Posted on by

President Biden acts like he cares about working Americans, but that’s all it is: an act.

This is the kind of thing that pisses me off about Joe Biden being President. Looking at the January unemployment numbers, he said:

The unemployment numbers are from data collected in the middle of the month, normally before the 20th, meaning before he signed the executive order that threw 11,000 people out of work on the Keystone XL Pipeline!

Posted on by

Schadenfreude! Hard left feminist decries surge in homeschooling, but the surge is caused by leftist teachers’ unions trying to keep public schools closed

Feminist Jill Filipovic McCormick is not a fan of home schooling:

Right-wing groups love to push homeschooling because it helps keep kids away from material that might challenge their conservative worldview, and it keeps women out of work and in the home. It’s a pretty transparent set of motivations, not good for women or children.

This is a pet issue of mine and some day I’ll write about it at length, but the whole conversation about homeschooling would go very differently if we believed children had a right to a high-quality education — or if we believed children had rights at all, separate from parents.

Please do note that my tweet talks about what motivates right-wing groups to push homeschooling — it does not say that parents who homeschool have a single set of motivations (they certainly do not). Plz work on reading comprehension before you teach your kids.

…and just observing how many people on the right are big mad at the idea that “children should have rights.

The previous four paragraphs are the rest of the Twitter thread Mrs McCormick posted; it’s simply easier for the reader for me to copy and paste them; no changes to her text have been made.

Twitchy noted many objections made to Mrs MCormick’s tweets, which you can read if you follow this link.

I had made a few reply tweets to her:

Yet the teachers’ unions, which are 75% female, want to keep the public schools closed to in-person classes, forcing primarily women to stay at home to care for their children. The teachers still get paid, but many of the other public school employees are out of work.

It’s been women’s careers which have been more negatively impacted by the virus, yet it’s the heavily female, politically liberal teachers’ unions which have been most resistant to resuming in-person classes.

Here’s How the Pandemic Is Affecting Women’s Careers: Women have been disproportionately hit by job losses and many of those who are working say they may have to step back.

And, of course, parents who can somehow afford it have shown a tendency to pull students from the closed-to-in-person instruction public schools in favor of private, frequently religious, private schools

Public Schools Will Struggle Even More as Parents Move Kids to Private Ones During the Pandemic.

Then there’s the President attempting to force acceptance of ‘transgenderism’ on the public schools. Why would it surprise anyone that some parents might not accept that, and choose to abandon the public schools?

Now, I was going to let it go at that, until I opened The Philadelphia Inquirer’s website this morning, and found this gem:

Philly teachers union says it’s ‘not safe’ to reopen schools. It wants the city to intervene.

by Kristen A. Graham and Maddie Hanna | February 4, 2021 | 9:20 AM EST

The city teachers union says it doesn’t have confidence buildings are safe for reopening, setting up a showdown with the Philadelphia School District over a planned Monday return for some teachers.

Philadelphia Federation of Teachers president Jerry Jordan (David Maialetti/ The Philadelphia Inquirer)

Philadelphia Federation of Teachers president Jerry Jordan said Wednesday night he has called on the city to assign a neutral third party who will examine evidence presented by both sides and decide whether buildings are in suitable shape for a return.

That’s a move open to Jordan based on a memorandum of understanding signed by the union and district in the fall, requiring the involvement of the Mayor’s Office of Labor and a “world-renowned physician” to weigh in swiftly on reopening disputes. If the outside expert determines the district is not in compliance with safety standards, they will direct the school system to fix the problems.

After weeks of back and forth and meetings with district officials Monday and Tuesday, Jordan said he still had deep concerns over ventilation, especially in schools where window fans are still being installed to improve air flow, and other safety issues.

There’s more at the original, but it all boils down to one thing: no matter what the school district does, it will never be enough. Here in the Bluegrass State, the Fayette County schools remain closed for other “reasons,” even though the Commonwealth has begun COVID-19 vaccinations prioritizing teachers.

The Inquirer article noted that the Philadelphia public schools have been closed to in-person instruction since last March; that’s eleven months! And if the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers gets its way, the schools will be closed to in-person instruction for a full year.

We might as well face facts: we have lost an entire educational year! From The Washington Post:

It’s time to admit it: Remote education is a failure

Opinion by Helaine Olen, Columnist | December 2, 2020 | 11:32 AM EST

Whenever someone expressed concerns about the quality of remote education back in the early days of covid-19, they were all but shamed into silence. No, the spring did not go well, but that was done on the fly, with next to no preparation. No, it’s not an ideal solution, but staying with in-person instruction is out of the question. There is a learning curve, we were told. We’ll get this thing right with time.

Here’s how that worked out: In Houston, the number of students with failing grades is exploding. In St. Paul, Minn., a high school student is almost as likely to be on track to fail a class as pass it. In the junior high and high schools of Fairfax County — one of the wealthiest counties in the United States — 1 out of 10 students flunked at least two classes, and the number was almost double that for those with disabilities. Enrollment is falling in closed school districts from coast to coast and many points in between. Some children are exiting for private schools, or private pods. Others are simply MIA.

In the vast majority of cases, remote learning is a poor substitute for in-person education — no matter what efforts are made, no matter how many teacher trainings are offered.

It’s not simply a matter of subpar or nonexistent Internet or computer access, something that impacts students from more than 4 million households. Small children, as it turns out, will not sit in front of a computer to listen to a teacher or complete an assignment without supervision. That means millions of parents — for the most part, moms — got conscripted as unpaid teacher’s assistants. And while older children don’t need parents next to them in order to do their work, they often won’t do it regardless.

