MRC's DeSantis Defense Brigade Attacks Disney For Him Topic: Media Research Center
The DeSantis Defense Brigade at the Media REsearch Center has been working so hard, we're still trying to keep up. The MRC has been giving DeSantis' partisan war against Disney special attention. Tierin Rose Mandelburg did her best DeSantis PR job in an April 18 post:
“Don’t mess with Texas” should change to “don’t ef with Florida.” Governor Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) just cracked down against Disney … again.
Desantis and the Disney company have been in a feud for quite some time now. The increasingly woke entertainment conglomerate tried to interfere with Florida politics when it objected to a DeSantis-backed bill to protect kids from hypersexualized content in schools.
Most recently DeSantis has cracked down on Disney's fantasy financial situation. Walt Disney World resides in a special tax district called Reedy Creek and in essence, has been serving as its own government since 1967. DeSantis ended that and appointed the Central Florida Tourism Oversight Board to replace the Disney-run Reedy Creek Improvement District that formerly oversaw Disney World infrastructure.
Disney tried to outmaneuver DeSantis when it “cut a special deal with the old oversight board it controlled before the new board, appointed by [DeSantis], took over,” Daily Mail noted.
It became known that Disney secured approvals for the next 30 years for zoning, infrastructure and air-rights if the company chose to expand -- without approval from DeSantis’ selected board and without meeting the rules DeSantis had set.
[...]
DeDantis went so far as to drop a casual mention of building a prison next to the amusement park.
Disney owns undeveloped land near its current residence but DeSantis confirmed that Florida also owns that land. He toggled with a couple of ideas with suggestions from others like a state park or an extension of the amusement park. DeSantis added, “Someone even said, like, maybe you need another state prison. Who knows? I just think that the possibilities are endless.”
The House of Mouse might want to start playing nice, if you ask me, since Disney’s development is going to be up to DeSantis’ hand-picked board if the new resolution takes effect.
Mandelburg didn't explain why Disney must be punished simply for "objecting" to DeSantis' "don't say gay" law. She went on to huff that "Disney has clearly overstepped and abused its privileges," but she didn't explain why exercising First Amendment rights is suddenly a "privilege" when used to advance views she doesn't like.
The same day, Alex Christy complained that commentataors pointed out DeSantis' partisan nastiness:
Occasionally, the cast of MSNBC will view themselves as qualified to opine on what is and is not conservative and Tuesday’s Chris Jansing Reports was one such occasion. Not only did nominal Republican Tara Setmayer declare Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’s fight with Disney to be “petulant” and “not conservative,” but also “un-American.”
Jansing’s original question to Setmayer had nothing to do with Disney, but was more about 2024 horse race analysis and how it relates to the GOP’s relationship with Donald Trump, “if you're a congressional Republican, how worried are you about the fallout from the former president if you show up at a DeSantis event?”
After a long-winded answer about Republicans being scared of Trump, DeSantis being a former “C-lister” and a “wimp,” Setmayer declared, “And his behavior taking on Disney is not only petulant, but should be concerning to people who claim that they're free market conservatives because political retribution against a private company is definitely not conservative and quite frankly un-American.”
Apparently, breaking cronyism is simultaneously anti-free market, un-conservative, and un-American. This is why MSNBC needs actual conservatives and not members of The Lincoln Project.
Christy didn't mention that his MRC colleague thinks free speech is a "privilege." Isn't that un-American?
In yet another April 18 post, Curtis Houck grumbled that there was accurate reporting about DeSantis and Disney:
Amid stories meant to inflame racial tensions, the Fox News vs. Dominion Voting Systems case, and rallying to TikTok’s defense over a Montana bill to ban the app, NBC’s Today found time Tuesday to bemoan Governor Ron DeSantis’s (R-FL) daring to “doubl[e] down on a fight against an American icon: Mickey Mouse.”
“Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is making headlines on several fronts this morning. A high-profile trip to Washington, D.C., his escalating feud with Disney, now floating the idea of building a state prison next to Disney World,” co-host Craig Melvin began.
Houck then tried to reframe DeSantis's threat to build a prison next to Disney World: "After pointing out “[t]he clash last year when Disney opposed Florida’s Parental Rights in Education law,” Gutierrez bemoaned how DeSantis used an appearance to (jokingly) propose the “developing land next to Disney World” to include a prison." Houck offered no evidence that DeSAntis was joking.
That was followed by comedy cop Christy complaining that others didn't get DeSantis' (unproven) joke:
CBS’s The Late Show host Stephen Colbert and Comedy Central’s The Daily Show temp host Jordan Klepper condemned Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on their Tuesday shows for joking about possibly putting a new state prison next to Disney World and it was unclear if these professional joke tellers knew DeSantis was joking.
Referencing Disney’s attempt to wiggle around state law, Colbert introduced a clip of DeSantis by declaring that he “couldn't take control of Disney World, so now he's talking about what he can do to the land around the park.”
Colbert may be celebrating prematurely, but as for DeSantis, the clip showed him musing over what do with the land around Disney World, “People have said, you know, maybe have another-- maybe create a state park, maybe try to do more amusement parks. Someone even said, like, maybe you need another state prison. Who knows? I mean, I just think that the possibilities are endless.”
Based off his tone of voice, body language, and facial expressions, DeSantis was clearly joking, but Colbert still replied, “Yeah, a state prison next to Disney. He’s about to run for president, and his latest proposal is ‘I'm going to put Florida convicts next to your children.’”
Christy regularly ignores the voice, body language, and facial expressions of comedians to declare that their jokes aren't funny, so maybe he's not a very good judge of such things.
Houck returned for an April 19 post whining that someone pointed out DeSantis' weak position against Disney:
MSNBC’s Morning Joe has, in part, been defined by co-host Joe Scarborough’s jealousy for Florida Republicans who had a more successful political career and following than he did.
Such was the case Wednesday when he and his crew of middle school bullies spent over 25 minutes smearing Governor Ron DeSantis (R-FL) as “anti-business,” “anti-conservative,” “insecure,” and “stupid” for fighting woke Disney and working to undo the state’s crony arrangement with Reedy Creek.
With 2024 on their mind, they also made sure to fawn over Donald Trump linking with Disney to attack DeSantis.
[...]
