Category Archives: Freedom of Speech and of the Press

Posted on by

The Philadelphia Inquirer: using grammar to avoid telling the whole truth

Writers attempt to communicate with the written word, and decent writers should know at least something about grammar, to ply their trade most efficiently. One important concept in grammar is the difference between the comparative and the superlative.

Comparatives vs. Superlatives

Published October 7, 2019

Not all things are created equal: some are good, others are better, and only the cream of the crop rise to the level of best. These three words—good, better, and best—are examples of the three forms of an adjective or adverb: positive, comparative, and superlative. . . . .

There are a few irregular adjectives and adverbs. For those, you must memorize how these change the spelling of their positive form to show comparative and superlative degrees.

Some common irregular adjectives are good, better, best and bad, worse, worst.

Some have more than one option: little can become littler or less (comparative), and littlest or least (superlative). Many, some, or much become more in the comparative and most in the superlative.

It was this paragraph which caught my attention, in the main editorial in this morning’s Philadelphia Inquirer. Any decent writer understands that he shouldn’t use the same word twice in a sentence if possible, so when the Editorial Board wrote that “too many residents endure,” the following should be “where most, but not all, the shootings occur.” Continue reading →

Posted on by

The Philadelphia Inquirer has now come out against Freedom of Speech and of the Press No one who reads the newspaper regularly can really be surprised.

In 1971, President Richard Nixon sought a restraining order to prevent The New York Times and The Washington Post from printing more of the so-called “Pentagon Papers,” technically the Report of the Office of the Secretary of Defense Vietnam Task Force, a classified history and assessment of American policy and operations in the Vietnam war. The Times and the Post fought the injunctions in court, the Times winning in New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971). The Times was all about the First Amendment and Freedom of the Press.

Of course, the American left were aghast that Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter has meant that conservatives would be able to actually speak freely. As we have previously noted, Twitter added rules banning “targeted misgendering or deadnaming of transgender individuals.” “Misgendering” means referring to ‘transgendered’ individuals by their biological sex, either directly or through the use of the appropriate pronouns, while “deadnaming” means referring to such people by their birth names rather than the ones they have adopted which are more consistent with their imagined ‘gender.'[1]The First Street Journal’s Stylebook is exactly the opposite: while we do not change the direct quotes of others, in original material we always refer to people by their normal, biological sex … Continue reading The New York Times gave OpEd space to Chad Malloy[2]Chad Malloy is a man male who claims to be a woman, and goes by the faux name “Parker Malloy.” to claim that such restrictions actually promoted freedom of speech.

And now come the Editorial Board of The Philadelphia Inquirer, who are also very much opposed to the freedom of speech and of the press . . . for other people!

Social media companies must curtail the spread of misinformation | Editorial

It may be up to policymakers to strike the balance between upholding the First Amendment and regulating speech on sites such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube.

by The Editorial Board | Sunday, February 19, 2023 | 5:00 AM EST

About 500 hours of video gets uploaded to YouTube every minute. The online video-sharing platform houses more than 800 million videos and is the second most visited site in the world, with 2.5 billion active monthly users.

Given the deluge of content flooding the site every day, one would surmise that YouTube must have an army of people guarding against the spread of misinformation — especially in the wake of the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection that was fueled by lies on social media.

Whenever I see something by the Editorial Board which has a plethora of hyperlinks, I always suspect it was written by columnist Will Bunch; that’s just his style. And when I see yet another reference to the Capitol kerfuffle, I’m even more persuaded, because former President Trump has been living, rent-free, in Mr Bunch’s head.

Well, not actually.

Following recent cutbacks, there is just one person in charge of misinformation policy worldwide, according to a recent report in the New York Times. This is alarming, since fact-checking organizations have said YouTube is a major pipeline in the spread of disinformation and misinformation.

The hand-written copy of the proposed articles of amendment passed by Congress in 1789, cropped to show just the text in the third article that would later be ratified as the First Amendment.

The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was very simply written: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” But it seems that the Editorial Board very much want Freedom of Speech and of the Press limited.

Not limited for the Inquirer, of course, but to all of those riff-raff not part of the old-line credentialed media.

Mr Bunch, oh, sorry, the Editorial Board continued for several paragraphs, telling us how Google and Meta and Twitter lave laid off thousands of staff, including people who were, supposedly, staff who were supposed to stifle “misinformation,” and “hate speech,” before we get to this:

But Musk says he is a free speech absolutist — except when it impacts him. The billionaire temporarily suspended the accounts of several journalists and blocked others who rebuked him on Twitter. He also fired employees at SpaceX, one of his other companies, who criticized him.

More to the point, Musk fails to understand that freedom of speech is not absolute. As much as this board supports and cherishes the First Amendment, there are rules and regulations surrounding what can be said.

For example, you can’t harass or violate the rights of others. Just ask Alex Jones. The conspiracy theorist and Infowars founder was ordered to pay nearly $1 billion in damages to the families of eight victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting for his repeated lies that the massacre was a hoax.

Oops, sorry, wrong answer. That was not the government regulating speech, but a civil action in which Mr Jones was found liable for damages (supposedly) inflicted on eight families. Just like the old maxim that you can’t yell, “Fire!” in a crowded theater, while doing so can make you liable for both civil damages and criminal law violations if someone is injured by your actions, that does not give the government the right to prevent you from entering the theater because you might yell, “Fire!”

To be sure, the First Amendment makes it difficult to regulate social media companies. But doing nothing is not the answer. The rise of artificial intelligence to create sophisticated chatbots such as ChatGPT and deepfake technology will worsen the spread of fake news, further threatening democracy. Policymakers must soon strike a balance between the First Amendment and regulating social media.

“Strike a balance”? What part of “Congress shall make no law” don’t the Editorial Board understand?

Texas and Florida have already muddied the regulation debate by passing laws that will upend the already limited content moderation efforts by social media companies and make the internet an even bigger free-for-all. The U.S. Supreme Court put off whether to take up the cases, leaving the state laws in limbo for now.

Meanwhile, the European Union is pushing forward with its own landmark regulations called the Digital Services Act. The measure takes effect next year and aims to place substantial content moderation requirements on social media companies to limit false information, hate speech, and extremism.