There’s more at the original, and yes, it is an opinion columnist who wrote it, but Helaine Olen included a lot of linked information, which is why I chose to use it.

We have frequently noted the efforts of private schools to open, despite the orders of state Governors. And private school enrollment has reversed a decades-long decline and showing increased enrollment. The number of students being homeschooled has shot up as well, though some officious bureaucrats are trying to stop that.[1]Full disclosure: My daughters attended parochial schools for part of their education.

I will admit to some schadenfreude here: it is the actions of the public school teachers and their unions which are helping to increase both private and parochial school enrollments and homeschooling, the very thing Mrs McCormick hates. It isn’t we evil reich-wing conservatives forcing and keeping the public schools closed; it’s the actions of the primarily liberal and Democratic public school teachers and their unions.

References

References
↑1 Full disclosure: My daughters attended parochial schools for part of their education.
Posted on by

The General Assembly overrides Governor Beshear’s vetoes, so he goes to court to try to override the legislature

In mid-January, I submitted an OpEd to the Lexington Herald-Leader, one which the editors chose not to print suggesting that Governor Andy Beshear ought to sign Senate Bill 1, which the General Assembly passed, and which the Governor threatened to veto. In it, I wrote:

In the political dispute between Governor Andy Beshear (D-KY) and the Republican majority in the General Assembly, the legislature has taken up, and approved, bills to restrict the emergency powers of the Governor under KRS 39A. The Governor’s declaration of an emergency, and the executive orders which followed, were initially generally approved, as the extent and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic was both worrisome, and unknown.

However, the public were told, and sold on, the notion that this was a problem that could be greatly reduced by fourteen days of action. Dr. Ezekiel J. Emanuel, writing in The New York Times, said:

Health experts have not been overreacting. Models from Imperial College London and others suggest that up to 2.2 million Americans could die within a year without sufficient efforts to “flatten the curve.”

At the same time, it is right to worry about how Covid-19 will wreck the economy. Projections already suggest that the American economy could contract by more than 15 percent in the second quarter and that the unemployment rate could surpass 20 percent.

But the economy cannot be fixed without solving the pandemic. Only after the virus is contained can we reopen restaurants, bars, gyms and stores; allow people to travel, attend conferences and visit museums; and persuade them to buy cars and houses.

The window to win this war is about seven to 14 days.

If the United States intervenes immediately on the scale that China did, our death toll could be under 100,000. Within three to four months we might be able to begin a return to more normal lives.

Published on March 23, 2020, three to four months would have been late June to late July. Despite actions taken by the vast majority of our nation’s governors, including Governor Beshear, Dr. Emanuel’s now-seemingly-rosy prediction fell flat on its face.

Kentucky State Police put notices on and recorded license plates of unoccupied cars at Maryville Baptist Church on Easter morning. April 12, 2020. Photo by
Scott Utterback, The Louisville Courier- Journal.

Governor Beshear’s actions became controversial fairly quickly. While the Governor first recommended that schools and churches close, of their own volition, on March 19th he made it an order. This included April 12th, which was Easter Sunday. When a few churches refused to be closed to in-person services on the holiest day of the Christian calendar, Kentucky State Police troopers recorded license plates and VIN numbers of worshipers in two church parking lots, an ugly scene which attracted nationwide attention.

Resistance started mounting in the Bluegrass State, and leaders of the General Assembly began asking the Governor to be included in his decision-taking, but Mr. Beshear declined. The Herald-Leader reported:

Beshear was asked at Friday’s (July 10, 2020) news conference on COVID-19 why he has not included the legislature in coming up with his orders. He said many state lawmakers refuse to wear masks and noted that 26 legislators in Mississippi have tested positive for the virus.

Under the state constitution, the Governor has the power to call the state legislature into a special session, but the General Assembly does not have the ability to call itself back into session. When the Kentucky Supreme Court prohibited all state lower courts from acting on suits to stop the Governor’s orders, in July, then finally ruled in November that his executive orders were legal, Republican leaders knew that it was only legislative action which could get them involved.

Republicans significantly increased their already large majorities in both chambers of the legislature, and several bills were pre-filed to limit the Governor’s power. Mr. Beshear promised to veto the bills even before they were passed, but the General Assembly passed them anyway, by large margins. The Governor has promised to challenge the bills’ legality in court if his vetoes are overridden.

Senate Bill 1 does not prevent the Governor from taking action during an emergency; what it does do is limit his executive orders to thirty days unless an extension is approved by the General Assembly. It further specifies that no emergency orders can suspend rights under the United States Constitution.

There is no reason the legislature cannot be consulted; the Governor simply chose not to do so, thus drawing lines in the sand and angering legislators. There may not be much that he can do to repair that fractured relationship, but signing Senate Bill 1, and agreeing to work with the General Assembly might be the best he could do.

If he vetoes it, his veto will be overridden anyway. The sensible thing to do is sign it.

Of course, the Governor did not sign Senate Bill 1, or any of the other legislation the General Assembly sent him, vetoing six bills, and allowing a seventh to become law without his signature. And, as predicted, the General Assembly overrode his vetoes:

GOP swiftly overrides Beshear vetoes. He immediately challenges COVID laws in court.