The ever-pompous goon later quipped: “You know, Willie, as a Florida guy, I am a Florida man, it’s never made sense these attacks on Disney.” He explained that “Floridians take great pride in” Disney and he has “friends” across the spectrum, so DeSantis doing anything to fight the multi-billion dollar corporation was “a great example...of Republicans overrplaying.”
Nowhere in these 25 minutes of hate did they care to admit DeSantis was reelected in November by nearly 20 points, Republicans swept state row offices, and the GOP gained super-majorities in the legislature.
If Houck thinks Scarborough is jealous of DeSantis' success, does that mean we can claim Houck is jealous of the success of CNN's Oliver Darcy, given how he can't stop maliciously slandering Darcy as a "Benedict Arnold" for the offense of escaping the right-wing bubble?
The next day, Houck baselessly insisted that Disney treats ABC the way the MRC treated its former "news" division CNSNews.com:
Acting on behalf of its parental overlords in Ron DeSantis-hating Disney, ABC’s Good Morning America ran a 62-second segment on Thursday trashing the Florida Republican Governor’s Board of Education for having “expanded the Don't Say Gay bill” “critics warn...is dangerous”to the lives of students.
ABC had a helping hand as Wednesday’s NBC Nightly News also bemoaned the change while touting members of Florida’s congressional delegation endorsing former President Trump over DeSantis in the 2024 GOP presidential primary.
Houck offered no evidence to back up his claim that Disney is mandating the content of ABC News reports.
Houck used the word "whore" in the headline of an April 27 post to disgustingly smear any news coverage critical of DeSantis:
On Wednesday night and Thursday morning, the “big three” of ABC, CBS, and NBC banded together under the banner of corporate liberalism to rally behind ABC’s parent company/"economic heavy hitter" Disney and even some 2024 GOP presidential candidates against Governor Ron DeSantis (R-FL) for having created a “long-running feud” and “power struggle” for Florida supremacy.
So as not to lose their jobs, ABC’s newscasts were stenographers for the people who sign their paychecks. World News Tonight anchor David Muir boasted in a tease: “Our parent company, Disney tonight filing a lawsuit against Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, accusing the governor of a ‘targeted campaign of government retaliation.’”
Again, Houck has no evidence of coordination -- he simply assumes that Disney treats ABC like his employer treated CNS. Despite a complete lack of proof, HOuc concluded by repeating the slander again, asserting that the "liberal media" was "playing whores for corporate liberalism."
DeSantis must be paying the MRC well for it to so viciously smear anyone who tells the truth about him.
MRC Continues To Rage About Abortion Pills Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center is continuing to rant against abortion pills. When a Trump-appointed judge approved a ban on them over alleged problems with the FDA approval process, it defended the ruling and attacked anyone who criticized it. Alex Christy complained in an April 8 post:
Friday’s edition of CNN Tonight reacted to the news that a federal judge suspended the FDA’s approval of the abortion drug mifepristone with horror, claiming the judge was inserting his “theological opinion” and seriously wondering why pro-lifers don’t target drugs like Viagra or Tylenol.
[...]
Michaelson began by explaining the concept of “judge shopping,” where liberals and conservatives alike seek judges who they are certain will rule the way they desire, “Thtat’s not controversial. What's shocking -- so, I've been writing about Matthew Kacsmayrk for many years. He has said outrageous things over the years, and there's outrageous things in this opinion. This is a garbage opinion from open to shut.”
He further accused Kacsmaryk of playing to pro-lifers “He calls mifepristone chemical abortion. That's sort of that sort of a dog whistle.”
Mifepristone, like every other pill, is a chemical compound, so it a literally correct description, but even if liberals still object, abortion is still abortion whether you use “chemical” or “medication” as your preferred adjective.
Yet we don't recall Christy ever calling Tylenol a "chemical" when he takes one for a headache. Christy then huffed that mifepristone shouldn't be treated the same as other drugs, because abortion:
It’s one thing for CNN liberals to not understand pro-lifers, but the Republican strategist should know the difference between abortion and Viagra, Tylenol, and penicillin. It should also be noted that Kacsmaryk did not outright ban mifepristone, he simply said the FDA didn’t follow proper bureaucratic procedure.
In an April 9 post, Kevin Tober raged at NBC's Chuck Todd for pointing out the judge's partisan activism:
On Easter Sunday, NBC's Chuck Todd used the opening segment of his show Meet the Press to lash out at political activists for apparently causing a Texas court to order the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to halt the approval of the abortion pill mifepristone. Todd was clearly upset at the ruling and claimed there was no reason for a challenge to the use of the drug since it has been approved since the "end of Bill Clinton's presidency." As if that matters. It's obvious that Todd sees no problem with defending a demonic drug that kills the unborn on a religious holiday. We all know the leftist media is Godless, but Todd made it all too obvious.
"The national divide was crystallized on Friday night in those dueling abortion rulings," Todd proclaimed. "Less than an hour apart on specifically the abortion pill over federal judges, these are legal efforts that were pushed by political activists seeking a decision by the Supreme Court."
Todd claimed that "there was no actual medical event, no misuse of this pill to trigger this look at the drug. It was simply political activists."
"No actual medical event." Well, that's partially true since abortion isn't medicine, it's murder. This is why it was rightfully challenged.
Todd then bemoaned how "this was a drug that was approved at the end of Bill Clinton's presidency, four presidencies ago." He seemed to think that evil procedures should be allowed to continue and should not be challenged simply because they've been in existence for decades.
Tober's reference to "evil procedures" gives away the game that this legal action is driven by partisan activism and not medicine. He then whined that another judge issued a ruling to preserve the status quo on the drug:
Todd ended by noting that "obviously the Supreme Court has to weigh in on this one."
That is the fault of the leftist judge in Washington state who randomly reacted with a contradictory ruling in an attempt to save the left's abortion blood lust. Now the Supreme Court has to weigh in to solve the dispute between the two lower court rulings.
Todd is pointing fingers in the wrong direction.
Tober didn't explain why Kacsmaryk's ruling must be considered so perfect that it shouldn't even be appealed -- but then, he's a partisan activist, not a legal expert.
When the (conservative-controlled) Supreme Court issued a stay of Kacsmaryk's ruling, the MRC didn't take it very well. Christy used an April 22 post to effectively argue that the lives of women are worth less than that of a fetus:
Senior medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen joined CNN This Morning Weekend on Saturday to react to the Supreme Court issuing a full stay on Friday night that allows the abortion pill mifepristone to remain on the market by repeating one of the network’s favorite and silliest talking points: mifepristone is “way, way less deadly” than Viagra.
