old-school, massaging mainstream news media though they do come across as cheerleaders which gives those on the establishment front opportunity to dismiss them as mere proponents of another narrative. Our suggestion to you for this election or any other is to get news coverage from varying sources outside and within the more mainstream, weigh the facts and arguments of those whose record is more reliable and then squaring from that with what works or is congruent to our constitutional republic's civic structure. However, that can be easier said than done especially with ballots overloaded with too many races which overwhelm the voter's ability to make all the right choices.

So resist being duped by the old mainstream or digital behemoth news massagers and seek coverage and analysis by more truthful or independent sources exhibiting reliability and constitutional civic knowledge. Don't let the legacy mainstream news do your thinking for you! Remember that the call to the masses to protect our democracy is a euphemism to abolish the workings or our republic. Their incantations for democracy are hollow as they make no real accompanying demand to eliminate the two-party system that restricts ballot access to third parties. They offer no affinity voting system that can functionally handle third parties which allows for victory of more nuanced compromise. Until the system is changed there will only be further polarization where the two parties accommodate mostly to some lowest common denominator that's too broad to adequately filter the radicals or sell-outs. A two-party system is just one step above and closest to a one-party state which increasingly exists behind the scenes with the uniparty collaborators.

Until the anti-constitutional intent of the progressives and the massaging bias of the media is better known to the masses, their demands to protect our "democracy" will only result in an overbearing uniparty state enabled by the weakness and miscalculations of Weimar Republicans and brought about through the rash and rabid promises of Utopian Democrats. Such is evident in that party's calls for 'social justice' which in practice means to punish those classified under particular demographic categories as oppressors for the injustices of the past committed against certain minorities as opposed to punishment via due process for an individual's actions today which is true justice. Ironically, their 'diversity' in practice is where everyone thinks and conforms alike to a socio-economic perspective that excludes the input of what's considered more traditional western values like merit and personal accountability. Their 'gender affirmation' in practice is actually a travesty of gender confusion being pushed upon the upcoming generations. Forget not that their party has let crime run amok by defunding police in various jurisdictions.

It's time that the outcome of an election should be determined by weighing policies of the candidates as to whether they are feasible solutions to the real problems we face as opposed to basing an election on the divisive boogeyman tactics of identity politics.

Deleterious Effects of Democracy

“The founders didn't want this sort of democracy at all. The Constitution is written so that citizenship rights are very, very limited,” he says. “They worried about democracy ... It was a bad form of government because once you let everybody participate, then you're likely to elect a demagogue. You're likely to have people come to power who appeal to the frenzy of the masses. That idea is long gone.”

'Wehrman points out that the framers of the Constitution saw to it that only one part of one branch of the federal government, the House of Representatives, is popularly elected by the people. The Electoral College chooses the president, the commander in chief selects the Supreme Court justices and, originally, senators were selected by state legislatures.' ~ Dora Mekouar | January 24, 2021 7:00 AM

'Founders actually feared democratic rule. James Madison expressed this attitude in Federalist #10: "...instability, injustice, and confusion ...have in truth been the mortal disease under which popular governments everywhere perished..."

'The Founders preferred the term "republic" to "democracy" because it described a system they generally preferred: the interests of the peopled were represented by more knowledgeable or wealthier citizens who were responsible to those that elected them. Today we tend to use the terms "republic" and "democracy" interchangeably.'

'Another modern version of democracy is called "democratic centralism," a term made famous by Vladimir Ulyinov Lenin. As the leader of the Russian Revolution in 1917, he established a communist government that allowed no private property to exist. All members of society were theoretically equal. However, Lenin considered a small "vanguard of the revolution" necessary to guide the people and establish order. So a small group of leaders make decisions in the name of the people, based on their perceptions of what the people want and need.'

'There is a sense, then, in which the Constitution’s detractors are right about its being “antidemocratic.” It is antidemocratic in the sense that it is pro-republic.'

'The limits on federal power set forth in the Constitution make it a bulwark against many sorts of abuse, including that most constant temptation of democracies, the tyranny of the majority.'

'Yet Americans now find their lives directed by a jumble of agencies far removed from the legislature and staffed by bureaucrats who make and enforce a vast network of rules that govern nearly every aspect of our lives.'

'Woodrow Wilson, a standard-bearer for an earlier incarnation of the progressive juggernaut, welcomed such an arrangement.'

“The bulk of mankind,” he noted sadly, “is rigidly unphilosophical, and nowadays the bulk of mankind votes.”

'What to do? The solution was to shift real power out of elected bodies and into the hands of the right sort of people, enlightened people, progressive people — people, that is to say, like Woodrow Wilson.'

'It used to be that the left accorded a certain latitude to opposing views.'

'That’s all over now.'

'Every issue is an existential emergency for which the left’s shock troops are willing to go to the wall.' ~ Roger Kimball | Published Sep. 27, 2024, 7:17 p.m. ET

'This same over-the-top rhetoric about democracy has become pervasive among many on the political left in recent years. The hyperbole holding democracy at the level of god and religion comes with the defamation that those on the right are trying to undermine democracy through election integrity legislation. It’s past time to push back against the accusation that conservatives are “undermining democracy.”

'John Jay, the first chief justice of the Supreme Court, similarly warned of democracy. “Too many … love pure democracy dearly. They seem not to consider that pure democracy, like pure rum, easily produces intoxication, and with it a thousand mad pranks and fooleries.”