By Daniel Desrochers and Jack Brammer | February 2, 2021 | 5:56 PM EST | Updated February 2, 2021 | 6:50 PM

Kentucky Republicans asserted their control in Frankfort Tuesday, overwhelmingly voting to override vetoes issued by Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear of bills that limit his powers during the coronavirus pandemic and other emergencies.

The action by lawmakers upon returning to the Capitol after a three-week break set the stage for a court battle, which Beshear initiated immediately.

In announcing his lawsuit against House Bill 1, Senate Bill 1 and Senate Bill 2, Beshear accused lawmakers of surrendering to COVID-19.

“Today, the General Assembly attempted to surrender to COVID-19 and accept the casualties. As your governor, I cannot let this happen,” Beshear said. “I have filed this action to continue to fight for the protection of all Kentuckians.”

The action fulfilled a promise he made Monday to fight the laws in court, setting up another battle in which the judicial branch will determine whether Beshear has the power to place restrictions on gatherings and businesses to limit the spread of COVID-19.

The Governor’s lawsuit was filed in Franklin County Circuit Court; Franklin is the county in which the state capital of Frankfort is located. The Governor asked for:

a temporary restraining order, a temporary injunction and a permanent injunction against the Defendants, Robert W. Osborne, Speaker of the Kentucky House of Representatives, Bertram Robert Stivers, II, President of the Kentucky Senate, and Daniel J. Cameron, the Kentucky Attorney General.

The Governor is trying to run out the clock on COVID-19. Had he included the legislature in 2020, it might not have come down to this.

Regardless of the outcome of this filing, the loser will appeal to the state Court of Appeals, and then to the state Supreme Court. That isn’t a very good history:

On July 17th, the Kentucky Supreme Court halted all lower state court efforts to enjoin Governor Andy Beshear’s (D-KY) executive orders to fight COVID-19. Then, three weeks later, the Court set September 17th to hear oral arguments on those cases, which meant that Mr Beshear’s executive orders would continue in force, without any recourse to the state courts to challenge them, for two months before the state Supreme Court would even allow arguments against them.

Those oral arguments were heard, but it wasn’t until November 12th that the state Supreme Court issued its ruling. That’s 118 days, or 3½ months, that the state Supreme Court left the Governor’s orders in force without any actual legal ruling.

Sadly, when that court did rule, it ruled in favor of the Governor.

Under Senate Bill 1, Governor Beshear can still issue executive orders for up to thirty days, without the approval of the General Assembly to extend them, so the Governor’s latest executive order, extending the mandatory mask order until March 1st. The Governor cannot extend that order now, under Senate Bill 1, without the approval of the legislature. But if he gets his way on an injunction, he could extend the order, and, if we get the same 118 days from the state Supreme Court, that would take until June 27th before there was a ruling by the officially non-partisan but practically Democrat controlled state Supreme Court.

All of this could have been avoided if the Governor had included the General Assembly in his decisions, if he had not acted unilaterally and specifically chosen to ignore the legislature.

Translation: Governor Beshear believed that the legislature would not go along with his draconian decrees.

I will admit it: I have little faith that the state Supreme Court will uphold the legislature and the rights of Kentuckians.

Posted on by

The New York Times and the Ministry of Truth

Anybody who has ever written for a collegiate newspaper, a category which would include me, has had at least a few dreams about being a reporter and writer for The New York Times.[1]Though not a journalism major, I wrote for the Kentucky Kernel for two years while in the Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce in the early 1980s.

Of course, to become a writer for the greatest newspaper in the world, you had to be well-educated, and it helped if you went to one of the top schools, such as the Columbia University’s School of Journalism. To have been well-educated, at least as far as a liberal arts degree is concerned, there is virtually no way you could not have read George Orwell’s 1984, the dystopian novel about life in a totalitarian society.

So, one would think that no one could ever suggest, in the pages of the Times, such a thing as Mr Orwell’s Ministry of Truth, where the main character, Winston Smith worked, would ever be a good idea. But if one did think that, one would be wrong.

How the Biden Administration Can Help Solve Our Reality Crisis

These steps, experts say, could prod more people to abandon the scourge of hoaxes and lies.

By Kevin Roose[2]Mr Roose is a technology columnist for The Times, and the host of the “Rabbit Hole” podcast. His column, “The Shift,” examines the intersection of technology, business, and … Continue reading | February 2, 2021 | 11:54 AM EST

Last month, millions of Americans watched as President Biden took the oath of office and, in a high-minded Inaugural Address, called for a new era of American unity.

But plenty of other Americans weren’t paying attention to Mr. Biden’s speech. They were too busy watching YouTube videos alleging that the inauguration was a prerecorded hoax that had been filmed on a Hollywood soundstage.

Quite the statement! Mr Roose seems to believe that if I didn’t watch the inaugural, I must be some evil or deluded conspiracy theorist. As it happens, I did not watch the inaugural, but I did not because I did not wish to see the transition to someone with Joe Biden’s and the Democratic Party’s repugnant policies.

Or they were melting down in QAnon group chats, trying to figure out why former President Donald J. Trump wasn’t interrupting Mr. Biden’s speech to declare martial law and announce the mass arrest of satanic pedophiles.

Or maybe their TVs were tuned to OAN, where an anchor was floating the baseless theory that Mr. Biden “wasn’t actually elected by the people.”