[...]
With the help of an on-screen chart that showed that mifepristone is responsible for five deaths per one million users as compared to 20 and 49 deaths for penicillin and Viagra respectively, Cohen added “In fact, if you're going to look at deadly side effects, penicillin: way more deadly, Viagra: way, way more deadly.”
Safety or deadly for whom? One million successful abortions are responsible for one millions deaths.
Resident MRC anti-abortion extremist Tierin-Rose Mandelburg raged against the Supreme Court in an Apriul 24 post using anti-abortion talking points instead of facts:
Last week, less than a year after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the court debated the decades-long decision of the FDA to approve a chemical abortion drug called mifepristone for sale at retail pharmacies. Unfortunately, despite the FDA’s inadequate research, the Supreme Court ruled to keep mifepristone on the market.
The news of this is shocking and heartbreaking for those in the pro-life movement.
Prior to the announcement, numerous pro-lifers were prayerfully hoping the deadly drug would be pulled.
[...]
The fact of the matter is that mifepristone is an extremely harmful drug. On top of the fact that it ends at least one life - the life of the child in the womb - it also poses significant threats to the health and even life of the mother. Mifepristone, the first of a two-pill abortion-inducing regimen, chemically kills an unborn baby and can cause the mother to experience up to a month of cramping, bleeding and severe pain. As a matter of fact, the drug is “four times more dangerous” than surgical abortions and has reportedly increased abortion-related ER visits by 500 percent from 2002-2015, according to Republican Sen. James Lankford's office.
But anti-abortion exremists like Mandelburg want to outlaw surgical abortions too. Make up your mind, Tierin-Rose! Still, she whined: "Even still, Friday's news that the Supreme Court decided to keep the drug legal and available shows just how pro-abortion our nation has become. These people aren't pro-woman, they're pro baby death, as evidenced by many of the people who fought to keep the deadly pill on the market."
Tim Graham spent a May 11 post complaining that a Reuters article on mifepristone accurately identified conservatives at conservatives, going on to grumble further about more accurate reporting: "Reuters also employed the usual formulation on the science: 'Scientific studies have overwhelmingly concluded that the drug, which has been used by millions of women, is safe.' Safe for aborting women, but 'scientific studies' apparently don't consider the unborn baby to be a human, or someone whose safety you consider. That's liberal thinking, but there are no 'liberals' identified in this story."
For a May 17 post, Tober bizarrely chose to interpret a news story as a guide to breaking the law:
How desperate were the cast of CBS Mornings to promote the left’s abortion-on-demand agenda? Well, the fact that they were openly promoting an abortionist in Amsterdam who openly admits to providing abortion pills to women seeking abortions in American states where it was illegal. Even openly advertising how their viewers can get illegal abortions wasn’t off-limits for the leftist media.
Correspondent Haley Ott spoke to a foreign abortionist Dr. Rebecca Gomperts whose organization “Aid Access helps Americans get abortions, even though they are thousands of miles apart.”
Tober is spouting the Depiction-Equals-Approval Fallacy, regularly used in the ConWeb to falsely assume that because a news outlet runs a particular story, it endorses the content of that story.
How Has The MRC Been Freaking Out Over Drag Lately? Topic: Media Research Center
It's been a while since we last checked in on how viciously the Media Research Center hates drag performers, so it's time to take a closer look.
Comedy cop Alex Christy took issue with Stephen Colbert calling out a sweeping Tennessee ban on drag shows in a March 2 post, responding to his jokes with right-wing talking points -- even the joke about an old picture of the Tennessee governor in drag:
Stephen Colbert voiced his displeasure at Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee’s announcement that he plans to sign bills that will prohibit “gender-affirming care” for minors and drag shows for children on Wednesday’s edition of The Late Show on CBS. Colbert was so disgusted by the moves that he addressed Lee as “you dick.”
Colbert began by announcing the news, “There's some troubling news from Tennessee, thanks to Republican Governor and dad's friend saying ‘Wow, you really grew up over the summer,’ Bill Lee. Lee announced he will be signing Tennessee's sweeping new anti-LGBTQ bills, which, among other things will ban gender-affirming treatment for transgender youth.”
Expressing his opposition, Colbert continued, “Come on. Transgender or not, I don’t care who you are, all teens struggle with figuring out relationship to their bodies.”
Colbert is exactly right, but his conclusion is completely backwards. Teenagers do struggle with their relationship with their bodies which is why it is highly irresponsible to encourage boys to think they that they are girls and vice versa.
Moving right along, Colbert also reported that, “Tennessee isn't just coming for the young ones. The governor has said he'd sign a bill that would restrict drag shows. Yes, he wants to severely limit drag. Our Founding Fathers did not create this country so men could wear frilly shirts, silk stockings, and powdered wigs!”
The Founding Fathers did not wear dresses or parade around in front of children in a hyper-sexualized manner.
For, Colbert the biggest problem was trying to define “sexualized entertainment,” as he argued Lee doesn’t have a good answer, “You know who else can't define what drag is? Governor Bill Lee. Because the day before he announced he'd sign the bill, a picture of him emerged dressed in drag in high school. Okay, okay. Okay, okay, admittedly those are some great gams, but I'm sorry, those pearls?”
The photo in question is from a high school yearbook and shows Lee in a cheerleader’s uniform, but if Colbert was trying to portray Lee as a hypocrite, he failed because Lee wasn’t performing in a sexual manner in front of children.
[...]
Again, Colbert got it backwards it is people who are preying on the confusion and innocence of children who are appealing to their political base at the expense of real human beings. That is something someone who claims to be a devout Catholic should be able to understand.
So a guy in a cheerleader uniform is not acting "hyper-sexualized"? Weird.
The same day, Kevin Tober went on a hateful tirade after MSNBC's Joy Reid pointed out the ridiculousness of the Tennessee drag ban:
On Thursday night’s The ReidOut on MSNBC, host Joy Reid once again lashed out at Republicans for wanting to protect children from degenerate groomers who want to genitally mutilate children and inflict sexually explicit drag shows on them. The latest source of Reid’s rage came as Tennessee Governor Bill Lee signed two bills that would ban sex-change procedures and sexually-explicit drag shows.