'Famed writer and historian Gore Vidal put it simply that “the founding fathers hated two things: Monarchy and Democracy. They wanted a Republic.” That is what we have in America.'

'In recent years, the political left has taken this to a new level. They go so far as to claim the nondemocratic attributes of our Constitution, like the Electoral College, should be abolished. They have started attacking the Supreme Court in a way we have never experienced. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and other top Democrats have called the Capitol Building the “temple” of Democracy and a “sacred” place. Others in the Democratic Party and media have made similar statements inferring “democracy” is on par with God and defines the American system.' ~ Bill Connor

Move to Abolish the Constitution

'In fact, the complaint about the Constitution being anti-democratic is true. The Constitution does not mention the term “democracy.” It does allow for a democratic vote every two years. We are so brainwashed that we call our form of government democracy without thinking. And now the power-mad are trying the next big step to diminish the Constitution, because this document stands between them and ultimate power.'

'The Constitution is anti-democratic because America’s founding documents’ sole purpose is to preserve the sanctity of the individual. The Constitution seeks to prevent the ultimate abuse by democracy: that the majority of 51% will control the minority of 49%. In the democratic view of the nation, the majority should issue edicts that everyone follows, no matter the effect on the individual.'

'In a constitutional republic, the tyranny of the majority is held in check in many profound ways. Among them is separation of powers into legislative, judicial, and administrative roles, with distinct powers and limits on those powers. Another is the bicameral congress, a house, and a senate. A third is the Electoral College, which serves to prevent the larger states from overpowering the less populated states. The fourth is states’ rights, further distributing power from the central government. In the beginning, the only people allowed to vote were landowners, because the founders thought they had a personal stake in understanding their role as self-governing.'

'A republic is so much more than a democracy.' ~ Jay Davidson

“The framers of the Constitution went too far in preventing amendments,” he now argues. As a result, we are stuck with a set of rules which not only makes addressing political problems harder but is itself responsible for many of the political problems we need to address. The Constitution’s “very existence as a largely unchanged document has become a sledgehammer wielded by a minority to prop up a system that engenders polarization and festering national discord,” he says. Chemerinsky doesn’t just want to amend the Constitution, either. He wants us to throw it out and come up with a new one.'

'Pierson and Schickler, too, blame the Constitution, not so much because it was misconceived from the start as because it is now past its sell-by date. For most of American history, although there were some rough patches, the Constitution worked O.K., they think, but it “was simply not designed to meet the challenges we now face.” They compare the system of government the Framers built to “aging and rickety software.”

'But what about a new constitutional convention? If we convened one, would we get a better set of rules? In fact, writing a new Constitution has been suggested many times before, and the Constitution even makes provision for a constitutional convention. One notable writer supporting the idea is Sanford Levinson, of the University of Texas School of Law, who made the case in “Our Undemocratic Constitution,” published in 2006. He’s a liberal, and holding a constitutional convention may seem like a liberal idea, a response to the politicization of the federal judiciary under Trump and Mitch McConnell.' ~ Louis Menand | September 23, 2024

'The attacks on the court are part of a growing counterconstitutional movement that began in higher education and seems recently to have reached a critical mass in the media and politics.'

'The past few months have seen an explosion of books and articles laying out a new vision of “democracy” unconstrained by constitutional limits on majority power.'

'In the New York Times, book critic Jennifer Szalai scoffs at what she calls “Constitution worship.” She writes: “Americans have long assumed that the Constitution could save us; a growing chorus now wonders whether we need to be saved from it.” She frets that by limiting the power of the majority, the Constitution “can end up fostering the widespread cynicism that helps authoritarianism grow.”

'In a 2022 New York Times op-ed, “The Constitution Is Broken and Should Not Be Reclaimed,” law professors Ryan D. Doerfler of Harvard and Samuel Moyn of Yale called for liberals to “reclaim America from constitutionalism.”

'Without countermajoritarian protections and institutions, politics would be reduced to raw power. That’s what some have in mind. In an October 2020 interview, Harvard law professor Michael Klarman laid out a plan for Democrats should they win the White House and both congressional chambers. They would enact “democracy-entrenching legislation,” which would ensure that “the Republican Party will never win another election” unless it moved to the left. The problem: “The Supreme Court could strike down everything I just described, and that’s something the Democrats need to fix.” ~ Tyler Durden | Wednesday, Sep 25, 2024 - 08:05 PM

'But Georgetown law professor Louis Michael Seidman says that adherence to the Constitution is both misguided and long out of date. In his incendiary new book, On Constitutional Disobedience, the scholar who clerked for Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall argues that giving up on the Constitution would improve American political discourse and government, freeing us from what he describes as an “intergenerational power grab” by the Founding Fathers.'

'There is one thing that would change, and that is people would not be able to stop an argument by saying, “But that is unconstitutional.”

'The Constitution, in the great words of its preamble, speaks of “we the people,” of forming “a more perfect union” and providing “for the common defense” and “general welfare.” Those are things that anybody could favor. To the extent that we treat the Constitution as kind of a poem that inspires us, or even as a framework that allows us to debate how we should achieve these things, I don’t have a problem with that. Poems inspire us, but they don’t command obedience, and I don’t think the Constitution should either.' ~ Amy Crawford | February 5, 2013

Legacy Mainstream Media Bias in Trump/Harris Coverage

'The severity of the matter, coupled with the short time elapsed between the events, demands our attention and careful discussion.'