And there you have it: the admiration of the Board to limit not what they are calling “false information,” but also “hate speech and extremism.” The Board want to limit what people can read, if it doesn’t meet with their approval of what should be said. We reported on the Inky ending reader comments on all stories other than sports, and then, when a sports story on Will Thomas, the male University of Pennsylvania who claimed to be a woman named “Lia,” with open comments, drew many which held that no, Mr Thomas was not a woman, the newspaper removed them. To the Inky, which has all of its articles on Mr Thomas, on all ‘transgendered’ persons, phrased to agree with the claims that they are the gender they claim to be, rather than the sex they really are, questioning that in any way is ‘misinformation’, ‘hate speech,’ and ‘extremism.’

“As much as this board supports and cherishes the First Amendment,” they claimed, but let’s tell the truth here: the Editorial Board do not support and cherish the First Amendment when those First Amendment rights are exercised by people of whom they disapprove, expressing opinions with which they disagree.

References

References
↑1 The First Street Journal’s Stylebook is exactly the opposite: while we do not change the direct quotes of others, in original material we always refer to people by their normal, biological sex and their original names. But we do say that explicitly.
↑2 Chad Malloy is a man male who claims to be a woman, and goes by the faux name “Parker Malloy.”
Posted on by

Once again, the Lexington Herald-Leader chooses to break McClatchy policy, and publish photo of a criminal suspect Why? I suspect it's because he's white

It has been awhile since we last mentioned the McClatchy Mugshot Policy:

Publishing mugshots of arrestees has been shown to have lasting effects on both the people photographed and marginalized communities. The permanence of the internet can mean those arrested but not convicted of a crime have the photograph attached to their names forever. Beyond the personal impact, inappropriate publication of mugshots disproportionately harms people of color and those with mental illness. In fact, some police departments have started moving away from taking/releasing mugshots as a routine part of their procedures.

To address these concerns, McClatchy will not publish crime mugshots — online, or in print, from any newsroom or content-producing team — unless approved by an editor. To be clear, this means that in addition to photos accompanying text stories, McClatchy will not publish “Most wanted” or “Mugshot galleries” in slide-show, video or print.

Any exception to this policy must be approved by an editor. Editors considering an exception should ask:

  • Is there an urgent threat to the community?
  • Is this person a public official or the suspect in a hate crime?
  • Is this a serial killer suspect or a high-profile crime?

If an exception is made, editors will need to take an additional step with the Pub Center to confirm publication by making a note in the ‘package notes‘ field in Sluglife.

Oddly enough, I have never been able to find the McClatchy mugshot policy officially published anywhere, but after the apparently internal memo went out, but on August 20, 2020, then Fort Worth Star-Telegram, a McClatchy newspaper, reporter Nichole Manna published it in a tweet.

The Lexington Herald-Leader is another McClatchy newspaper, so you would assume that that newspaper would follow the policy, right?

‘Brazen theft.’ Former University of Kentucky student accused in $67 million fraud

by Bill Estep | Thursday, February 16, 2023 | 11:27 AM EST | Updated: Friday, February 17, 2023 | 11:21 AM EST

Screenshot of Herald-Leader logo and accompanying photo, taken at 11:45 AM EST on Friday, February 17, 2023. Click to enlarge.

A former Lexington resident and University of Kentucky student has been accused of siphoning $28 million from a company and using it for expensive personal purchases, including a $16 million jet and a luxury box at a sports arena.

Christopher S. Kirchner was charged with wire fraud in a federal criminal complaint.

Authorities arrested him Valentine’s Day at his home in a gated community in Westlake, Texas, according to court records.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed a separate civil complaint against Kirchner, 35, alleging he lied over and over to investors in raising $67 million for his company, Slync.io, and drained much of it for himself even as the company didn’t meet payroll at times.

“This case concerns an offering fraud orchestrated by Kirchner . . . involving his brazen theft of over $28 million of investor funds to fund his lavish lifestyle,” SEC attorneys said in the complaint.

Read more here.

So, Mr Kirshner is accused of a rather serious felony, and the story is of some interest in Kentucky, but I have to ask: under which of the three mugshot policy exceptions does Mr Kirshner’s case fall?[1]In writing this story, I initially saved Mr Kirshner’s photo from the story itself, but decided instead to take a screenshot, including the newspaper’s logo, to prove what I have stated, … Continue reading Is Mr Kirshner an urgent threat to the community? He had his initial court appearance, in Texas, earlier this week, and was released pending a trial. Clearly federal law enforcement in Texas did not consider him to be an urgent enough threat to hold him without bail. Is he a public official or the suspect in a hate crime? No, he is a private individual, and no hate crime is either charged or alleged. Is he “a serial killer suspect or a high-profile crime?” He isn’t charged with killing anyone, and wire fraud isn’t exactly what anyone would call a “high-profile crime.”

So, why did what my best friend used to call the Herald-Liberal break policy and include Mr Kirshner’s photograph? There’s nothing in reporter Bill Estep’s story which indicated that Mr Kirshner is a previously convicted criminal, and if he is acquitted — and remember: he is legally innocent until proven guilty — he will have been harmed, according to the McClatchy policy statement that “The permanence of the internet can mean those arrested but not convicted of a crime have the photograph attached to their names forever.”

Mr Estep has been with the newspaper for a long, long time; it would seem improbable that he would have been unaware of the McClatchy policy. If Mr Estep went ahead and published this story, under his own byline, without getting approval of Editor Peter Baniak, he again violated policy. Whether Mr Baniak actually did approve the publication of Mr Kirshner’s photograph is unknown.

As regular readers know, The First Street Journal does not share the McClatchy policy’s concerns, and regularly publishes photos of those accused of crimes. I do not object to the newpaper publishing Mr Kirshner’s photograph; I do object to the hypocrisy being shown by publishing it.

There is, of course, more. As we have previously reported, the newspaper has previously published photos of white suspects, including this, and especially this one, in which the mugshots of five white convicted criminals were published, out of nearly two dozen inmates affected.

Let me be clear about this: my strong impression is that the editor and staffers of the Lexington Herald-Leader have been far more guarded about publishing photographs of black criminal suspects and convicted criminals than white suspects and convicted criminals. I suspect, but cannot prove, that this is more than just an unconscious bias, but a deliberate policy choice, because these ‘exceptions’ to the policy have occurred far too often to be obvious coincidences.