It’s a long article, in which Mr Roose suggests:

  • “Unless the Biden administration treats conspiracy theories and disinformation as the urgent threats they are, our parallel universes will only drift further apart, and the potential for violent unrest and civic dysfunction will only grow.”
  • We must have a “holistic understanding of what the spectrum of violent extremism looks like in the United States, and then allocate resources accordingly.”
  • “The Biden administration could set up a “truth commission,” similar to the 9/11 Commission, to investigate the planning and execution of the Capitol siege on January 6. This effort, (Joan Donovan, the research director of Harvard University’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy) said, would ideally be led by people with deep knowledge of the many “networked factions” that coordinated and carried out the riot, including white supremacist groups and far-right militias.”
  • Several experts with whom Mr Roose spoke “recommended that the Biden administration put together a cross-agency task force to tackle disinformation and domestic extremism, which would be led by something like a ‘reality czar.'”

Mr Roose graciously granted that this “sounds a little dystopian,” but continued to say that we needed to listen to the arguments for such suggestions, including tapping into the algorithms used by Twitter, Facebook and YouTube to ferret out bad, bad, bad messages.

Really? As we noted previously, Twitter already takes sides on the issue of ‘transgenderism,’ and bans ‘deadnaming’ and ‘misgendering,’[3]‘Deadnaming’ means referring to a ‘transgender’ person by his given name at birth, rather than the name he has taken to match the sex he claims to be; ‘misgendering’ means referring to a … Continue reading as though the issue is settled, and no dissent can be tolerated.

Was Mr Roose simply reporting? The Times has already published articles claiming that Free Speech is killing us. Noxious language online is causing real-world violence, and that Twitter’s bans on ‘deadnaming’ and ‘misgendering’ actually promotes freedom of speech. The Times told us how wonderful it was that Jeff Bezos was able to deplatform Parler, but lamented that some of those who lost their speech on Parler migrated to Gab and Rumble.[4]Full disclosure: I maintained a Parler account, and have a Gab account.

Until the nation reckons with the self-inflicted wounds stemming from an under-regulated, unreformed social media information architecture, President Biden’s calls for healing and national unity won’t produce substantial, lasting results. The new administration needs a long-term plan to confront the escalating threat, as far-right insurgents migrate from one platform to the next.

The Parler hack is the place to start. It indicates that moderation of violent, racist, anti-democratic content will increasingly lead to migration of that same hateful content. For instance, the deplatforming of Parler triggered a virtual stampede to similar forums like Gab and Rumble. Analysts have already documented Parler groups re-forming and spreading evermore hateful content on Telegram and a host of smaller platforms.

When the Times prints OpEd pieces claiming that social media are “under-regulated (and) unreformed,” what are we ro conclude other than the Times, which so jealously and zealously protested that its own Freedom of the Press should not be restricted in New York Times Co v United States, believe that other people’s speech and publications must be more strictly regulated, that those who decline to conform to the Accepted Wisdom — meaning: the wisdom of the left — should simply not be allowed to make their cases or present their views?

If Chad Malloy writes an article claiming that ‘deadnaming’ and ‘misgendering’ is bad, horrible, and should not be allowed, the Times will publish it, and Twitter will be perfectly happy to allow positive tweets referencing it. If William Teach tweets “Since the gender confused have a much higher chance of having mental issues and suicidal tendencies, let’s put them around military grade weapons for Social Justice, am I right?” he gets suspended by Twitter, and not allowed to express that viewpoint, despite the fact that every point he made is true.[5]Chad Malloy is a male who claims to be female, using the name Parker Marie Malloy.

Twitter suspended the account of Catholic World Report for noting that Dr Richard Levine, appointed by President Biden to become Assistant Secretary for Health in the Department of Health and Human Services is “a biological man identifying as a transgender woman”, despite the fact that the statement is completely accurate.[6]Dr Richard Levine claims that he is female and goes by the name “Rachel.” As noted in our Stylebook, we always refer to the ‘transgendered’ by their biological sex and given … Continue reading

The Times apparently wants some form of a Ministry of Truth, but, like the one for which Winston Smith worked, its business is making certain that whatever Big Brother says is not contradicted by history or the facts. “Ignorance is Strength” the Party says in the book, and it seems that The New York Times wants everybody to remain ignorant of any information, any views of which the Times disapproves.

The late William F Buckley, Jr, famously said, “Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” It wasn’t so long ago that the editors of the Times would have shaken their heads at conservative views, but nevertheless simply argued against them, rather than trying to stifle and stamp them out.

Today? All of that has changed! The editors now want a government agency to tell everyone what is true, and stamp out anything they feel is contrary.

References

References
↑1 Though not a journalism major, I wrote for the Kentucky Kernel for two years while in the Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce in the early 1980s.
↑2 Mr Roose is a technology columnist for The Times, and the host of the “Rabbit Hole” podcast. His column, “The Shift,” examines the intersection of technology, business, and culture. You can find him on Twitter, LinkedIn, or Instagram. @kevinroose • Facebook
↑3 ‘Deadnaming’ means referring to a ‘transgender’ person by his given name at birth, rather than the name he has taken to match the sex he claims to be; ‘misgendering’ means referring to a ‘transgender’ person by sex-specific terms referring to his biological sex rather than the sex he claims to be.
↑4 Full disclosure: I maintained a Parler account, and have a Gab account.
↑5 Chad Malloy is a male who claims to be female, using the name Parker Marie Malloy.
↑6 Dr Richard Levine claims that he is female and goes by the name “Rachel.” As noted in our Stylebook, we always refer to the ‘transgendered’ by their biological sex and given names at birth.
Posted on by

Is there no actual journalism practiced at The Philadelphia Inquirer?