'Yet the collective response from the so-called first drafters of history, the Fourth Estate, has been anything but appropriate for the moment, especially concerning the second assassination attempt. The reactions have lacked the weight and seriousness one would expect as recently as ten years ago for just one of these incidents, let alone events just two months apart.'

'If a right-leaning individual tried to murder Vice President Kamala Harris, Trump would be accused of inspiring the attack. There’s no doubt about it. Weirdly, when we reverse the roles and an individual with Democratic ties attempts to murder Trump, Trump is also accused of inspiring the attack. It’s a worldview in which Trump is responsible for all political violence, regardless of the target. Meanwhile, the people who claim his rhetoric inspires such violence are never held accountable for similar rhetoric, even when political violence is committed against the GOP nominee and conservatives.'

'Then, of course, there were the articles downplaying the second gunman’s apparent left-wing inclinations, including his multiple donations to Democratic candidates, his pro-Democratic voting record, and his very public embrace of Democratic sloganeering.'

“The suspect arrested in relation to the shooting at Trump’s golf course in Florida on Sunday has been identified as Ryan Routh,” Time magazine reported on September 16, “a 58-year-old with unclear political ideology, a criminal record, and a history of praising Iran and supporting Ukraine.” ~ Becket Adams | September 22, 2024 6:30 AM

'It’s clear that the media thinks that another news cycle about a Trump assassination this close to the Nov. 5 election has to be downplayed. It’s double bad that the would-be assassin Sunday has a record of donating to Democrats and copied the Biden-Harris campaign message about Trump being a threat to “democracy.”

'There is an old phrase in the media world for when you’re in an interview and don’t want to answer a specific question. It’s called a “block and bridge.” That’s what the media has done collectively with this story to make it go away.'

'So, the bias is obvious. You already know how this would have been covered if it was Vice President Kamala Harris who nearly had been assassinated for a second time.'

'And here’s where we get to the “bridge” part. USA Today, when it bothered to report on Sunday’s second assassination attempt at all, insinuated that it’s Trump’s fault that people are trying to kill him.'

'The Enquirer ended up changing the headline about Trump’s bringing violence on himself for not “meeting their editorial standards.” Of course, the Ohio newspaper left in a summary that Trump “brings the crazies out, and one of those crazies tried to shoot him.”

'Clinton said in an MSNBC interview with host Rachel Maddow—aired just a day after the assassination attempt—that the media needs to be even more relentless in how it defines Trump as a “danger to our country and the world.”

'Instead of victim-blaming Trump, it’s time for much of America’s corporate media outlets to look in the mirror and consider that they, not Trump, have become a threat to democracy.' ~ Jarrett Stepman | September 18, 2024

'Witt’s questioning about the Trump campaign asking to tone down “the violence” comes after her network, MSNBC, platformed speakers, such as Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY) in July, who have claimed Trump is an “existential threat to democracy.” Just before the second assassination attempt on Trump on Sunday, MSNBC’s Inside with Jen Psaki featured Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-TX), who argued domestic terrorism in the country is real and that Trump is “the guy that stokes it.”

'The network conducted an interview between anchor Jake Tapper and former Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney in October 2023, in which she warned that Trump is “the single most dangerous threat we face.” Tapper has compared Trump’s speeches to the writings of Adolf Hitler and his book Mein Kampf.'

'On Truth Social, the former president blamed President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris for spreading “rhetoric” that has resulted in another assassination attempt against him. Trump argued Biden’s and Harris’s past comments calling him a “threat to democracy” are hypocritical, citing his four criminal cases as proof they are inciting violence against him.' ~ Asher Notheis | September 16, 2024 1:28 pm

'It is true that Trump's willingness to engage in hyperbolic speech and wild accusations that are either exaggerated or completely untethered to the truth was a shock to the American political system. From the moment he came down the escalator in Trump Tower in June 2015, Trump has never behaved like a typical politician or used measured speech. His tendency to continuously break the accepted rules of politics earned him the admiration of tens of millions of Americans, but the ire of many opponents. They have reacted to every flight of Trumpian rhetorical fancy with not just outrage but predictions that each incident would finally be the one that breaks him, only to always be disappointed. Rather than penalize Trump, his followers discounted the gaffes and cheered him precisely because he had not pulled his punches in denouncing a D.C. establishment that has done so much damage to the country.'

'Nor are they prepared to hold themselves to the same standards by which they judge Trump and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio). Vance was bashed for highlighting the complaints of some Springfield, Ohio, residents about Haitian immigrants. In a hostile interview, CNN's Dana Bash accused him of inciting bomb threats against schools and hospitals even though he had never called for violence.'

'While Trump can be criticized for his over-the-top speeches, Democrats and the liberal media have gone much further. They have justified inappropriate Nazi analogies and undermined the democratic system, which is incompatible with efforts to brand one side of the political spectrum as beyond the pale. America's constitutional republic has flourished because we have a tradition of recognizing our political foes as mistaken but not as enemies. By engaging in campaigns to smear Trump and lawsuits whose purpose is to bankrupt and imprison a political foe, Democrats have crossed the line between partisan speech and banana republic tactics.'

