Here’s the latest of too many examples of schools allowing students to be censored or bullied just because they wore “Make America Great Again” caps or shirts. At least this school apologized. Sometimes, they try to claim that they ban all politically-oriented messages on clothing. I’d love to check that by looking back at their yearbooks from 2008-2016 and counting all the photos of Obama T-shirts.
With ratings cratering in the wake of its promotion of such transparent frauds as “Russian collusion” and Michael Avenatti, CNN has announced mass layoffs. A source told Fox News that “basically the whole division” covering health care will be laid off. I am honestly sorry to hear that, both because I hate to hear of people losing their jobs and because health care news (not scare stories about the need for government health care, but actual stories about health care) is an important topic that viewers need to know about. I could have suggested some firings that would’ve been much more deserved and improved CNN’s programming immensely.
Ironically, just a few weeks ago, a CNN vice president dismissed news of layoffs as a “crazy rumor.” This is just more proof that the people running CNN can’t tell crazy rumors from news.
Life lessons learned the hard way: If you’re going to “empower women” and “encourage them to become more free and confident and to do what they want" by taking topless photos of yourself in beautiful vacation spots, don’t leave your camera full of topless photos behind at a rest stop so you have to beg whoever found it to give it back. Because that doesn’t sound like something that most women would want to emulate
When news media outlets get a story wrong, they always have the excuse that news is “the first draft of history.” They’re rushing to press, and mistakes inevitably get made that later have to be corrected. Most consumers are forgiving of minor errors (although if you’re still hammering away on “Russian collusion” after two-plus years, you really have no excuse.)
But books are a different matter. Books are supposed to be, if not a final draft of history, then at least a more reliable account that has taken months or years to write and gone through layers of editors and fact-checkers before being published, printed and distributed.
So imagine how embarrassed feminist author and former Clinton adviser Naomi Wolf must have been during an interview to promote her new book when she realized that the premise of the book was factually incorrect.
Wolf’s book, which is about censorship and criminalization of homosexuality, made the shocking claim that dozens of gay men were executed in Great Britain after 1835, disproving the widespread claim that that year marked the last such execution. Interviewer Matthew Sweet asked how she’d uncovered this bombshell that every historian had overlooked. She responded that all their court records said “Death recorded.” Sweet asked if she was aware that in Britain, that means a death penalty was recorded but not carried out. So none of the people she claims were executed actually were.
Why, no...she did not know that. She’d apparently been so zealous to make her point that she forgot to do basic research (she belongs on CNN). She also forgot that America and Great Britain are two countries divided by a common language (that quote is widely attributed to George Bernard Shaw, but if you spend 30 seconds Googling it, you’ll discover there’s no proof that he wrote it.)
There’s more at the link, and it gets even worse. This may be the first book promotion interview that ended with a “death by embarrassment recorded.”
Some more on the disastrous Naomi Wolf interview, and why other authors who would normally be sympathetic just aren't feeling it in her case.
Timely comic strip
From the minute President Trump announced that he was declassifying all the documents related to the “Russian collusion” investigation, reaction from his critics has veered all over the map – which is understandable, because that’s what panicked people do.
One of the more laughable responses came from Rep. Adam Schiff, who declared Trump's order move “un-American.” This from a man who has been trying to unseat a duly-elected President for two years by claiming he has evidence of Russian collusion that he’s never shown anyone and that somehow, the two-year, $35 million Mueller investigation missed. Now, he seems to think it’s not un-American for the US government to lie to judges to get secret warrants to spy on American citizens who are working for an opposition political campaign, but it is un-American to let the people know what their government was doing. I think Schiff might be as unclear on the meaning of the word “un-American” as he is about the word “evidence.”
And then there’s the hilarious claim that Trump is somehow engaging in a "cover-up" by ordering the release of all the documents. I admit, this is a head-scratcher. I think they’re claiming that he’s trying to distract us from all the impeachable offenses in the Mueller report by focusing on the illegality of the genesis of the investigation. Sort of like the way that they’re trying to distract us from the lack of impeachable offenses and the illegality of the genesis of the investigation by accusing him of a cover-up. This argument is sort of like a dog chasing his own tail until he catches it and swallows himself.
However, some concern has also come from Trump supporters, who worry that the language of the order, which allows Attorney General Barr to redact the documents as he sees fit to protect classified information, might result in heavy redactions that will leave the public still in the dark about what the intelligence agencies were up to – or at least, give the Democrats just enough cover to claim that no perfidy has been proven because the records aren't complete (in the same way that they claim the approximately 1.5% of the Mueller report that wasn’t released publicly must have contained damning evidence of impeachable offenses that the other 98.5% somehow missed.
To help assuage their worries, Trump assured Fox News, “We are exposing everything.” He called the Russian collusion scenario an “attempted takedown of the President of the United States," and said, “Americans will “be able to see how and why this whole hoax started…You’re gonna learn a lot. I hope it’s going to be nice, but perhaps it won’t be.”
I can hardly wait. In the meantime, Democrats may finally be learning not to claim there’s evidence against Trump in every government document we’re not allowed to see. Trump just might let us see them and discover there was hanky-panky afoot, but not on his end.
LEAVE ME A COMMENT BY CLICKING HERE. I READ THEM.