It’s a pretty sad thing that I have come to check the Philadelphia Police Department’s Current Crime Statistics page every weekday morning.[1]The statistics are updated Monday through Friday only. Well, this is Monday morning, and the first of February, so we get the homicide statistics for the month of January. And an even fifty people didn’t experience much Brotherly Love in the City during what is normally the coldest month of the year.

In last year’s just-barely-missed-the-record, Philadelphia saw 38 homicides in January. Fifty is a 31.58% increase. Fifty in 31 days is a rate of 1.6129 per day, which, if maintained throughout 2021, would mean 589 people killed in the city’s mean streets.

Yet, The Philadelphia Inquirer, the newspaper of record for the city, the metropolitan area, and really the entire Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, didn’t have the first hint of a story about this, at least not as of 11:38 AM EST, when last I opened the newspaper’s website.

Oh, there was plenty on the website’s main page. There was a big story about why the Inquirer was closing comments on its news stories, because “Commenting on Inquirer.com was long ago hijacked by a small group of trolls who traffic in racism, misogyny, and homophobia. This group comprises a tiny fraction of the Inquirer.com audience. But its impact is disproportionate and enduring.”

How can they be sure that these views do not represent more than a “tiny fraction” of their audience? Have they really done the research, or is it because the #woke in the newsroom, who got Executive Editor and Senior Vice President Stan Wischnowski fired to resign because he wrote an attention grabbing headline, but one of which the left wholly disapproved, didn’t like the idea that the riff-raff could express their opinions?

The Inquirer could post an OpEd piece by Patrick J Egan strongly in opposition to capital punishment,[2]Yes, I, too, am opposed to capital punishment, though not for the same reasons. The author claims that executions could resume once Governor Tom Wolf (D-PA) is out of office, and a capital punishment … Continue reading but make no mention of the one crime, murder, that can result in capital punishment, even as it has surged to record levels?

How could fifty homicides, occurring at a higher rate than during the previous year be so blithely ignored, be not considered newsworthy?

Oh, wait, I know! You have to have actual journalists on the staff to practice journalism. No wonder I’ve seen it called The Philadelphia Enquirer!

References

References
↑1 The statistics are updated Monday through Friday only.
↑2 Yes, I, too, am opposed to capital punishment, though not for the same reasons. The author claims that executions could resume once Governor Tom Wolf (D-PA) is out of office, and a capital punishment proponent is in office, while ignoring the fact that the previous Governor, Tom Corbett, a Republican, signed 47 separate death warrants during his four years in office, yet not one execution actually occurred.
Posted on by

The New York Times and The Washington Post want to censor other people’s #FreedomOfSpeech WaPo OpEd piece argues that the Sedition Act of 1798 was a good idea

From 1984, Chapter 2:

Thoughtcrime does not entail death: thoughtcrime IS death.

Now he had recognized himself as a dead man it became important to stay alive as long as possible. Two fingers of his right hand were inkstained. It was exactly the kind of detail that might betray you. Some nosing zealot in the Ministry (a woman, probably: someone like the little sandy-haired woman or the dark-haired girl from the Fiction Department) might start wondering why he had been writing during the lunch interval, why he had used an oldfashioned pen, what he had been writing — and then drop a hint in the appropriate quarter. He went to the bathroom and carefully scrubbed the ink away with the gritty dark-brown soap which rasped your skin like sandpaper and was therefore well adapted for this purpose.

Winston Smith knew that all evidence of incorrect thought needed to be erased, yet he couldn’t help from keeping his diary. Mr Smith had found the beautifully-paged blank book in the window of “a frowsy little junk-shop in a slummy quarter of the town,” the type of shop that Party members were not supposed to frequent, and just buying the thing had been a violation of discipline. George Orwell didn’t really imagine computers or word-processors or the horrors, horrors! of widespread self-publication on the internet, where anybody, anybody! could read things.

From the Editorial Page of The Wall Street Journal:

Speech and Sedition in 2021

The progressive press decides that dissenters should be suppressed.

By The Editorial Board | January 29, 2021 | 7:21 PM EST

Most Americans learn in school about flagship political excesses in U.S. history like Joe McCarthy’s 1950s inquisitions, the post-World War I Red Scare and the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. Yet a recent Washington Post opinion piece purports to explain “what the 1798 Sedition Act got right.”

The law banned a wide range of political speech and publication. It was passed by the ruling Federalists to suppress the rival Democratic-Republicans, whom they saw as seditious. The Post piece argues that though their solution was “flawed,” the Federalists had reason to worry about “unregulated freedom of the press.”

The author of the referenced Washington Post OpEd piece is Katlyn Marie Carter, an assistant professor of history at the University of Notre Dame and currently a fellow at the Notre Dame Institute for Advanced Study. She is writing a book entitled “Houses of Glass: Secrecy, Transparency, and the Birth of Representative Democracy.” She argued:

Citing the problem of misinformation in 1801, Rep. John Rutledge Jr. (S.C.) did not mince words in identifying falsehood as a particular threat to democracy. “In a Republican Government, where public opinion rules everything, it is all-important that truth should be the basis of public information,” he asserted. If public opinion was ill formed — poisoned by lies, deception, misrepresentations or mistakes — the consequences could be dire. “Government, which is the preservative of the general happiness and safety, cannot be secure if falsehood and malice are suffered to rob it of the confidence and affection of the people.”