References

References
↑1 In writing this story, I initially saved Mr Kirshner’s photo from the story itself, but decided instead to take a screenshot, including the newspaper’s logo, to prove what I have stated, in case it is edited out later.
Posted on by

Senator Karen Berg thinks that Jack can be Jill . . . and wants the public schools to enforce that

Kentucky, one of the most conservative and Republican states in the nation, elected Democrat Andy Beshear to be Governor of the Commonwealth in 2019. The previous Governor, Republican Matt Bevin, had tried to take serious action to restore the state’s employee pension fund to greater financial stability, and the teachers in the Bluegrass State went absolutely ape! Out of 1,442,390 total votes cast, then-Attorney General Beshear beat Governor Bevin by 5,189 votes, with 28,425 going to Libertarian John Hicks.

Having a Democrat as Governor has led to all kinds of mischief in Kentucky. Mr Beshear’s handling of the COVID-19 panicdemic[1]No, that’s not a typographical error; I spelled it panicdemic deliberately, because unreasoning panic is how the United States reacted to the disease. was to order churches closed — a decision eventually ruled illegal, but not until churches had been closed for nine weeks, including through Easter Sunday[2]Governor Beshear ordered the Kentucky State Police to record license plate and vehicle identification numbers of cars parked in one church parking lot on Easter Sunday, to order people who attended … Continue reading — “non-essential” businesses closed, mask mandates and the other intrusive measures. He ordered people not to have gatherings of more than ten people, from more than two households, for Thanksgiving in 2020, an order I am happy and proud to say we violated.

Another bit of horrible mischief was the appointment of other Democrats to fill executive positions in the Commonwealth, including the Commissioner of Education. From the Lexington Herald-Leader:

KY education chief defends state pronoun guidance after legislators’ attacks, bills

By Valarie Honeycutt Spears and Austin Horn | Monday, February 13, 2023 | 5:13 PM EST

Kentucky Education Commissioner Jason Glass spoke out Monday in response to lawmakers’ criticism about a state guidance document recommending the use of a student’s preferred pronouns and legislation that seeks to strengthen “parental rights” in schools.

In a Monday email to state education employees, Glass referenced his comments last week to the House Education Committee, where he was testifying about long-standing shortages in the educator workforce.

“While I was happy to share information with them about the shortages we are facing and trend lines in the teacher workforce,” Glass said, “I was disappointed with the turn the meeting took toward the end of the time I was there. Instead of staying focused on what we can do to support the teaching profession, some of the legislators ended up focusing on guidance the agency produced regarding use of student’s preferred names.”

At the meeting, lawmakers openly criticized Glass and the guidance, calling it part of a “woke agenda” driven by Glass.

The guidance says, in part, school leaders should consult with their local board counsel for advice on specific issues in their districts. It is considered best practice to recognize and use a student’s preferred name and pronouns when these preferences are requested, the document said.

If a student voluntarily discloses their sexual orientation or gender identity to an educator with the assumption that this information is to be kept private, it is best practice for the educator to maintain that confidence and keep the information confidential, the document recommends.

There’s more at the original. While what my best friend used to call the Herald-Liberal has a paywall, non-subscribers can access a couple of free articles a month.

As we have previously noted, the Central Bucks (Pennsylvania) School Board required teachers, administrators and staff to use students’ proper names, references and pronouns as recorded in school records, unless the individual student’s parents approved a change. This was done to avoid legal repercussions if a particular student wanted to claim he was the opposite sex, and his parents sued the school for ‘enabling’ gender transition. By setting up a system under which parents can ‘opt in’ to allowing their ‘transgendered’ students to be identified by their ‘preferred’ names and pronouns, the District is also setting up a policy which allows parents to choose not to go along with that silliness, and thus protect the District from being sued into penury.

While no such lawsuit has been filed in the Bluegrass State thus far, that doesn’t mean one couldn’t happen if teachers follow the Commissioner of Education’s ‘guidance’. Quite frankly, I hope that such does happen, sooner rather than later. More, I want to see not just the school systems sued for this, but the school administrators, staff, and teachers who go along with such nonsense.

Of course, the newspaper, which as we have previously reported makes endorsements uniformly rejected by voters in the sixth congressional district and the state as a whole, is very much on the side of the homosexual and ‘transgender’ lobby:

Sen. Berg: Please listen to a grieving mother. ‘Parents rights’ bills are dangerous. | Opinion

by state Senator Karen Berg (D-26th District) | Friday, February 10, 2023

I have been proud to represent the people of Kentucky and fight for their rights and well-being since being first elected in 2020. However, this proud moment was marred by a deep personal loss — my transgender son, Henry, who I loved with all my heart, took his own life. This tragedy has forced me to confront the harsh reality where discrimination and bigotry against the LGBTQ+ community are all too common.

We have previously noted Senator Berg, who is actually a physician, a diagnostic radiologist, who should understand the very elementary biology of sex differences, and her acceptance of her daughter’s transgenderism. While all of the sources I could find give only Miss Berg-Brousseau’s first name as “Henry,” and use the masculine pronouns and references to her, at The First Street Journal, we always tell the truth: Miss Berg-Brousseau was female, regardless of what she and her mother wanted to believe. The Herald-Leader uncritically wrote that Senator Berg’s daughter was her son. As is so often the case, the newspaper’s stylebook calls for referring to the ‘transgendered’ by the gender they claim to be, not the sex they actually are, and the use of the preferred ‘pronouns’ and faux name they chose. All of this is subtly designed to be courtesy, but also to normalize ‘transgenderism’ as something real.

Now, bills like Senate Bill 150 are being introduced in our state legislature and sold as “parental choice,” but in reality, they are nothing more than a dangerous attack on our children. These bills aim to limit the authority of the Kentucky Board of Education and the Kentucky Department of Education concerning parental rights and a student’s use of pronouns, prohibit school policies from keeping student information confidential from parents, and even require school personnel and students to use pronouns for students that do not conform to that student’s biological sex.

Perhaps Dr Berg isn’t that good a doctor, because she just referred to a ‘transgendered’ student’s ‘gender identity’ as his “biological sex.”