This was a problem for Reid who cried that “Republicans in Tennessee are moving full speed ahead in their quest to undo the thing they hate the most, the 20th century. With Governor Bill Lee signing a bill today that would restrict drag performances.”
Reid then claimed that drag was simply an art form that has been around since Shakespeare. She wants you to think Shakespeare’s kids went to drag queen story hour where a mentally ill man in a dress twerked and read to them.
“If Governor Lee knew the history that Republicans don't want you to learn, he’d know that drag is an art form that goes back, literally, centuries. It's been around since Shakespeare,” Reid falsely claimed.
Christy tried to defend the Tennessee governor again in a March 4 post:
A heavily imbalanced CNN Tonight panel declared on Friday that Republicans and specifically Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee is a hypocrite for banning gender transitions for minors and to overly-sexualized drag shows for children are hypocrites, first for claiming to believe in limited government and second because he has been photographed in drag. Neither criticism holds up under factual review.
[...]
The photo of Lee is of him in a cheerleader uniform, he was not practically naked or doing any of the overtly sexual acts that are featured in some of the viral videos that served as the inspiration for this law that everybody, Hyde included, on this CNN panel ignored.
Christy also whined that the panelists didn't interpret the Tennessee law to his liking, insisting that dressing in drag for "prurient interest" is what is outlawed. Does he really think a guy dressing as a cheerleader does not spark prurient interest in some people?
In a March 13 post serving up the MRC's ritual bashing of the Academy Awards, Stephanie Hamill complained that Oscar-winning director Daniel Scheinert thanked his parents for "not squashing my creativity when I was making disturbing horror films or perverted comedy films or dressing in drag as a kid, which is a threat to nobody":
I think it safe to say that many parents would disagree with this sentiment. There are many out there who would likely take issue with the drag queen agenda being pushed on kids, especially when children are being exposed to inappropriate shows in public places and even in some schools.
There's a "drag queen agenda" now? Who knew?
Thge MRC's chief transphobe, Tierin-Rose Mandelburg, melted down yet again in a March 16 post over a planned "Drag Story Hour," then cheered fellow a fellow transphobe attacking it:
The March 19 event is being sponsored by James and a nonprofit called "Drag Story Hour NYC." Supposedly, said non-profit has been “showered” in over $200,000 in taxpayer funds to shove drag queens in the faces of the city's children.
[...]
As a counter to the blasphemous drag event James is hosting, LibsofTikTok owner Chaya Raichik - who's also the author of a great, wholesome children’s book called "No More Secrets" - is hosting her own story hour down the street from James’ drag show, co-hosting the truly family-friendly event with Trent Talbot, author of “Fight For Freedom Island."
These conservative voices are right. It’s disgusting that New York’s taxpayer money is helping drag queens groom kids, but it's even more disgusting that James thinks this is something to be “proud" of.
There is nothing "wholesome" about Raichik's hate and homophobia, and "grooming" has become a meaningless slur from right-wingers like Mandelburg.
Nicholas Fondacaro spent a March 21 post demeaning "gay actor" Billy Porter -- whom the MRC hates for his flamboyant manner of dress -- for defending drag queens:
In the latter half of Tuesday’s edition of The View, gay actor Billy Porter screamed like a banshee as he denounced Florida Republican Governor Ron DeSantis for cracking down on child exploitation at drag shows. The unhinged Porter screamed that DeSantis had launched a “civil war of the mind” and conspiratorially shouted about how investigators needed to “follow the money.” His manic tirade received nothing but strong approval from the rest of the cast.
Joy Behar noted that, in the eight months since Porter was last on the show, “things have only escalated” in terms of DeSantis’s legal challenges to kids being at drag shows. “What do you make of the fact that we're still talking about this, and that it’s happening in other states too, not just Florida?” she wondered. “There's this war against trans people,”she answered for him.
Things immediately dipped into the conspiratorial as Porter shouted about the need to “follow the money” like it was Watergate:
[...]
Failing to explain why kids needed to take part in drag shows or attend them at all, Porter made the asinine deflection that “the leading cause of death in children are GUNS!” “They're guns! I know it's the morning and I'm not supposed to be screaming, but they're guns!” he screamed.
“Not drag queens,”Whoopi Goldberg added. “Not drag queens! LEAVE US ALONE!” Porter shrieked at the top of his lungs.
[...]
“It's a distraction on purpose. We don't know what to pay attention to … What's happening?! … What are we talking about, and what are we doing?!” he continued to come off the rails. “We're already in a civil war, y'all! It's a civil war of the mind! They're messing with our minds! We're already in it!”
This crazed hyperventilating by Porter got nothing but praise from The View cast. “But you're making the right points,” Hostin said, with Behar proclaiming: “The civil war on the mind is a very good point.”
Fondacaro made no effort to rebut anything Porter actually said -- presumably because he knew he couldn't. That's why he chose to distract from that by trying to ridicule him instead.
Christy defended anti-drag laws yet again in a March 24 post:
Benjamin “BenDeLaCreme” Putnam of RuPaul’s Drag Race and Comedy Central The Daily Show temp host Al Franken not only alleged that Republicans in Tennessee had no idea what they’re talking about when they passed their “insidious” ban on children attending drag shows, but such laws contribute to high suicide rates.
Franken began by declaring that “I think there are a lot of people objecting to drag without even having any idea what it is.”
[...]
Putnam also found it offensive that drag shows would be labeled “as adult entertainment,” claiming that “is insidious within itself to say that someone dressing this way is only appropriate for adults when they’re not doing anything that is adult-oriented and the idea that children are somehow going to be made more queer by access to queer culture.”
If Putman genuinely believes that drag shows do not qualify as adult entertainment, his anger would be better directed towards those in the viral video that inspired this law that featured little children rubbing their hands against a performer’s crotch.
Christy didn't explain why a context-free video from a right-wing website should serve as a credible explanation of anything.
Christian Toto spent his March 25 column trying to defend anti-drag hate from a Hollywood industry publication (which Toto inexplicably insists is "far-Left") that brought the the Tom Hanks-starring '80s drag comedy show "Bosom Buddies":
The far-Left outlet brings back “Bosom Buddies” to suggest that conservatives are suddenly, inexplicably outraged by drag performers.