'That is the predicament in which the Democrats' unquenchable rage at Trump has landed us.' | Published Sep 17, 2024 at 11:57 AM EDT :: Updated Sep 17, 2024 at 1:09 PM EDT

'On Oct. 6, four weeks before the Nov. 5 election, “60 Minutes” featured an interview of Ms. Harris by Bill Whitaker. The editors went beyond the usual media airbrushing. They not only cleaned up Ms. Harris’ rambling sentences but also rearranged statements by both Mr. Whitaker and Ms. Harris for effect.'

'How do we know this? Because unedited portions became available. In an earlier broadcast of CBS’ “Face the Nation,” a two-minute teaser aired that was not featured on “60 Minutes.” That segment was replaced by two minutes of differently edited tape.'

'Why did “60 Minutes” do this? Democrats are concerned about Muslim voter turnout in Michigan, a swing state, and Minnesota, both of which have large Muslim communities. Someone at “60 Minutes” could have been protecting the Democratic nominee’s Islamic flank.'

'A less savory reason might be growing antisemitism among American progressives, including mainstream news outlets such as CBS.'

'According to the New York Post, CBS News’ senior director of standards emailed all CBS News employees in late August with a list of problematic terms, including Jerusalem: “Do not refer to it as being in Israel.”

'In a study released just before the vice presidential debate, the Media Research Center reviewed more than 340 hours of coverage in 161 stories on the “CBS Evening News” and its Saturday-Sunday twin, the “CBS Weekend News,” from July 21 to Sept. 27. The study found that coverage of Ms. Harris was 84% positive, contrasted with coverage of Mr. Trump, which was 79% negative.'

'The same held for the vice presidential candidates, with Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, getting 89% positive coverage and Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio, a Republican, getting 89% negative coverage.'

'In the Oct. 1 vice presidential debate on CBS, Mr. Vance was confronted with hostile queries, mini editorials and even a fake fact check by moderators Margaret Brennan and Norah O’Donnell.' ~ Robert Knight | Friday, October 11, 2024

'Former CBS News staffers are demanding an independent investigation into “60 Minutes” over the brewing Kamala Harris interview scandal — even as the network digs in its heels and refuses to release the full, unedited transcript, The Post has learned.'

'The controversy has prompted media insiders and critics — including Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump — to question the ethical standards at the Tiffany Network.'

“I think there should be an outside investigation,” one former CBS News journalist told The Post on Thursday. “Obviously, there’s a problem here. If they care about journalistic integrity, they would conduct an investigation or release the full transcript.” ~ Alexandra Steigrad | Published Oct. 10, 2024, 7:03 p.m. ET

'Minutes in, the moderators showed bias against Trump, primarily by fact checking him and not Harris, even though both made false claims. It is possible Trump made more false claims than Harris overall — CNN (Lean Left bias) counted 33 false claims from Trump and one false claim from Harris, while Ryan Saavedra (Not Rated) of the Daily Wire (Right bias) counted 16 false claims from Harris and 14 from Trump — but it’s still notable that the moderators never fact checked Harris.'

'Here are some comments from Harris that were false or needed context, but the debate moderators did not check:' .... {bullet list within link}

'In an example of a slanted question, Muir asked Trump, “Why do you believe it's appropriate to weigh in on the racial identity of your opponent?” The framing of the question already implies disapproval on the part of the moderators. Rather than asking about the content of Trump’s policies or comments, asking why the comments were appropriate intentionally forces Trump to answer a loaded question to which there is no good answer. Either he must say his comment was inappropriate, or say, “It is justified to comment on the racial identity of my opponent.” The question misses Trump’s original point about Harris purportedly changing her stated identity and using her ethnicity for political gain.'

'While moderators asked Trump about his purported involvement in Jan. 6, moderators did not ask Harris about posting about the Minnesota Freedom Fund, which was used to bail out protesters and rioters in Minneapolis in the wake of George Floyd’s death, and which Harris has been criticized for.'

'The right tends to view the 2020 Black Lives Matter riots as equally or more destructive than Jan. 6 and also informing Jan. 6; one critique of Harris’ running mate is that he allowed the rioting in his time as governor of Minnesota. Moderators would have been more balanced to ask both about Jan. 6 and the summer of 2020 leading up to it.' ~ Clare Ashcraft | September 11th, 2024

'The Muir-Davis deception was part of an ongoing media revolt against the electorate that has been boasted about in the trade press. But many refused to heed those reports as warnings.'

“Harris also has a tight circle of powerful female friends in Hollywood that advise and support her, including Disney’s Walden, Amazon Studios chief Jen Salke and Sharon Klein, Disney’s head of TV casting.”

'But more interesting is the description of Walden: “As the head of Disney’s television business, she runs ABC News.” This puts Walden in charge of the Muir-Davis moderator squad that notoriously interfered with the debate.'

'There’s a long line of TV performers who brandish their political preferences under the façade of interviews, town halls, and panel discussions: NBC’s Savannah Guthrie and Kristin Welker; CBS’s Norah O’Donnell and Margaret Brennan; everyone at MSNBC; everyone at CNN except Scott Jennings; ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, Jonathan Karl, Rachel Scott, and Martha Raddatz, plus Muir and Davis.'