These measures are not just misguided. They are cruel and harmful. Bills like SB 150 send a message to LGBTQ+ students that they are not valued or respected and put them at greater risk of discrimination and harm, whether self-harm or bullying. They also undermine the ability of teachers and school staff to create safe and inclusive environments for all students, and they limit the ability of schools to provide the support and resources that our children need to thrive.

Senator Berg could, if she chose, try to amend SB 150 to allow, as the Central Bucks policy does, schools to refer to ‘transgendered’ students by their preferred names, pronouns and other gendered references if the student’s parents were notified and consented. But that isn’t what she wants; she wants the public schools — which, due to compulsory education laws, have what is, in effect, a captive audience — to keep a student’s ‘transgender identity’ a secret from the parents. While it’s difficult to imagine that parents could fail to notice these things, or that the gossip of neighborhood parents and other students would escape the parents’ notice, Senator Berg does not want them notified.

Of course, Dr Berg wants ‘transgenderism’ normalized as well:

The provision in SB 150 to establish requirements for public schools’ courses, curriculums, or programs on human sexuality is particularly concerning. These courses and curriculums should provide accurate and comprehensive information on human sexuality and gender identity in a way that is inclusive and respectful of all students. Requiring a specific perspective on these subjects limits educational opportunities and spreads harmful, inaccurate information about the LGBTQ+ community.

Actually, the public schools should not be presenting programs on human sexuality at all; that is the job of parents. But any curriculum on human sexuality is going to have a “specific perspective,” either normalizing and accepting what the federal government has euphemistically referred to as “minority sexual orientations,” or not doing so, which the homosexual and ‘transgender’ advocates would find terrible. Dr Berg is pushing a specific agenda. Dr Berg is wanting the public schools in Kentucky to push the acceptance of a transgender student as being the sex he claims to be rather than the sex he is; she wants the schools to push the notion that Jack is really Jill — or vice versa — with the schools enforcing the chosen names, pronouns, and other gendered references the ‘transgendered’ prefer, regardless of the beliefs of other students and other students’ families.

It isn’t much of a step to see another student referring to Jack as Jack rather than Jill being punished for bullying for not accepting the notion that Jack is really Jill.

In her OpEd piece, Dr Berg mentioned nothing about her daughter’s mental illness, I suppose because it would undermine the political goal she is trying to achieve. But it’s not a secret, as even Dr Berg previously admitted:

This lack of acceptance took a toll on Henry. He long struggled with mental illness, not because he was trans but born from his difficulty finding acceptance.

Henry Berg-Brousseau is seen with his politician mother Karen, father Bob, a marketing director, and sister Rachael, a rabbi. Photo from the Daily Mail. Click to enlarge.

To be blunt about it, young Miss Berg-Brousseau would have found ‘acceptance’ difficult even if people around her accepted her claim to be a boy. A photo of the family shows Miss Berg-Brousseau as being shorter than her mother and sister, as well as obese. Were she an actual boy who grew up that way, “he’d” have been the last picked for a team in Phys Ed, and been dateless as high school girls, real girls, would have rejected “him” for more masculine guys. As an adult, she might somehow ‘pass’ as a male, if no one asked any questions, but she’d have been the least impressive of ‘guys’. A female claiming to be male does not change the sexual dimorphism which exists in human beings, and Miss Berg-Brousseau grew up with a height much more typical of females than males.

You know, I get it: Dr Berg really, really, really wants to believe that her daughter was actually her son, and she wants her daughter to be honored for what she claimed to be. She is suffering the personal tragedy of having lost her child, and that is a devastating thing, but it doesn’t make her right.

More, I understand that some people think that it’s just common courtesy to accept the ‘transgendered’ as who and what they claim to be, rather than what they actually are. But people have a right to think for themselves, and if they do not want to agree that Jack is really Jill, they have that right, and the public schools should not be enforcing a perception that girls can be boys and boys can be girls. The ‘transgendered’ need mental help, to help them to come to terms with what they are, not coddling to continue their delusions of what they think they should be.

References

References
↑1 No, that’s not a typographical error; I spelled it panicdemic deliberately, because unreasoning panic is how the United States reacted to the disease.
↑2 Governor Beshear ordered the Kentucky State Police to record license plate and vehicle identification numbers of cars parked in one church parking lot on Easter Sunday, to order people who attended services into self-quarantine.
Posted on by

The credentialed media really, really, really hate being held to account Taylor Lorenz is just hopping mad that not everything in the world revolves around her

Taylor Lorenz is a Washington Post journolist[1]The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their … Continue reading about whom we’ve reported several times. Miss Lorenz first came to my attention when she doxed Chaya Raichik, a Brooklyn-based real estate salesperson who was the creator of the Twitter site Libs of TikTok. My good friend Amanda Marcotte of Salon loved that LoTT was doxed, doubtlessly hoping that Chaya Raichik, a Brooklyn-based real estate salesperson and LoTT creator would lose her job, and posted a hope that Mr Musk’s buyout of Twitter results in the whole thing being killed.

Then, a month later, we noted that Miss Lorenz, who found it so necessary to expose Miss Raichik, was simply appalled that the political resistance to President Biden’s attempt to create a Ministry of Truth Disinformation Governance Board within the Department of Fatherland Homeland Security forced the proposal to be ended. The proposed Minister of Truth board administrator, Nina Jankowicz, worked in the press room at Volodymyr Zelensky’s campaign headquarters, which calls into question just how impartial she could have been in fighting ‘disinformation’ concerning the Russo-Ukrainian War.

She later complained about someone else being doxed, a journalism student who had written a critical article about her subject: Continue reading →

References

References
↑1 The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their objectivity. I use the term ‘journolism’ frequently when writing about media bias.
Posted on by

To the left, liberal politics are far more important than Freedom of Religion Jennifer Palmeiri said the quiet part out loud: to the left, religious faith is determined by politics, rather than the other way around.

As we noted on Friday, an FBI “Analyst” submitted a proposal to monitor traditional Catholics who prefer the Tridentine, or Traditional Latin, Mass, “Radical-Traditionalist Catholics,” or RTEs, he called them, because “Racially or Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremists,” or RMVEs might be interested in using Latin Mass Catholics to spread their goals.