Why do they hate people who are different? Why can’t they leave drag performers alone? That’s not written in the piece, but it’s implied from start to finish.
In doing so, the site ignores the key reason for the Sturm und Drang.
Some drag queens are performing highly sexual material for very young children … even toddlers. It’s being encouraged across the culture, including by New York’s Attorney General, Letitia James.
The media is downplaying this element of the story as much as possible, but platforms like Twitter abound with footage showing drag queens interacting with children in highly sexual ways.
Hanks and Scolari did no such thing. Nor did other famous drag performers like Milton Berle, Flip Wilson and, famously, Robin Williams in “Mrs. Doubtfire.”
They dressed in drag, while drag queens add more dimension to the art form. It’s often sexual in nature and has been aimed directly at adult audiences for decades. The practice has had its detractors, but their voices were small and on the boundaries of the culture.
That’s no longer the case.
Toto didn't explain why he insists that the mere act of dressing in drag for public performance must automatically be presumed to be "highly sexual," or why Hanks and Berle deserve a carve-out from the hate. Drag is drag, is it not?
WND Helps A Proud Boy Rioter Play Victim Topic: WorldNetDaily
We've documented how WorldNetDaily complained about the convictions of Proud Boys members over the Capitol riot -- some on seditious conspiracy charges -- while downplaying their acts of violence. That continued in a May 15 article by Bob Unruh:
A Jan. 6 prisoner is demanding House Speaker Kevin McCarthy release all of the Capitol surveillance video that he promised to make public.
It was about four months ago that McCarthy vowed to release all of the footage as the Republican Party took control of the House when it was elected into the majority.
The Gateway Pundit commented, "Here we are now, 5 months into House Republicans’ reign of Congress, and nothing is happening."
The report explained prisoner Dominic Pezzola called the Pundit to express his anger.
"He still hasn’t let it out. They are just all talk. They don’t care about us," Pezzola said. "If we don’t get up and get off our a***s and grow a set, it’s going to be too late for our way of life. If it doesn’t affect you right now, someday, your children are going to school in between learning about proper pronouns and transgender studies, they are going to be learning about the ancient conservatives that are now extinct that used to roam the plains of the flyover country that had to be eradicated by the left because they were a threat to socialism and communism."
He charged, "How dare [McCarthy] call himself a Republican. You say you work for us? Everyone knows that January 6 was a complete set-up. There are feds, there are informants and there’s Antifa — I mean, there is everything you can imagine in there."
It wasn't until the 20th paragraph that Unruh quoted the far-right Gateway Pundit to describe what Pezzola was accused of: "Pezzola, who joined the Proud Boys 30 days prior to January 6, was acquitted of a seditious conspiracy charge but convicted of other charges, including robbery of government property and assaulting, resisting, or impeding an officer." And Unruh didn't mention what, exactly Pezzola did: he stole a riot shield from a Capitol Police officer and used it to smash out the glass in a Capitol window after another rioter threw a piece of wood through it. Pezzola later bragged in a selfie video he was smoking a “victory smoke” cigar as he said “I knew we could take this (expletive) if we just tried hard enough.”
Unruh went on to uncritically repeat the Gateway Pundit claiming that "constitutional experts confirm the GOP-led House has the power to assure J6 defendants of due process, or even set them free," citing "Article I Section 8 Clause 17 of the U.S. Constitution." In fact, that clause simply establishes that the federal government can control federal buildings and has nothing whatsoever to do with criminal proceedings.
This was followed two days later by an anonymously written article attacking police for using typical crowd control procedures to beat back a mob:
The crowd already was rowdy on that fateful Jan. 6, 2021, when hundreds were at the U.S. Capitol to protest what they viewed as a purloined American presidential election.
But the police lines largely were holding protesters in a group, on the sidewalk, with some minor skirmishes.
But then the shooting started. By the police, since they were the only ones armed.
And that's when, according to a lawyer representing Jan. 6 defendants, it all went bad.
It is the Gateway Pundit that has posted a long series of videos showing the change from protesters angry and upset to unarmed protesters being shot and injured by police.
[...]
The report said the confirmation of "unjustified use of deadly force" reveals "the precise time the typical protest escalated into 'the most investigated demonstration in FBI history.'"
That's according to defense attorney Steven Metcalf, who told the Gateway Pundit, "This is crucial — this is crucial — because this is where what everybody is saying" about J6 being a set-up and a fedsurrection "actually matters. But nobody is pinpointing the precise time."
President Trump ordered law enforcment to use tear gas and rubber bullets against largely peaceful protesters in Lafayette Square, outside the White House, during protests following the death of George Floyd, and we don't recall WND being bothered by that.
The anonymous WND writer also repeated old grievances:
Ex-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi set up a partisan committee – including only harsh critics of President Trump – to "investigate" the Jan. 6 events, but its members focused almost solely on issues they thought they could attribute to Trump's actions – and his instructions to supporters to demonstrate "peacefully" that day.
In fact, the committee deliberately withheld massive amounts of surveillance footage from the public, video that still hasn't fully been made available to Americans.
The writer censored ther fact that Trump also said during his pre-riot speech: "We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore," which would seem to overrun his CYA call for peace.
MRC Can't Stop Spewing Hate At Brittney Griner Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center rooted for WNBA player Brittney Griner to rot in a Russian prison on wildly trumped-up drug charges simply because she exercised her First Amendment rights (which purportedly makes her "un-American") and failed to be heterosexual -- even as it fretted over the plight of Russian athletes facing the consequences of their home country launch war on Ukraine -- then it petulantly whined that the U.S. government negotiated her release. It has continued to whine ever since:
A Jan. 17 post by Kevin Tober complained that one network newscast offered "a news brief on anti-American lesbian athlete Brittney Griner appearing at a Martin Luther King Day rally" rather than reporting on the right-wing outrage of the day.
A March 16 post by Jay Maxson grumbled about criticism of homophobia at Baylor University: "Homosexuality is a campus taboo, though the lesbian Brittney Griner formerly played basketball at the school. Left unsaid by [the writer] is that Griner’s lesbian WNBA world more than makes up for her sexual orientation having been a closeted no-no at Baylor."