'Independent journalist Matt Taibbi recently noted, “Reporters no longer see themselves as a check on power. They see themselves as a part of it.” So Muir-Davis “fact-checked” Trump and repeatedly gave passes to Harris.' ~ Armond White | September 13, 2024 6:30 AM

Legacy Mainstream Media Untrustworthy COVID Coverage

'Maher took aim at The Daily Beast for a hit piece it ran on him in 2021 for considering the lab-leak theory, running the headline "Bill Maher pushes Steve Bannon Wuhan lab conspiracy theory," something he noted was "typical of the mainstream media at the time."

"Of course, it wasn't a conspiracy theory, and it wasn't owned by Steve Bannon. And now everyone, including the Biden administration, admits there's at least a 50-50 chance that the virus could have begun in the lab in Wuhan that was doing gain-of-function research on that virus, duh! But I don't see a lot of retractions being printed," Maher said.'

"Yes, some very bad ideas were embraced as the conventional wisdom, ideas that haven't aged well. And a lot of its dissenting opinions that were suppressed and ridiculed at the time have proven to be correct," Maher said. "Maybe that's why the powers that be never wanted a COVID commission. Why not? We love commissions! The Warren Commission, the AIDS Commission, 911 Commission. The NFL even had an 'Is ramming your head into another guy's head bad for heads?' Commission." ~ Joseph A. Wulfsohn | Published March 30, 2024 8:50am EDT

'By late 2020, the media and public health establishment had two obsessions. One of their obsessions involved forcing the public to wear masks, even though the mountains of data and several studies had already confirmed that they don’t stop the transmission of respiratory viruses. The second obsession was forcing everyone to take Covid vaccines, regardless of their actual efficacy, risk of side effects, age or underlying health, or the vaccines’ rapidly waning efficacy.'

'Neither of those obsessions has abated, though even the most extreme, hardened Covid extremists have acknowledged that the vaccines were flawed, mandates were a mistake, and side effects should be acknowledged.'

'The media, unwilling to give up on the increased power, influence, and moral judgment it gained during the pandemic, has refused to accept that it effectively ended years ago. ' ~ Ian MillerIan Miller | July 19, 2024

'For example, when Neil Ferguson of Imperial College in London more than two months ago reported his model that predicted up to 2.2 million coronavirus deaths in the United States, the New York Times accepted the predictions as near reported fact, both in its news and editorial coverage. Despite the fact that Ferguson has a long record of making wild exaggerations in his death-from-disease models, the media treated his dire predictions as Oracles from the Gods and demanded radical measures to counter this alleged threat.'

'Given that most American journalists, both print and electronic, would proudly call themselves progressives, we should not be surprised when news coverage follows progressive narratives that hold to the view that expansion of state power is also the expansion of civilization itself.'

'Not surprisingly, it is the NYT and like media outlets that have turned Anthony Fauci’s every word into fulfilled prophecy (even if what he said actually was not true), and if Fauci is cautious about allowing people to reopen their businesses and go back to work, then we should all remain self-quarantined.'

'For most of their formal education, journalists have been taught that we are running out of resources, that overpopulation of the planet is a dire threat, and that environmental catastrophe (this time with climate change) is always around the corner. Most journalists I know have not even developed the intellectual capacity to believe otherwise, even when time and again the dire predictions that they have come to religiously believe don’t actually occur.'

'Something like the COVID-19 saga fits into nearly every narrative from progressive journalists that one can imagine.'

'Last, journalists can clearly see that politicians are much more likely to act on what seems to be certain catastrophe, and in return journalists heap praise on those politicians that take the most extreme measures. Take Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York, for example. Despite the fact that Cuomo ordered nursing homes to admit COVID-19 patients—despite the vulnerability of elderly people to the coronavirus—with his directive leading to numerous deaths, the media coverage is largely positive precisely because he is seen as “doing something.” ~ Mises Wire • William L. Anderson | 05/14/2020

Reports of Venezuelan Gang Around Aurora CO Apartments

'Aurora Mayor Mike Coffman acknowledged on Thursday that Venezuelan gangs have taken control of several apartment complexes in the northern part of the city in what he called “a nightmare situation.”

'He also admitted that the city "lost control" of the gang infiltration "and we're working aggressively to get it back."

'But he pushed back on the national media’s recent portrayal of an entire city being overrun by gangs.'

'Coffman said it’s no coincidence that three Aurora apartment complexes that have had major problems are owned by the same company, CBZ Management.'

'The management that ran the buildings disappeared when violence started happening there, according to residents who spoke with The Denver Gazette.'

“The gangs are making people turn over their keys to them. They want access to their units because they need places to hop into and hide their guns and dope when police show up,” he said.' ~ Carol McKinley | Aug 29, 2024 :: Updated Sep 11, 2024

'Residents at an Aurora apartment complex are speaking out against the narrative that their building is being taken over by a Venezuelan gang — saying it isn't true.'

'A Facebook post by Mayor Mike Coffman perhaps added to the panic when Coffman called for an emergency court order to clear the apartment buildings associated with Venezuelan gang activity, declaring the properties a "criminal nuisance." ~ Kristian LopezPosted | 8:27 PM, Sep 03, 2024 :: updated 12:55 PM, Sep 04, 2024

'The move to apprehend the armed Venezuelan gang members comes after a blitz of national media attention on the city of Aurora thanks to the efforts of Council Member Danielle Jurinsky.'

'After assisting residents Cindy and Edward Romero on Wednesday, they were able to share a video which has since gone viral online and on the air.'