Someone leaked a hand-redacted, redacted by magic marker, copy of the “FBI internal use only” document, and the Bureau decided, rather quickly, that they ought to withdraw the document entirely.

FBI retracts leaked document orchestrating investigation of Catholics

By Tyler Arnold and Joe Bukuras | Thursday, February 9, 2023 | 3:15 PM EST

The FBI says it is retracting a leaked document published on the internet Feb. 8 that appears to reveal that the bureau’s Richmond division launched an investigation into “radical traditionalist” Catholics and their possible ties to “the far-right white nationalist movement.”

In response to an inquiry from CNA, the FBI said it will remove the document because “it does not meet our exacting standards.”

Really? The document is ‘sourced’ citing far-left political sources, including Salon, The Atlantic, and the Southern Poverty Law Center. If there are less biased sources, they were redacted from the document. It’s so bad that it makes me wonder: if it was a great departure from the Bureau’s “exacting standards,” why wouldn’t the document author have realized it, and the Bureau have flagged it before it was leaked? Or is the document not really that great a departure from those “exacting standards,” which calls into question just how “exacting” those standards really are. Continue reading →

Posted on by

We wicked Catholics and our Assault Rosaries!

My good friend — OK, OK, I’ve never actually met her, but people can become good friends over Twitter these days — Christine Flowers says, in her Twitter biography, that she has an “open carry permit for (her) assault rosary.” That was a mocking reference to an article by Daniel Panneton in The Atlantic, originally entitled “How the Rosary Became an Extremist Symbol“, about which I have previously written.

The Atlantic got plenty of pushback about it, and twice changed the article headline and subheading — the title “How Extremist Gun Culture Co-Opted the Rosary: The AR-15 is a sacred object among Christian nationalists. Now “radical-traditional” Catholics are bringing a sacrament of their own to the movement” isn’t shown in the screen captures tweeted by Taylor Marshall — imaged to the left, but the internet is forever.

And now we find out that some in the federal government, specifically the FBI, see Catholics, at least some Catholics, as evil subversives. From National Review:

FBI Internal Memo Warns against ‘Radical Traditionalist Catholic Ideology’

by Brittany Bernstein | Wednesday, February 8, 2023 | 5:14 PM EST

The FBI’s Richmond field office released an internal memo last month warning against “radical traditionalist Catholic ideology,” and claiming it “almost certainly presents new mitigation opportunities,” according to a document shared by an FBI whistleblower on Wednesday.

Kyle Seraphin, who was a special agent at the bureau for six years before he was indefinitely suspended without pay in June 2022, published the document, “Interest of Racially or Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremists in Radical Traditionalist Catholic Ideology Almost Certainly Presents New Mitigation Opportunities,” on UncoverDC.com. Continue reading →

Posted on by

In which Leonard Downie says the quiet part out loud The credentialed media have sacrificed objectivity and internalized bias 

Conservatives have been saying, for a long time now, that the credentialed media were quite biased in their reporting, mostly, though not quite entirely, biased in a leftward direction. Yes, this site has focused much of its attention to The Philadelphia Inquirer, but it’s hardly alone; we reported previously how The New York Times found the details about an (alleged) killer not to be news which is fit to print. For the journolists[1]The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their … Continue reading in the Times’ newsroom, the ones who forced out liberal columnist Bari Weiss because she just wasn’t #woke enough, the fact that a young, black gang member (allegedly) stabbed to death a white PhD candidate in computer science at an Ivy League college just does not fit Teh Narrative. The leftists who decry ‘mass incarceration’ just can’t deal with the fact that Vincent Pinkney should not have been able to stab Davide Giri, because he should have still been behind bars on that Thursday night, and that it took the London Daily Mail to tell people the truth.

Well, now a professional journalist has said the quiet part out loud. From The Washington Post:

Newsrooms that move beyond ‘objectivity’ can build trust

By Leonard Downie Jr. | Monday, January 30, 2023 | 7:15 AM EST

Amid all the profound challenges and changes roiling the American news media today, newsrooms are debating whether traditional objectivity should still be the standard for news reporting. “Objectivity” is defined by most dictionaries as expressing or using facts without distortion by personal beliefs, bias, feelings or prejudice. Journalistic objectivity has been generally understood to mean much the same thing.

But increasingly, reporters, editors and media critics argue that the concept of journalistic objectivity is a distortion of reality. They point out that the standard was dictated over decades by male editors in predominantly White newsrooms and reinforced their own view of the world. They believe that pursuing objectivity can lead to false balance or misleading “bothsidesism” in covering stories about race, the treatment of women, LGBTQ+ rights, income inequality, climate change and many other subjects. And, in today’s diversifying newsrooms, they feel it negates many of their own identities, life experiences and cultural contexts, keeping them from pursuing truth in their work.

There’s just so much in that which is wholly wrong that it’s difficult to wrap my head around it. But the most obvious point is that, if a reporters are applying their “identities, life experiences and cultural contexts” to the stories they are covering, it means that readers who have different “identities, life experiences and cultural contexts” are not getting the news in a context they can fully understand or appreciate.

The notion that there is one truth for white men and another for women or blacks or homosexuals is pretty stupid when it comes to reporting just the facts. That’s what the Times did, by covering up the known facts about a suspected killer, deciding that their readership did not need to know that Mr Pinkney could have still been in jail when he (allegedly) slew Mr Giri. Their reasons for that? Well, I can speculate, but I don’t know.

Leonard Downie Jr., the author, a former executive editor of The Washington Post, is a professor at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University, so that means he is teaching this stuff to journalism students, trying to make the upcoming generation of reporters as consumed with their biases as what we are already seeing.

Something like this occurred during my early years in the field in the 1960s and ’70s. Under the leadership of a few editors, including especially The Post’s Ben Bradlee, our generation of young journalists moved away from mostly unquestioning news coverage of institutional power. I was one of the editors on The Post’s Watergate story, which spawned widespread national investigative reporting that continues today. Colleagues at The Post, other newspapers and broadcast networks reported skeptically on the unwinnable Vietnam War.

“Report(ing) skeptically” is a good thing, if reporters are trying to ferret out the truth.