Rutledge’s words sound like a premonition. Democracies are uniquely dependent on public opinion and trust, which makes the truth crucial to their function — and early Americans knew it.

While the communications world in 1801 was a far cry from the world of smartphones and social media, the two shared a key similarity. When the Internet debuted, it prompted significant optimism that the ease of access to information would promote knowledge. Similarly, early Americans had faith that a newly expanded print media would spread enlightenment. But like today, this initial hope soon gave way to concern. By the late 1790s many concluded that the truth was actually endangered by unregulated freedom of the press; they believed the only way to secure the republic was to punish people for spreading lies. Otherwise, falsehood would poison public opinion and people’s trust in their elected officials would be unduly eroded.

Rutledge’s warning came as he argued for renewal of the Sedition Act of 1798, which among other things, criminalized “false, scandalous and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame the said government, or either house of the said Congress, or the said President, or to bring them, or either of them, into contempt or disrepute.”

Who, I wonder, did Dr Carter believe would determine what was true and what was not? We noted earlier that the (purportedly) private publisher Twitter has, in effect, determined that transgenderism, the idea that people can change their sex through a combination of drug therapy and surgical procedures, is the truth, and speech arguing differently must be prohibited. The New York Times gave OpEd space to Andrew Marantz to claim that Free Speech is Killing Us, and Chad Malloy[1]Chad Malloy is a male who claims to be female, using the name Parker Marie Malloy. The First Street Journal’s Stylebook notes that we always refer to the ‘transgendered’ by their birth names … Continue reading to state that Twitter’s restrictions on ‘deadnaming’ and ‘misgendering’ actually promote the freedom of speech. One side of the argument is simply to be suppressed, or, as Mr Orwell put it, “Ignorance is Strength.”

Twitter and Facebook and Joe Biden have all determined that the matter is settled, and therefore statements to the contrary are simply falsehoods, and ought to be suppressed. So far, so far! the government under President Biden hasn’t acted to declare such speech seditious, but private social media sites, which have near monopolistic publication control, apparently have.

Of course, President Biden has only been in office for eleven days now, so give it time; he just might try to use the power of government to shut people up.

The Journal continued to note articles by Thomas Friedman and Nicholas Kristof of The New York Times calling for advertiser boycotts of Fox News, as did Margaret Sullivan of The Washington Post. So much for “All the News That’s Fit to Print.” So much for “Democracy Dies in Darkness.”  Apparently these august credentialed media sources believe that Freedom of the Press means only their Freedom of the Press, 

I’ve reached the point where I’ve quoted too much from the Journal, and there is much more at the original. But just one more paragraph:

Much of American journalism, which was supposed to revert to its historic role as a check on those in power after Donald Trump left town, is now devoted to shutting down the commercial lifeline of other media. Think of the precedent for the next populist Republican President who might declare pro-choice publications “deadly.”

Of course, the last populist Republican President did not do that; the worry is that the current pro-abortion Democratic President might declare pro-life publications “deadly.”

That would include this publication!

The next step? Look for the left to start pressuring site hosting services to stop hosting sites like The Pirate’s Cove and The Other McCain and Le*gal In*sur*rec*tion and RedState because those sites don’t agree with what is apparently the Accepted Wisdom concerning transgenderism, and that’s simply unacceptable to the left. Because Parler used Amazon as its site hosting service, Jeff Bezos, owner of the “Democracy Dies in Darkness” Washington Post was able to lights out the service.[2]Note that I had a Parler account. Parler was a free speech site, but, sadly, its software and presentation were poor.

The Pirate’s Cove uses the blog tagline, “If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all,” while The Other McCain has, “‘One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up.’ — Arthur Koestler”. The left and the credentialed media want us to do the latter, just shut up.

I’ve never been very good at shutting up.

References

References
↑1 Chad Malloy is a male who claims to be female, using the name Parker Marie Malloy. The First Street Journal’s Stylebook notes that we always refer to the ‘transgendered’ by their birth names and biological sex.
↑2 Note that I had a Parler account. Parler was a free speech site, but, sadly, its software and presentation were poor.
Posted on by

The truth will not set you free The truth will land you in Twitter jail

We have already noted that Twitter, and the left in general, do not like Freedom of Speech. When it comes to the subject of transgenderism, Twitter has already banned ‘deadnaming’ and ‘misgendering.’[1]‘Deadnaming’ means referring to a ‘transgender’ person by his given name at birth, rather than the name he has taken to match the sex he claims to be; … Continue reading The New York Times, which so strongly defended its right to Freedom of Speech and of the Press in New York Times Co v United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971), gave space in the OpEd section to Andrew Marantz to write “Free Speech is killing us. Noxious language online is causing real-world violence.” Mr Marantz, while exercising his First Amendment rights, clearly does not like the unregulated speech of others. The Times had earlier given OpEd page space to ‘transgender’ activist Chad Malloy to claim that Twitter’s ban on ‘deadnamimg’ and ‘misgendering’ actually promotes the Freedom of Speech.[2]Chad Malloy is a male who claims to be female, using the name Parker Marie Malloy. The First Street Journal’s Stylebook notes that we always refer to the ‘transgendered’ by their … Continue reading

Well, now our good friend William Teach of The Pirate’s Cove has been given a seven-day suspension by Twitter, because he did something really radical like tell the truth about the ‘transgendered.’ Mr Teach replied to Representative David E Price (D-NC 4th District) regarding his support of President Biden lifting the ban on ‘transgenders’ in the military along the lines of it being a really bad idea to have people with serious mental health issues who are prone to suicide around military grade weapons. Mr Teach told me, in an e-mail, that Twitter responded to his appeal by saying that his reply was “threatening,” and required him to delete it.