'Colorado's capital and largest city, Denver, is a sanctuary city. Aurora is a suburb of Denver.'

'Jurinsky celebrated in a call with Fox News Digital, saying "I am happy that what I have been saying is now confirmed. It is a shame that people had to suffer for as long as they did, but I am happy that this gang will now be addressed." ~ Jasmine Baehr | August 30, 2024 8:35pm EDT

Bias, Censorship, Monopolization of Content Under Big Digital

'Regarding the pandemic, the Facebook founder said President Joe Biden's administration had in 2021 "repeatedly pressured our teams for months to censor certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire."

'Zuckerberg said he would not be repeating his Covid-era push to fund non-profits working to support US electoral infrastructure due to such donations being seen by Republicans as being partisan.'

'The letter also touched on controversy regarding Facebook's handling of a story regarding US President Joe Biden's son Hunter that was published by the New York Post in 2020.'

'Zuckerberg said the story, which purported to expose corrupt dealings by the Biden family, was "temporarily demoted" while Facebook fact-checkers probed the possibility of it being "a potential Russian disinformation operation."

'Donald Trump, who is seeking a return to power in November after losing his reelection fight to Biden in 2020, claimed that Zuckerberg's statement offered support for his conspiracy theory that the election was stolen.' | Issued on: 27/08/2024 - 06:21 :: Modified: 27/08/2024 - 16:56

'Former President Trump on Friday threatened to prosecute Google if elected in November, alleging the search engine was “only” showing “bad” stories about him and “good” articles about Vice President Harris.'

“This is an ILLEGAL ACTIVITY, and hopefully the Justice Department will criminally prosecute them for this blatant Interference of Elections,” he continued. “If not, and subject to the Laws of our Country, I will request their prosecution, at the maximum levels, when I win the Election, and become President of the United States!”

'In the report, Media Research Center alleged that Google “pads its search results about political candidates with leftist legacy news articles,” pointing to stories from outlets like The New York Times, The Washington Post and CNN that appeared above both candidates’ campaign websites.'

“Both campaign websites consistently appear at the top of Search for relevant and common search queries,” a Google spokesperson said. “This report looked at a single rare search term on a single day a few weeks ago, and even for that search, both candidates’ websites ranked in the top results on Google.” ~ Julia Shapero | 09/27/24 5:41 PM ET

'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.'

'YouTube, which is owned by Google, allows users to flag inappropriate videos, at which point Google censors weigh in and sometimes remove them, but not, according to a recent report by Gizmodo, with any great consistency – except perhaps when it comes to politics. Consistent with the company's strong and open support for liberal political candidates, Google employees seem far more apt to ban politically conservative videos than liberal ones. In December 2015, singer Joyce Bartholomew sued YouTube for removing her openly pro-life music video, but I can find no instances of pro-choice music being removed.'

'In 2006, Google was accused of excluding conservative news sources that generated stories critical of Islam, and the company has also been accused of banning individual columnists and competing companies from its news feed. In December 2014, facing a new law in Spain that would have charged Google for scraping content from Spanish news sources (which, after all, have to pay to prepare their news), Google suddenly withdrew its news service from Spain, which led to an immediate drop in traffic to Spanish new stories.'

'The problem here is that if a Google executive decides your business or industry doesn't meet its moral standards, it bans you from AdWords; these days, with Google's reach so large, that can quickly put you out of business.'

'In May 2016, Google blacklisted an entire industry – companies providing high-interest "payday" loans. As always, the company billed this dramatic move as an exercise in social responsibility, failing to note that it is a major investor in LendUp.com, which is in the same industry; if Google fails to blacklist LendUp (it's too early to tell), the industry ban might turn out to have been more of an anticompetitive move than one of conscience.'

'You may disagree, but in my view Google's blacklisting practices put the company into the role of thuggish internet cop – a role that was never authorized by any government, nonprofit organization or industry association. It is as if the biggest bully in town suddenly put on a badge and started patrolling, shuttering businesses as it pleased, while also secretly peeping into windows, taking photos and selling them to the highest bidder.' ~ Robert Epstein | June 22, 2016, at 9:00 a.m.

'Facebook has fact-checked us into oblivion with so-called “independent fact-checkers,” hid our content from the public, and stripped away our ability to monetize. We watched a once thriving online community looking to stay informed and debate ideas slowly disappear. Facebook was determined to wipe “political” content from the platform — and despite our best efforts to stop them, it succeeded.'

'Then in 2023 came the Twitter and Facebook files, where the censorship and election interference were exposed, receipts and all. The files received national attention for weeks. But still, what was done?'

'Fast-forward to now, and Zuckerberg has finally decided to apologize for doing the Biden-Harris administration's bidding and removing or suppressing content detailing the truth about COVID-19 and the Hunter Biden laptop — stories that we covered truthfully but were accused of spreading “conspiracy theories” or “Russian disinformation.” ~ Townhall Staff | Aug 28, 2024

'The documents expose an onboarding presentation given by Facebook employees to CDC staff on May 19, 2021. Facebook trained CDC staff on how to use the platform’s “Government Reporting System.” This came in response to profanity-laden demands from senior Biden–Harris White House officials exposed by the House Judiciary Committee. As their “End-to-end workflow” described, if “Government requests,” then “Facebook processes.”