Throughout the time, beginning in 1984, when I worked as Bradlee’s managing editor and then, from 1991 to 2008, succeeded him as executive editor, I never understood what “objectivity” meant. I didn’t consider it a standard for our newsroom. My goals for our journalism were instead accuracy, fairness, nonpartisanship, accountability and the pursuit of truth.

Well, the dictionary definition of objectivity Mr Downie gave above would be a good one, and would certainly fit in the five goals he stated.

To better understand the changes happening now, I and former CBS News president Andrew Heyward, a colleague at Arizona State University’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism, investigated the values and practices in mainstream newsrooms today, with a grant from the Stanton Foundation. What we found has convinced us that truth-seeking news media must move beyond whatever “objectivity” once meant to produce more trustworthy news. We interviewed more than 75 news leaders, journalists and other experts in mainstream print, broadcast and digital news media, many of whom also advocate such a change. This appears to be the beginning of another generational shift in American journalism.

Among the news leaders who told Heyward and me that they had rejected objectivity as a coverage standard was Kathleen Carroll, former executive editor of the Associated Press. “It’s objective by whose standard?” she asked. “That standard seems to be White, educated, fairly wealthy. … And when people don’t feel like they find themselves in news coverage, it’s because they don’t fit that definition.

If objectivity is defined as “as expressing or using facts without distortion by personal beliefs, bias, feelings or prejudice,” I have to ask: if the media are moving toward reporting filtered through concerns about:

upheaval over discrimination against and abuse of women; persistent racism and white nationalism; police brutality and killings; the treatment of LGBTQ+ people; income inequality and social problems; immigration and the treatment of immigrants; the causes and effects of climate change; voting rights and election inequality; and even the very survival of our democracy

isn’t that the very definition of “distortion by personal beliefs, bias, feelings or prejudice”? Two plus two will always equal four, regardless of the race, color, ethnicity or sexual orientation of the observer.

We have noted many times before how the credentialed media have simply accepted the notion that a ‘transgender’ person can change his sex, referring to such people as Richard Levine and Will Thomas as Rachel Levine and Lia Thomas, completely uncritically, and without any reference to their claims that they have ‘transitioned’ to the other gender unless that is a part of the story itself. I get that many people, though I suspect fewer people than the left believe, accept Dr Levine’s and Mr Thomas’ claims that they are really women, but in referring to these people solely by their assumed names and the pronouns appropriate for the opposite sex, have the media not taken one position in the debate over whether the transgendered really have been able to change their sex?

The American left are aghast that Elon Musk’s somewhat delayed purchase of Twitter has meant that conservatives would be able to actually speak freely. As we have previously noted, Twitter added rules banning “targeted misgendering or deadnaming of transgender individuals.” “Misgendering” means referring to ‘transgendered’ individuals by their biological sex, either directly or through the use of the appropriate pronouns, while “deadnaming” means referring to such people by their birth names rather than the ones they have adopted which are more consistent with their imagined ‘gender.'[2]The First Street Journal’s Stylebook is exactly the opposite: while we do not change the direct quotes of others, in original material we always refer to people by their normal, biological sex … Continue reading The New York Times gave OpEd space to Chad Malloy[3]Chad Malloy is a man male who claims to be a woman, and goes by the faux name “Parker Malloy.” to claim that such restrictions actually promoted freedom of speech.

To trans people, it represented a recognition that our identity is an accepted fact and that to suggest otherwise is a slur.

That their ‘identity’ might not be “an accepted fact” is not something Mr Malloy wanted to concede, but Twitter’s policy also meant that those who did not accept such claims still had to be careful with their language, or be suspended or permanently banned. The Times, as well as The Philadelphia Inquirer, continued to use language to try to lock in the notion that ‘transgendered’ people have actually changed their gender, and go along with Mr Malloy’s claim that to not accept their “identity . . . is a slur.” Such would certainly not fit with Mr Downie’s standard of “accuracy, fairness, nonpartisanship, accountability and the pursuit of truth.”

“There is some confusion about the value of good reporting versus point of view,” said current Post executive editor Sally Buzbee, who noted that many journalists want to make a difference on such issues as climate change, immigration and education. “We stress the value of reporting,” she said, “what you are able to dig up — so you (the reader) can make up your own mind.”

That is a wildly inconsistent statement. If “many journalists want to make a difference” on some important issues, is that not biased reporting, and trying to influence how readers think rather than giving readers all of the information available so they can make up their own minds?

There’s a lot more in the article, but one paragraph, the last I shall quote, really caught my eye:

Both Heyward and I continue to believe that allowing journalists to express opinions on controversial social and political issues erodes the perception of their news organizations’ fairness and open-mindedness.

A quite reasonable statement, but Mr Downie’s previous quote that “many journalists want to make a difference” allow for the reporters’ opinions when it comes to what are supposed to be straight news stories to slant them, perhaps subtly, toward a particular point of view certainly does erode the perception of a particular news organization’s fairness and open-mindedness.

I will admit to being surprised by Mr Downie’s article, because he said, and The Washington Post admitted through the publication of it, that yes, that credentialed media source, and many others like it, are slanting the news.

Mr Downie said that media organizations can “build trust” as they “move beyond objectivity,” but I have to ask: how does allowing a particular reporter’s presentation of the facts through his ‘lived experience’ or racial, ethnic, or sexual identity and orientation status build trust among those who are not of the same experiences or identity?

Think about the results, because we actually do have them. Newspapers all over the country have been failing; even The Washington Post, one of our country’s newspapers of record, and The Philadelphia Inquirer have been laying off staff, while smaller newspapers have been shut down completely, or bought out by hedge funds with a history of stripping them to the bone. The Post itself might have failed had Jeff Bezos not bought it and saved it, at least for a while.

But it’s more than newspapers: CNN, the first 24-hour news network has been in a steady ratings decline, and has been surpassed in viewership by MSNBC, while both of them have been beaten out by Fox News. All three have obvious biases, and all three are mostly watched by people who agree with their biases. That hasn’t been particularly good for expanding their audiences. CNN can’t blame its general decline on the same forces that have so damaged print newspapers, and whatever it has been doing has not exactly built trust for that network.

Mr Downie said the quiet part out loud, that the credentialed media have sacrificed objectivity and internalized bias. We are not surprised.
_____________________________
Also posted on American Free News Network. Check out American Free News Network for more well written and well reasoned conservative commentary.