Maxson groused some more in a March 27 post: 'Everyone knows the story of a very tall, woke Women’s NBA player and social justice warrior who played basketball in Russia. Brittney Griner, right? No, this is a story about the other annoying person fitting that description: Brianna Turner, who penned a Houston Chronicle op-ed dismissing the problem of transgender men in women’s sports. ... And we all thought Griner was the loudest SJW on the Phoenix Mercury team."
Tober returned for an April 27 post whining that the right-wing outrage du jour was ignored in favor of "news that anti-American athlete Brittney Griner held a press conference to discuss her experience in a Russian prison after breaking the law by bringing illegal drugs into a foreign country." Griner had had two vape cartridges of cannabis oil in her luggage when she was arrested in Russia, which hardly makes her the major drug trafficker Tober wants you to think she is.
Nicholas Fondacaro devoted a May 1 post to huffing that other people don't hate Griner as much as he does:
If there’s anything more annoying than journalists and media types hyping up the White House Correspondents Dinner, it’s them blowing smoke about who they invited to be their guests. Viewers of Monday’s CBS Mornings were treated that to grotesque display as everyone gushed about them inviting anti-American basketball player Brittney Griner to be their guest of honor; even bragging about how her presence meant there were at “the cool people's table.”
“It was the weekend much of Washington waits for all year long as reporters, politicians, celebrities, all kinds of familiar faces gathered on the red carpet at the White House Correspondents Dinner, one of Washington’s biggest social events of the whole dang year,” co-anchor Tony Dokoupil touted at the top of their FIRST segment about the dinner.
Chief White House correspondent Nancy Cordes noted that Griner and her wife Cherelle “were guests of CBS News” and boasted that they were “one of the night’s biggest draws.” “President Biden met privately with Griner before the dinner. She described the moment to Gayle King,” she added before playing a video of Griner’s reaction King apparently shot with her phone.
Later that hour, CBS went to King directly so she could personally gush about having Griner at her table. “I couldn't stop smiling. I think my face hurt from smiling so much,” she described her evening with the Griners.
Fondacaro didn't explain what drove his rage.
John Simmons spewed his own rage at Griner in a May 15 post, even starting by bizarrely calling her an "entitled brat" for some reason:
We all remember that WNBA star and entitled brat Brittney Griner got released from a Russian prison in the most lopsided prisoner exchange in American history - the one where we released the most infamous arms dealer of the past 50 years to get back a clueless social justice who didn’t know Russia’s rules on weed possession.
Putting all that aside - and the fact that we left behind a former U.S. Marine and a school teacher - Griner is back in America and enjoying life. Perhaps unironically, her perspective on America has changed after the Biden administration made sure she didn’t have to face nine-and-a-half years in a Russian prison.
We remember that Simmons was all about wishing that Griner would rot in a Russian prison, and we also remember that the "former U.S. Marine" Simmons wishes was released by Russia instead of Griner received a bad-conduct discharge from the Marines for committing offenses much worse than Griner was ever accused of.
Simmons' whining continued:
Before Griner and the Phoenix Mercury played their preseason game against the Los Angeles Sparks on Friday (the game that no one probably watched), Griner was in awe of how powerful the singing of the “Star Spangled Banner” was.
“Hearing the national anthem, it definitely hit different,” Griner said. “It’s like when you go for the Olympics, you’re sitting there, about to get gold put on your neck, the flags are going up, and the anthem is playing, it just hits different.”
Well isn’t that funny, because in 2020 she couldn’t be bothered to even be on the court for the national anthem before WNBA games.
"I honestly feel we should not play the National Anthem during our season," Griner said. "I think we should take that much of a stand. I'm going to protest regardless," she said. "I'm not going to be out there for the National Anthem. If the league continues to want to play it, that's fine. It will be all season long, I'll not be out there.”
Simmons curiously failed to mention why Griner chose to do this; according to the link he supplied, it was related to the police shooting of Breonna Taylor. He also reused to note what Griner also said: ""I don't mean that in any disrespect to our country. My dad was in Vietnam and a law officer for 30 years. I wanted to be a cop before basketball. I do have pride for my country."
In the right-wing bubble of the MRC, saying such things and taking a stand against injustice makes one "un-American." But Simmons continued to sneer:
My oh my, America sure looks pretty good to Griner now that we got her idiotic self out of a Russian prison. Gosh, what a difference that makes!
Maybe Griner - and all her self-centered, America-hating peers - will shut up and realize that they have it pretty good on American soil. Maybe they’ll be more appreciative fo a country that allows them to act like spoiled children and make more money than the average American playing a sport. I guarantee you countries like Saudi Arabia, China, and Pakistan wouldn’t put up with their bullcrap.
But knowing Griner, she’ll likely hop back on the social justice train soon. She’ll just needs some time.
It's quite entertaining to watch privilged writers like Simmons rage from their right-wing bubble, smearing anyone who commits the offense of not agreeing with them as "entitled brats" and "spoiled children." Simmons also seems to want the U.S. to become like other countries where people who express "bullcrap" -- that is, any opinion that deviates from mandated government speech -- to be harshly treated; he's inadveretently demonstrating the authoritarianism that underlies right-wing politics. It seems that Simmons would have Griner rot in prison until she is "re-educated" and becomes a loyal government zombie. Creepy, huh?
Simmons wasn't done, though. He gleefully crowed in a May 22 post that Griner's WNBA return wasn't a sellout:
Brittney Griner’s first WNBA game after being brought back home from Russia was on Friday night - not that many of you cared.
Griner’s Phoenix Mercury played against the Los Angeles Sparks, losing 94-71 to open up the WNBA regular season. But Mercury head coach Vanessa Nygaard wasn’t just miffed that her squad had a nearly 20-point loss to start the 2022-23 campaign.
She was annoyed because in her mind, not many people showed up to support Griner’s homecoming, as only 10,396 fans attended the game at Crypto.com Arena. She wanted all 19,068.
Simmons declared that Griner somehow deserved every bad thing that happened to her:
The WNBA star and part-time social justice warrior was threatened with nine-and-a-half years in a Russian prison for possession of marijuana vapes. While the sentence was certainly overkill, she brought the trouble on herself and should have known better. Maybe people weren’t willing to treat Griner like a hero because she isn’t one?
One Twitter user perfectly summed up why so many people chose to do something better with their Fridays than watch social justice warriors play a basketball game.
Then again, Simmons thinks a disgraced criminal ex-Marine is a "hero," so maybe his judgment shouldn't be trusted.