'These slides show how closely the Biden-Harris Administration’s CDC and Big Tech coordinated to censor speech they disagreed with. The onboarding included a “government user experience” demo. As part of the “End–to–end workflow,” Facebook streamlined the process to make it easy for the government to censor the American people.'

'Using this system permits government actors to evade federal law requiring meticulous keeping of federal records, thereby preventing the public from using existing tools like FOIA to see what the government is doing behind the scenes.'

'The Constitution prohibits the government from censoring the American people, but Facebook and other social media companies went out of their way to make it easy for the Biden–Harris administration to “flag” posts for censoring. With a custom portal allowing the government to submit up to twenty links at a time, the Biden-Harris Administration and Facebook worked together to violate the First Amendment rights of countless Americans.' ~ Tyler Durden | Thursday, Sep 26, 2024 - 10:10 PM

'YouTube censorship has gained prominence as content creators face restrictions and demonetization for varied reasons. Numerous petitions under this topic highlight concerns about free speech, biased algorithms, and inconsistent enforcement of community guidelines. One petition with over 100,000 signatures challenges YouTubes demonetization policies, accusing the platform of stifling creativity and limiting income opportunities for creators. Another petition calls for transparency in the censorship process, citing instances of videos being removed without clear explanations.'

'Google and Facebook, in contrast, have the sort of power media barons of the newspaper age could only dream of.'

'YouTube has said in the past that it would delete any videos critical of WHO coronavirus guidance, the same World Health Organisation that has been heavily criticised for its links to the People’s Republic of China, (and its lack of links to the Republic of China).'

'For years, the company has been hiding or removing content it didn’t approve of, and whenever public attention was brought to the matter YouTube would simply blame error or oversight. What it looks like, more often than not, is that the site acts as censor up until the moment that it is caught, at which point it’s one of those unfortunate errors again.'

'Some of the most high-profile include the revelations about Facebook data-harvesting and Google’s extraordinary desire to be seen to stand up to all governments apart from the authoritarian ones.'

'Or people would find that the ‘likes’ for a particular tweet did not only remain static but would suddenly go down, as though Twitter had decided that a particular tweet needed to look less popular than it was.'

'It is well known that Silicon Valley is perhaps the most liberal (in the American sense of the term) place in the world. The people who work at the tech companies are almost uniformly left-leaning progressives, if not something stronger, and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey has admitted in the past that the corporation’s few conservatives don’t feel safe to voice their opinion. Similarly a former Facebook employee has accused the site of ‘curating’ feeds to screen out conservative content.'

'It is the same with YouTube, which even before you get to the issue of banning has the subtle art of ‘demonetisation’, by which the media giant signals whom it favours and whom it does not. For years it has become clear that conservative-leaning content in particular is having its ability to monetise (that is, make money from advertising revenue raised by views) removed because the site disapproves of the politics.' ~ Douglas Murray | May 29, 2020

'DuckDuckGo, whose CEO testified against Google in the trial, applauded the decision, but recognized the fight isn’t over. In a statement, SVP for public affairs Kamyl Bazbaz said, “The journey ahead will be long. As we are seeing in the EU and other places, Google will do anything it can to avoid changing its conduct. However, we know there is a pent up demand for alternatives in search and this ruling will support access to more options.”

'He described “Google’s monopoly in general search” as “remarkably durable,” writing that it increased from about 80 percent in 2009 to 90 percent by 2020. Bing, by comparison, has less than 6 percent market share, Mehta added. “If there is genuine competition in the market for general search, it has not manifested in familiar ways, such as fluid market shares, lost business, or new entrants,” he wrote.'

'Mehta underscored the idea that even the largest businesses in the US have no real alternative to Google. “Time and again, Google’s partners have concluded that it is financially infeasible to switch default GSEs or seek greater flexibility in search offerings because it would mean sacrificing the hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars that Google pays them as revenue share,” he wrote. “These are Fortune 500 companies, and they have nowhere else to turn other than Google.” ~ Lauren Feiner | Aug 5, 2024, 3:02 PM EDT

'For example, Google plans to appeal after losing the DOJ’s antitrust lawsuit earlier this year. The judge in that case, Judge Amit Mehta, found that Google operates a monopoly in two markets: general online search and text-based search advertising.'

'A second trial to determine remedies in the search case is set for April, and Judge Mehta has said he’s aiming to determine penalties by August 2025.'

'Google faces a similar set of allegations over its abuse of market power in the digital advertising market in a separate antitrust case brought by a group of state attorneys general led by Texas.'

'That trial is scheduled for earlyish next year.' ~ Allison Schiff | Monday, September 30th, 2024 11:02 am

Diversity and Social Justice

'The idea of disparate impact or proportional representation in professional sports simply does not exist, largely because diversity is not an absolute term, but an entirely political idea based on the notion that particular groups pledge fealty to progressive movements and politicians and in exchange receive proportional representation according to tribal affiliation — except when their specific group is already “overrepresented” in a particular lucrative or prestigious field.'

'Diversity is a word that the Left conjured up to escape the paradoxes of the increasingly fossilized notion of racially biased affirmative action. And since diversity was never defined, it has never had to offer an accounting for its many ironies and inconsistencies. But surely diversity must have some definition, or even the Left could not navigate its myriad manifestations?'