References

References
↑1 The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their objectivity. I use the term ‘journolism’ frequently when writing about media bias.
↑2 The First Street Journal’s Stylebook is exactly the opposite: while we do not change the direct quotes of others, in original material we always refer to people by their normal, biological sex and their original names. But we do say that explicitly.
↑3 Chad Malloy is a man male who claims to be a woman, and goes by the faux name “Parker Malloy.”
Posted on by

The Philadelphia Inquirer really, really, really hates the police!

We have noted previously that The Philadelphia Inquirer declines to publish the photographs of people accused of crimes. But when the accused are cops, even cops against whom police-hating District Attorney Larry Krasner cannot get convictions? Yup, the Inquirer will publish their photos!

Former Philly cop Carl Holmes’ sexual assault case has been tossed out of court

Prosecutors moved to withdraw charges after saying they’d been unable to get a key witness to appear at Holmes’ trial.

by Chris Palmer | Tuesday, January 31, 2023 | 1:59 PM EST

The criminal case against former Philadelphia Police commander Carl Holmes, who had been accused of sexually assaulting women at work, effectively collapsed Tuesday when a key accuser failed to show up to testify at trial.

The photo to the right is actually a screenshot from the Inquirer story, including the newspaper’s caption. I included it this was as documentation that yes, it was in there. The Inky’s image is linked here, and you can click on the photo to enlarge it.

We noted last October how the newspaper had published photos of former law enforcement officers accused of crimes.

Assistant District Attorney Clarke Beljean said at a brief hearing that prosecutors and detectives had taken extensive steps in recent days to find the witness and persuade her to come to court. They’d even asked a judge to issue a bench warrant Monday, when the trial had been scheduled to begin.

But none of those efforts was successful. And without the woman’s testimony, Beljean said, “I cannot put on a case.”

The charges connected to that witness — Michele Vandegrift, who said Holmes sexually assaulted her in his office in 2007 — were the only offenses still standing against Holmes, who had been charged in 2019 with assaulting two other subordinates. The cases connected to those witnesses had already fallen apart in court due to questions about their credibility or availability to testify.

Holmes, 57, who has denied the allegations, showed little reaction as prosecutors moved to withdraw the latest charges. He and his lawyer, Gregory Pagano, declined to comment as they left the courtroom.

Further down:

Holmes was once one of the Police Department’s highest-ranking commanders, a chief inspector who spent nearly three decades on the force and was also a lawyer. But during his career, he had been publicly accused of sexually assaulting women he worked with — allegations detailed extensively by The Inquirer and the Daily News.

Note how that’s phrased: article author Chris Palmer has written it in a way to imply that yes, Mr Holmes is guilty, guilty, guilty, the newspaper has documented it, and that the only problem is that witnesses won’t cooperate. Common Pleas Court Judge Shanese Johnson told the prosecutors, “She’s no longer interested in being part of this case. She’s ducking you.”

When I tried the story’s internal link, several times around 3:20 PM EST, I kept getting “Internal server error.”

In 2019, District Attorney Larry Krasner’s office accused Holmes of crimes including attempted sexual assault and indecent assault following a grand jury investigation. At the time, Krasner said he believed the investigation showed that powerful men in the Police Department had operated with “impunity,” particularly if they were accused of wrongdoing by women. But Krasner said his office would not shy away from prosecuting cases even if he believed they had been “mishandled” in the past.

And here the Inquirer shows us how much they love Mr Krasner — they endorsed him for re-election in 2021 — and how they love the George Soros-sponsored defense attorney who is now District Attorney’s attacks on the police.

There’s a significant amount of information in the original about how the purported witnesses have refused to come forward.

But there’s more in today’s Inquirer to show how much the editors hate the police:

Without systemic change, police killings will continue | Editorial

Political leaders and police departments should be able to balance the need to combat crime with the need to address racial inequality.

by The Editorial Board | Tuesday, January 31, 2023 | 5:00 AM EST

The sickening video of Tyre Nichols being beaten to death by five Memphis, Tenn., police officers is yet another reminder of how departments across the country have failed to address systemic police brutality.

From George Floyd to Freddie Gray to Michael Brown to Eric Garner, and every harrowing death in between, we have been here before. We have heard the cries for help, from “I can’t breathe” to “I’m just trying to go home,” and we have watched the videos of cold-blooded murder by cops, often over minor incidents.

Each time, there is a call for police reform. Each time, nothing seems to change.

Perhaps even more horrifying is that for every recorded spectacle of a senseless killing, hundreds of other murders at the hands of police go unnoticed. Police officers shot and killed a record 1,096 people in 2022, according to a database maintained by the Washington Post.

More than 1,096 people were murdered in 2022 in Chicago and Philadelphia alone, but the editors of the Inquirer don’t seem to care much about them. The newspaper rarely reports much at all about the killings in Philly, and almost never tells readers about arrests or convictions of killers unless the killings were somehow more noticeable than usual, such as the Roxborough High School shooting. We have detailed, many times, how the newspaper scrubs the race of both victims and accused criminals from the stories they do cover.

The editorial, which reads like it was written by the Inky’s most wild-eyed ‘progressive’ columnist, Will Bunch, continued:

There is some cautious optimism in seeing the five Memphis police officers fired and charged with second-degree murder and other crimes. But would the justice have been as swift if the officers were white?

Given that Mr Bunch the Editorial Board mentioned, further down, the George Floyd case in Minneapolis, it’s obvious that they do know that white police officers have been charged, tried, and convicted previously, so why the snarky bit of race-baiting?

There is no denying the racially biased culture that is embedded in policing. It goes without saying that the disproportionate number of people killed by police are Black.

What the editorial does not note is that a “disproportionate number” of criminals are black.

While the calls to “defund the police” may have been ill-phrased, the need to reevaluate and possibly redirect law enforcement funding hasn’t gone away. However, a pandemic-driven rise in shootings and crimes — along with Republican attacks — led to pushback. As public opinion shifted, so did the political will to address systemic racial inequality.

In the end, funding actually increased in most police departments, including in Philadelphia. In fact, with shootings and murders near records, none of the candidates in the upcoming mayoral primary has proposed to reduce police funding.