Despite Indictment For Sexual Misconduct, Michael Letts Still Published At Newsmax, WND Topic: Newsmax
Right-wing columnist Michael Letts is currently under indictment on charges of incest and sexual misconduct, yet the ConWeb continues to publish his work. We've doucmented how CNSNews.com was an enthusiastic publisher of Letts' column before it was shut down in April, but Newsmax and WorldNetDaily have published him as well. Letts ranted in a May 4 column published at Newsmax:
Democrats see no difference between law-abiding Americans who were shown into the U.S. Capitol (on Jan. 6, 2021) wandering around like sightseers, and those who forced their way in and causing damage and stealing property.
They want both thrown into prison for years. Some of them have been incarcerated for doing nothing more than obeying a police officer who waved them into the Capitol.
But for Democrats, there is no excuse for people being in the Capitol. Period.
As the they see things, they are no varying levels of crime, and the maximum penalty must be imposed, beyond misdemeanor or infraction levels.
That's an interesting statement for someone currently awaiting trial to make (not that he mentioned that relevant fact, of course). It's also highly dishonest for Letts to claim that Captiol rioters were nothing but sightseers, but that's part of a right-wing narrative to whitewash the riot.
In a May 31 column published at WND, Letts complained that the IRS has weapons and ammunition:
And I'm wondering … why? We're talking about a tax agency here. If someone breaks the law, agents usually don't come banging on the door demanding collection. But it appears something has changed – aggressively – over the past couple of years.
While the IRS hasn't commented back yet, OpentheBooks broke down the numbers further, indicating that 4,500 guns and over 5 million rounds of ammunition have already been stockpiled by over 2,000 of its agents.
Oh, but that isn't all. With these reported numbers, there are "now more federal agents with arrest and firearm authority (200,000) than U.S. Marines (186,000)." That's simply insane.
Once again, it's a tax agency – one that works in an entirely different range than the FBI or the Department of Justice. And here they are, arming themselves like crazy and potentially banging down the doors of U.S. citizens who are struggling to make ends meet as it is.
In fact, the IRS' criminal division has been armed for more than a century, and only about 2,100 IRS employees actually carry firearms.
In a June 28 column published at WND, Letts demanded the release of an alleged manifesto by the shooter in a gun massacre in Nashville, for no other apparent reason than that the shooter was allegedly transgender:
These are documents that should have already been released. The assumption is that because Audrey was transgender, it has become a political hot potato, and the writings will be harmful to the transgender cause.
It's hard to believe that their release could do more damage than the people who are trying to suppress it have already done to their cause.
In the wake of the shooting, many media pundits and people on social media either tried to downplay the fact that Hale was transsexual or that Hale's actions were somehow justified. In doing so, the victims were sometimes made to look as if they were partially to blame.
Letts did not disclose his own alleged criminality in any of these columns. and both WND and Newsmax have yet to report on the criminal charges against Letts.
How Has The MRC Been Attacking Google Lately? Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center has beenwagingwar against Google for wanting to improve the quality of its search results by downgrading lies and misinformation in its search results, which the MRC dishonestly portrays as "censorship" (even though by doing so, the MRC also seems to be conceding that right-wing websites are of poor quality). Let's look at how that politically motivated war has been going, shall we? A Feb. 13 post by Catherine Salgado raged that Google still wants to improve search quality:
As Meta expands its prebunking efforts, Google has jumped on the bandwagon with new prebunk ads in Germany.
Google’s “prebunking” test efforts in countries like Poland apparently showed "promising results" and now the company is expanding its efforts to target photos and videos in Germany and India, according to the Associated Press (AP). AP claimed that prebunking so-called misinformation is more effective than direct censorship or fact checks because censorship is naturally slammed and fact checkers are understandably distrusted now.
Google will reportedly expand prebunking through instructive ads, which supposedly made people less likely to believe alleged “misinformation” in a test pilot. The project launches Feb. 13 for Germany and is reportedly in development for India.
Salgado made sure to insert her employer's anti-George Soros propaganda and the MRC's own pet conspiracy theory about the 2020 election:
AP noted that the George Soros-funded Poynter Institute already praised Google’s efforts. Poynter Institute’s MediaWise director Alex Mahadevan enthused about Google’s project, “This is a good news story in what has essentially been a bad news business when it comes to misinformation.” Mahadevan called prebunking a “pretty efficient way to address misinformation at scale.” Radical leftist billionaire Soros’s Open Society Foundations gave Poynter’s International Fact Checking Network $492,000 between 2016 and 2020, as MRC Business noted in its Jan. 2023 report: George Soros: Propaganda Powerhouse.
AP’s list of topics that might trigger the spread of “misinformation” shows both the outlet and Google’s leftist bias: “COVID-19, mass shootings, immigration, climate change or elections.” MRC found Big Tech censorship helped steal the 2020 U.S. election.
Salgado is lying. All the MRC did is buy two polls from highly biased pollsters -- including Donald Trump's campaign pollster -- who supplied the results it paid for. Salgado then huffed: "Users don’t trust social media censors anymore for good reason." Because well-funded right-wing operations like the MRC spend millions of dollars annually lying their fellow right-wingers that fighting lies and misinformation in social media is "censorship"?
In a Feb. 21 post, Autumn Johnson whined that Google exercised its rights and funded a group that spoke out on a political issue:
A group with financial ties to Google is trying to convince the United States Supreme Court to strengthen the company’s liability protections—and censorship powers—under Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act.
Politico reported Friday that “prominent internet influencers and the nonprofit Authors Alliance filed an amicus brief ” in support of Google in Gonzalez v. Google. The groups responsible for the brief have financial ties to leftist Google, according to Politico:
[...]
While Google did not respond to the online publication’s multiple requests for comment, Ben Berkowitz, an attorney for Authors Alliance, insisted that none of the signatories were paid by Google to sign the brief, according to the report. Berkowitz also claimed that Google and its affiliates in no way contributed funding to the brief.
Johnson didn't explain why Google is apparently not allowed to do this. But she did write some more about the Supreme Court case two days later after arguments were presented in court. When the case was decided in Google's favor in May, Salgado was sad oveall but cheered that the ruling was so narrow that that it didn't address Section 230 concerns, which she declared to be "unexpected good news for free speech advocates."