The truth is that the ‘transgendered’ are much more heavily prone to suicide. The Williams Institute of the UCLA School of Law, not exactly a right-wing site, reported:

Studies of the transgender population demonstrate that the prevalence of suicide thoughts and attempts among transgender adults is significantly higher than that of the U.S. general population. For example, transgender adults have a prevalence of past-year suicide ideation that is nearly twelve times higher, and a prevalence of past-year suicide attempts that is about eighteen times higher, than the U.S. general population. The 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey (USTS), which is the largest survey of transgender people in the U.S. to date, found that 81.7 percent of respondents reported ever seriously thinking about suicide in their lifetimes, while 48.3 percent had done so in the past year. In regard to suicide attempts, 40.4 percent reported attempting suicide at some point in their lifetimes, and 7.3 percent reported attempting suicide in the past year.

In other words, Mr Teach’s Twitter reply that the ‘transgendered’ are prone to suicide was truthful . . . and Twitter suspended him for telling the truth.

The case of Bradley Manning, the Army intelligence technician, is instructive: he made at least two suicide attempts, and stole hundreds of thousands of pages of classified materials and dumped them to WikiLeaks. Mr Manning’s suicide attempts occurred in prison; what if he had not been in prison, but serving as an Army soldier, and had access to military weaponry?

I don’t know this to be the case, but I’m guessing that Mr Teach’s use of the term “gender confused” is what triggered Twitter’s Ministry of Truth to spot his reply.

What Mr Teach tweeted was a real, logical and truthful concern . . . but Twitter found the truth “threatening.” Jack Nicholson put it best:

Pierced Hearts, a Catholic site, had this story:

Twitter Locks Catholic Publication’s Account for ‘Hateful Conduct’

By Lisa Graas | January 29, 2021

SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 29, 2021 /Christian Newswire/ — On Sunday, Jan. 24, Catholic World Report received a notice from Twitter, alerting it that its account had been suspended for hateful conduct, and unless it removed the offending tweet, its account would remain suspended.

The tweet in question was a link to this Catholic News Agency news brief, written by Matt Hadro, and posted on CWR on Jan. 19, 2021. The tweet stated:

Biden plans to nominate Dr. Rachel Levine, a biological man identifying as a transgender woman who has served as Pennsylvania’s health secretary since 2017, to be HHS Assistant Secretary for Health. Levine is also a supporter of the contraceptive mandate.

Catholic World Report appealed the decision and Twitter has denied their appeal. Twitter considers the tweet hate speech, and unless Catholic World Report removes the tweet, its account will be suspended.

There’s more at the original.

But I have to ask: how is this tweet in question untrue? The tweet used Dr Richard Levine’s preferred name, “Rachel,” so it did not ‘deadname’ him. The tweet stated that Dr Levine is “a biological man identifying as a transgender woman,” a fact not in dispute. The tweet stated that Dr Levine has served as Pennsylvania Secretary of Health since appointed to the position by Governor Tom Wolf (D-PA) in 2017, and that President Biden has appointed him to be Assistant Secretary of Health, which are, again, accurate statements.

Everything in the ‘offending’ tweet was true, but Twitter considered it “hate speech.”

The only thing I can conclude is that Twitter sees the truth itself as hate speech. Twitter can’t handle the truth!

In George Orwell’s 1984, the Ministry of Truth had three slogans:

War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
For Twitter, those slogan seem to apply. If they can censor the non-approved views, if they can keep people ignorant of the fact that there actually are opposing views, it strengthens their position. The Freedom of Speech and of the Press that they apparently despise must lead to slavery, in the way Mr Malloy put it. War is Peace? Judging by Twitter’s uncritical acceptance of the #BlackLivesMatter rioters, and the left’s attempts to silence people like Andy Ngo who reported on the protesters’ violence, yeah, that fits, too.

References

References
↑1 ‘Deadnaming’ means referring to a ‘transgender’ person by his given name at birth, rather than the name he has taken to match the sex he claims to be; ‘misgendering’ means referring to a ‘transgender’ person by sex-specific terms referring to his biological sex rather than the sex he claims to be.
↑2 Chad Malloy is a male who claims to be female, using the name Parker Marie Malloy. The First Street Journal’s Stylebook notes that we always refer to the ‘transgendered’ by their birth names and biological sex.
Posted on by

Chicago thinks it’s the murder capital; Philly says, “Hold my beer!”

I had noted on Twitter that the City of Brotherly Love was exceeding its one-short-of-the-record homicide rate for 2020, though we aren’t even through January, the coldest month of the year, and that The Philadelphia Inquirer hadn’t even noticed it:

I did see an article on the Inquirer’s website yesterday evening, noting that two men had been murdered in a bodega:

Two men fatally shot in North Philly store

by Mensah M. Dean | January 28, 2021 | 6:17 PM EST

Two men were fatally shot in a North Philadelphia store Thursday in what police are calling a double homicide.

Shortly before 1 p.m., police were called to the Al-Madinah Traders store in the 3600 block of Germantown Avenue, which sells jewelry, perfume, books, and other items. Police said passersby had found the men dead inside the store.