'Diversity is the antithesis of white, male, Christian, conservative, and heterosexual. That combination precludes any claim on diversity, and with it any special consideration. There is no such thing as political or ideological diversity — of trying to hire professors or journalists across a spectrum of ideologies.' ~ Victor Davis Hanson | April 19, 2016 8:00 AM

'The promoters of diversity would say the team should include people of different racial and religious backgrounds because that would strengthen the ability of the team to come up with the right solution.'

“How is that?” one might ask. The answer is most likely, “Well, they would bring different abilities and insights into the group.” Oh, so that means that different races or religions or cultures do have skills that others do not. But isn’t that a racist proposition?'

'Why is it when 98 percent of an Afro-American electorate vote for the Afro-American candidate, it is seen as sticking together. When 60 percent of the white voters go for the white candidate, it is considered by some as racist.'

'To make another point, two organizations have lopsided majorities of a single racial group, the NFL and NBA, but nobody is calling for them to diversify. “Why?” you may ask. The probable answer would be that in professional sports you have a real meritocracy where proven skills are needed to build winning teams.' ~ Dick Sakulich | October 8 2018

'Once wildly popular, the sweeping Diversity, Equity and Inclusion movement is starting to crash and burn.'

'To understand this stunning reversal, look no further than the contradictory and often illogical concepts at the heart of DEI.'

'The contradictions continue in culture and entertainment. Look no further than the diversity-obsessed Hollywood. Today, if a White actor is cast to play a non-“White” role, critics complain the film is “whitewashed.” Meanwhile, shows and movies featuring people of color depicting historically White characters are lauded for their diversity.'

'The dilemma extends to enjoying other cultures in everyday life. There was a time in America when we proudly enjoyed foods, dress and traditions of many cultures but those who do so today risk being condemned for cultural appropriation.' ~ Christian Watson

'Social justice sees the world in the same way. While it purports to be justice, it is really based on cultural Marxism. Justice seeks fair treatment, equality under the law, and impartial punishment for wrongdoing. Social justice seeks equality of outcomes and the distribution of wealth.'

'It is on these narrow grounds of group identity that the wars of politics are waged. The discussions center not on whether policies are objectively just, but whether they benefit women, or blacks, or (insert other oppressed group). We act like each group votes with a collective mind.'

'The worldview of social justice is riddled with contradictions because the theory it is based on does not value facts first.'

'Why do we only have inherent anti-blackness? Why don’t we inherit the anti-Irishness from their oppression in the 1800s? Or another bias from ancestors in the past? Why is this the sin we are condemned by?'

'Bizarre things happen when you convince people they are guilty in virtue of their race. Books on facing your white privilege become best sellers. White people bow down to kiss the shoes of black men out of guilt. Crowds of individuals sit with hands raised in the air, renouncing their white privilege.'

'Social justice places undue importance on issues of ethnicity — things that matter — but don’t define us. People are suspicious of each other. We can’t let little things go, instead, we hold onto them and claim oppression.'

'The standards of social justice are impossible to meet. You will never be “woke” enough. You will never educate yourself enough, apologize enough, be a good enough activist.' ~ Katelynn Richardson | Jun 15, 2020

'If a person deliberately does harm to someone who does not deserve to be harmed, in the traditional understanding of justice the perpetrator deserves to be punished. Our traditional legal system is built on that principle.'

'An obligation in justice is one that can rightly be enforced by the threat of punishment, but an obligation in charity or humanity cannot.'

'Since the middle of the nineteenth century, however, a new and very different conception of justice has made its appearance, which rejects each of these presuppositions, which denies or at least minimizes the role of free will, and so of individual responsibility, and of action, and rejects likewise the traditional concepts of guilt and innocence, praise and blame, and reward and punishment. This is the theory of justice as fairness, also called the theory of ‘social justice’

'The Christian Socialists, however, did not stop to analyse the actual economic forces at work. Instead, they blamed the plight of the workers on the factory system and on competition. Justice demanded, they said, that the poverty of the workers be relieved.'

'According to this new theory, the notion of justice applies in the first instance not to an action, but to a state of affairs in society, namely a state of fairness or equality, and injustice is a state of societal inequality, especially poverty, economic inequality or inequality of power.'

'In studying crime, for example, it becomes a mistake to blame the criminal. Instead we must understand the societal circumstances which have made him what he is, and we must remedy those. The same analysis applies to terrorism. In some “progressive” circles at the present time, including some of our schools, the very use of the phrase “individual responsibility” marks one as retrograde.'

'The concept of civil rights was expanded from the prohibition of coercive to non-coercive discrimination, or from the Ku Klux Klan and the Jim Crow laws to the peaceful actions of private individuals.'

'It is true that the Equal Pay Act had been enacted some months earlier, but the motive for that was very different: it was put forward by the labor unions in order to ward off “unfair competition” for men from women doing the same job at lower wages.'

'But once inequality has been declared unjust, every kind of institution acquires a new, additional purpose, that of creating equality. All institutions are converted into welfare programs.'

'Where the traditional theory focuses on benefit versus harm, the new theory asks only about equality. But equality, especially enforced equality, is by no means always beneficial, but can cause a great deal of harm; for to create equality you usually have to injure some in order to benefit others.'

'As the U. S. Supreme Court has demonstrated with the concept of “disparate impact,” it is possible to be guilty of the crime of “discrimination” without any intention to discriminate. The absence of this reference to the will removes “social justice” from the realm of ethics.' ~ Thomas Patrick Burke | 03/22/2006