Yeah, the political moves to try to ‘defund the police’ mostly went nowhere, certainly not in Philadelphia where officially reported homicides jumped from 356 to 499 in 2020, and them up to 562 in 2021. The public responded with a huge surge in applications to carry firearms, because they saw the Wild West show into which the City of Brotherly Love had descended. And while the Philadelphia Police Department didn’t see a formal reduction in funding, the fact that Philadelphia is nearly 600 officers undermanned from its authorized full strength of 6,380, with around 800 more expected to retire within the next four years means that the Police Department has been defunded in a de facto sense.

The embedded link is to an Inquirer story; the editors already knew about the short staffing.

(M)ore departments need to increase de-escalation training and require fellow officers to intervene to stop abuse and report excess force.

This was perhaps the funniest part of all, because in his own column, Mr Bunch wrote:

Honor Tyre Nichols: Stop ATL’s dumb ‘Cop City’

Atlanta’s $90M project destroying a forest to train repressive cops needs to die

by Will Bunch | Tuesday, January 31, 2023

The lead story on CNN and other news outlets on Monday morning — after a weekend in which America struggled to process the utter senselessness of a Memphis cop beating that killed 29-year-old Tyre Nichols, an unarmed Black man — was that calls for “police reform” are again accelerating.

The headline struck me as — to use a phrase that normally makes me cringe — “fake news.” Those calls had been much louder and more forceful after a Minneapolis cop murdered George Floyd in 2020, and yet only a scattered hodgepodge of local-level reforms have even been attempted. Talk that President Joe Biden and Congress will revive a stalled federal bill to curb police brutality crashes into the blue wall of an inevitable filibuster by Senate Republicans. The nation’s weariness was reflected last weekend in relatively small protests, compared to the millions who marched nearly three years ago.

Yes, all of that boldface is in Mr Bunch’s original. I left it in to provide a greater example of the childishness of his writing.

Is it wrong of me to suspect that the distinguished Mr Bunch regrets that the “relatively small protests” this past weekend were small and peaceful, as opposed to the 2020 riots with their arson and destruction? Of course, the Inky fired forced the resignation of Executive Editor and Senior Vice President Stan Wischnowski over the headline “Buildings Matter, Too” on an article lamenting the destruction of property by the rioters in Philly, so maybe the #woke there — at least the ones left at that dying newspaper — do want another summer of fire and hate.

But if American leaders are serious in claiming that things are truly going to be different this time — that we are finally going to begin dismantling a deeply entrenched and militarized police-state culture that is drenched in white supremacy and treats Black and brown communities like occupation zones — then I know exactly where this project can start.

In the city that gave the world Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. — Atlanta, Georgia.

There, of all places, law-enforcement leaders backed by the business and political establishment are using brute force and now demagogic false claims of “domestic terrorism” to impose a $90 million monument to everything that is wrong about police culture in America: a massive training center that will scar a vital urban forest with a mock city where cops will learn to put down unrest after the inevitable next Tyre Nichols or George Floyd.

The source cited by Mr Bunch in his embedded link under “domestic terrorism” states that, “One man was fatally shot by police in the confrontation after he opened fire and wounded a state trooper, authorities said.”

Wouldn’t a police training center include the lessons of the George Floyd and Tyre Nichols incidents? Wouldn’t trainers be stressing that when force is needed, it must be the minimum force required to make an arrest, and to de-escalate situations so that officers will not face criminal charges?

Well, not to Mr Bunch, given his “train repressive cops” secondary title.

But the rot of the Cop City plan runs deeper than the repeating history of Riotsville or the facility’s location near the former site of the Old Atlanta Prison Farm, which was marred during its 20th-century run by racialized violence. Indeed, the plan for Cop City almost reads as if that new ChatGPT AI tool was asked to “describe a project that epitomizes everything wrong with modern America,” since it seeks to train Atlanta’s militarized police force at a facility that would take down irreplaceable forest wetlands that protect against climate change.

It would be wiser if Mr Bunch actually checked his sources. When your source is Teen Vogua, a real journalist — as opposed to a journolist[1]The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their … Continue reading — would check other sources.[2]One reason I use primarily credentialed media sources which run to the liberal side of the political spectrum is so that what I write can’t be criticized as stemming from evil reich-wing … Continue reading

“(V)ital urban forest”? “(I)rreplaceable forest wetlands”, huh? Robert Stacy McCain is a native of Atlanta, and knows something about the Peachtree State:

Being a native of Atlanta, let me tell you something about Georgia, in case you’re not familiar with the area. It’s hot and humid, which means that all manner of plant life grows with astonishing rapidity there. The house where I grew up in Douglas County had a chain-link fence around the backyard, and every summer one of my chores was to go out and cut the honeysuckle vines off that fence. If you didn’t cut those vines off — and it was tedious work, trust me — the whole fence would be covered in vines. The ditch down by the road? Oh, the hours spent with a slingblade cuttting back the brush and briars that sprang up relentlessly there! And the pine forest up the hill across the road? Oh, just 40 or 50 years earlier, that had all been farmland, until the bottom fell out of the cotton market. Stop farming your property for just a few years, and next thing you know, what used to be a pasture becomes a tangled forest — and that, my friends, is what happened to the old Atlanta Prison Farm.

A sling blade.

Reckon all those out-of-town hippies camping out in what they’ve dubbed “The Atlanta Forest” never handled a slingblade in their whole lives, and they sure as hell don’t realize that this “forest” only dates back to the 1960s or so, when the inmates stopped cultivating the property. Now it’s a tangled mess of briars and vines and oaks and pines and, if you’re a damned tree-hugging fool from Pittsburgh or someplace, maybe it seems like a South American rain forest or something, but it’s just what happens to any property in Georgia that’s gone untended for a while.

Not just Georgia; it happens in eastern Kentucky as well. I see it all around me. Mr McCain included that picture of the area, and it’s more weeded and tangled than a forest. But Mr Bunch has never been able to see the trees because the ‘forest’ is in the way.

References

References
↑1 The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their objectivity. I use the term ‘journolism’ frequently when writing about media bias.
↑2 One reason I use primarily credentialed media sources which run to the liberal side of the political spectrum is so that what I write can’t be criticized as stemming from evil reich-wing conservatives.