Police did not release the names of the victims, but described one as a man in his 40s who had been shot two times in the face, and the other as a man shot once in the head. His age was not given. Both were pronounced dead on the scene by medics.

As of Thursday evening, police had made no arrests and had not recovered weapons, they said.

The article author continued to note that the number of homicides was well above the same date in 2020, and that two other men had been murdered that morning, on in Kensington and one in the Wissinoming neighborhood.

So, that was four people sent early to their eternal rewards on Thursday, so I figured that I’d see 45 as the total when I checked the Philadelphia Police Department’s Current Crimes Statistics page this morning. I was wrong; it wasn’t 45, it was 46!

That’s compared to 35 slaughtered by January 28, 2020, a 31.4% increase.

As noted two days ago, the Editorial Board of the Inquirer blamed the Police Commissioner, the ironically named Danielle Outlaw, for the Police Department’s response to the #BlackLivesMatter protests. The Editorial Board thought that Miss Outlaw’s response was too harsh; I thought it too lenient.

But what the Editorial Board did not do was blame the huge jump in homicides on Commissioner Outlaw, or Mayor Jim Kenney, or District Attorney Larry Krasner, the three top law enforcement officials in Philadelphia.

People think of Chicago under its ridiculous Mayor, Lori Lightfoot, as the nation’s murder capital. In 2020, the Windy City saw 769 homicides, 270 more than Philadelphia. But Chicago has a population of 2,710,000, while Philly’s is 1,579,000. Crime rates are compared by rate per 100,000 population, and that leaves Chicago with a homicide rate of 28.38 per 100,000.

Philadelphia laughs and says, “We can beat that!”, checking in with a murder rate of 31.60 per 100,000.

As of January 25th, Chicago had 44 homicides, compared to Philly’s 37, but the disparity in population means that the City of Brotherly Love was far ahead.

New York City saw a huge rise in homicides as well, from 319 in 2019 to 462 last year, 44.8%, fewer than Chicago’s or Philadelphia’s, even though its population is several times that of the latter two cities.

Under Mayor Bill de Blasio, New York is on the fast track back to the Hell that Mayor Rudy Giuliani cleaned up, and even the liberal Michael Bloomberg didn’t trash. What New York and Chicago and Philadelphia all need is solid, conservative, no f(ornicating) nonsense mayors, district attorneys and police commissioners who will actually fight crime.

Posted on by

The Editors of The Philadelphia Inquirer blame the puppet, not the puppet master!

Sometimes you just have to laugh at the editors of The Philadelphia Inquirer. After years of rising homicide rates, they blame problems not on Mayor Jim Kenney, whom the Editors endorsed in his 2019 campaign, but on Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw, the ‘social justice’ policewoman from the left coast, and a near-total puppet of the Mayor:

Danielle Outlaw’s failure should push Kenney to ask for her resignation — but she didn’t fail alone

by The Inquirer Editorial Board | opinion@inquirer.com | January 27, 2021 | 4:46 PM EST

A little over 100 days into her job as Police Commissioner, Danielle Outlaw faced a trial by fire when peaceful protests over the killing of George Floyd turned chaotic and destructive.

Of course, the #woke staffers of the Inquirer, the ones who forced the firing resignation of Executive Editor and Senior Vice President Stan Wischnowski, fully supported the #BlackLivesMatter protests of the Summer of Fire and Hate, and they would have complained about any police efforts to rein in the Mostly Peaceful Protests™.

It was a trial demanding leadership and preparation that she failed miserably. But this failure is not hers alone. It was compounded by a failure of leadership of Mayor Jim Kenney and other city officials, including Managing Director Brian Abernathy who has since resigned.

These failures are detailed in an investigation released Wednesday by City Controller Rebecca Rhynhart, conducted by Ballard Spahr, At Risk International, Inc., and input from a Community Advisory Council.

The report detailed the city’s failure to anticipate or prepare for the protests here despite their presence across the country, a failure to create a plan for handling protests despite the existence of a blueprint for just such events, and a series of disastrous and troubling decisions – from declining to activate an Emergency Operations Center to using tools and weapons on crowds and neighborhoods that created chaos instead of control.

At the height of protests about police brutality and violence, Philadelphia police responded with often militaristic force, using tear gas, rubber bullets and force, including in a neighborhood where children and innocent bystanders were present. The city’s failure to anticipate or plan meant there were not enough police or vehicles to stop or contain looting. The report also details the troubling inconsistencies between police response to Black Lives Matter protesters and their friendlier interactions with white vigilantes wielding baseball bats and racial slurs.

The only problem is that the Philadelphia Police Department didn’t use enough force!

There are no “troubling inconsistencies between police response to Black Lives Matter protesters and their friendlier interactions with white vigilantes wielding baseball bats and racial slurs” because the #BlackLivesMatter protesters were vandalistic and violent, and others were not.

Commissioner Outlaw was a ridiculous hire in the first place, coming from the Left Coast, and more concerned about ‘diversity’ than actually fighting crime. But the truth is simple: she was a ‘social justice’ hire of a ‘social justice’ mayor, and both his puppet and his tool.

What the City of Brotherly Love needs is something the Editorial Board of the Inquirer would never, ever accept: the complete replacement of every liberal Democrat officeholder with hardline, conservative Republicans. The Editors would be aghast, but really, could they do any worse?