The MRC also conducted another one of its dubious "search bias" studies -- but this time about itself -- detailed in an April 27 post by Luis Cornelio headlined "IT'S PERSONAL":
Big Tech giant Google has taken to suppressing MRC Free Speech America in an apparent vendetta to punish the Media Research Center division for its work exposing its explicit anti-conservative bias and censorship.
MRC Free Speech America analyzed Google search results for “mrc free speech america” and found scathing evidence of Google’s censorship against the organization. “It looks like there aren’t many great results for this search,” Google warned at the top of the first page of search results. “The results below match your search terms, but some of them may not have reliable information on this topic.” The warning appears to be an attempt to dissuade users from the organization's sites and thwart its reach, page engagement and interactions.
Cornelio went on to huff:
MRC researchers made a clean environment search on April 14, 2023, for leftist outlets BuzzFeed, Mother Jones, and Jacobin — all of which have presented unreliable information on their sites. MRC publishes reliable content, while BuzzFeed and Mother Jones still have published on their sites the discredited Steele Dossier. Meanwhile, Jacobin ’s Marxist writings call for the destruction of America’s economic and political systems. Unsurprisingly, Google did not warn or alert users as to reliability concerns for these leftist outlets.
We'verepeatedlydocumented the MRC puiblishing unreliable information. And as we've noted, BuzzFeed never claimed the Steele dossier was accurate. Cornelio also documents no specific evidence of "unreliable" information at Mother Jones beyond more Steele dossier allusions and complaining that Jacobin supports the idea of socialism (which should not be a suprise to anyone).
Further, it's interesting that Cornelio is positioning the MRC as being as far-right as Mother Jones and Jacobin are "leftist." By ranting that Google's purported suppression of Free Speech America is "personal," it could very well be that Google deprecates search results for all partisan organizations, not just the MRC. Then again, given all the hate and slander the MRC has hurled Google's way over the past few years, Google would be entirely justified in making things personal.
NEW ARTICLE: WND's Obsession With Ray Epps Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily desperately wants to believe that a protester at the Capitol riot was a secret government plant, despite the utter lack of credible evidence to prove it. Read more >>
MRC Helps Musk Frame Soros As The Jew Right-Wingers Are Allowed To Hate Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center got rather touchy when it was pointed out that Elon Musk's attacks on George Soros leaned into anti-Semitism. Tom Olohan helped Musk pivot away from that in a May 18 post:
After Twitter owner Elon Musk’s tweets about leftist mega donor George Soros drew heavy criticism from across the leftist media, Musk was not only undeterred but tripled down on his earlier comments.
Musk responded directly to a “Squawk Box” clip criticizing his tweets May 18. While Musk conceded that comparing Soros to a comic book character was an imperfect choice, he quickly pivoted to directly state some of Soros’ misdeeds. Musk tweeted, “Anyway, my actual concern with Soros is that he has funded so many politicians & DAs who are soft even on violent crime, which has caused great damage to many cities imo. Also, while I am very much in favor of expanding legal immigration, we must have some vetting of who comes in, so that we do not allow dangerous felons to prey upon innocent Americans.”
[...]
Elon Musk’s latest tweet on Soros, follows several earlier ones on Soros’ political motives and funding of radical leftist DA’s, as well as a quote comparing Soros’ to the fictional supervillain Magneto.
CNN, Forbes, and MSNBC all smeared Musk for his tweet comparing Soros to Magneto. Musk was also questioned about his tweets in a CNBC interview before he responded to a “Squawk Box” clip about them. Despite this, the free speech advocate did not back down, standing by his criticism of Soros’ criminal justice views and spending. He even doubled down in a response to his initial tweet, writing, “I’d like apologize for this post[.]” He tweeted again, “It was really unfair to Magneto.”
Yes, Olohan really wants you to think the top business news network and the top business magazine are "leftist."
Joseph Vazquez used a May 22 post to hype a poll by a notoriously right-wing pollster claiming Americans agree with Musk's attack on Soros:
A majority of Americans are rejecting the media’s attempts to shield leftist billionaire activist George Soros from criticism and cast his opponents as anti-Semites.
A new survey by Rasmussen Reports and Ron Coleman’s ColemanNation podcast of 1,002 U.S. likely voters revealed that “Most American voters have a negative opinion of liberal billionaire George Soros, and nearly half agree with [Twitter owner] Elon Musk’s words comparing Soros to a comic-book villain.” Specifically, 51 percent of respondents reported viewing Soros “unfavorably,” which included 39 percent who had a “very unfavorable” impression of the billionaire. This poll’s release comes days after Musk set Twitter on fire for comparing Soros to Marvel supervillain Magneto, saying Soros "hates humanity" and for criticizing Soros for seeking to “erode the very fabric of civilization.”
Despite all the media bluster to make Soros into some kind of a victim, Americans clearly aren’t buying it. “Forty-seven percent (47%) of voters agree with [Musk’s] quote, including 35% who Strongly Agree that Soros ‘hates humanity,’” according to the survey taken between May 16-18, 2023.
Outlets like Forbes and CNN tried to cast Musk as being “anti-Semitic” for his tweets, though Soros’ ethnicity had nothing to do with what Musk was saying.
As we've noted before, Vazquez cannot possibly know Musk's intent in attacking Soros, unless the MRC has endowed him with long-distance mind-reading abilities.
A May 23 post by Olohan declared "VINDICATION" because Alan Dershowitz declared Soros to be a Jew right-wingers are allowed to hate, a key anti-Soros narrative at the MRC:
Harvard Law School Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz has weighed in to defend Elon Musk’s criticisms of George Soros and offered a few scathing remarks of his own.
Dershowitz published a May 21 op-ed in The Wall Street Journal pushing back against leftist media hacks who have called Musk’s tweets on Soros “antisemitic.” Dershowitz wrote, “But Mr. Musk stands falsely accused. Mr. Soros is an active participant in politics, and his Jewishness shouldn’t shield him from criticism.” Following these remarks, Dershowitz went into detail on how George Soros has acted to harm not only America, but also the Jewish state of Israel. “[N]o single person has done more to damage Israel’s standing in the world, especially among so-called progressives, than George Soros,” Dershowitz rebuked.
Dershowitz lists two anti-Israel groups, Human Rights Watch and J-Street, which Soros has donated massive amounts of money to in the past.
But criticism of Israel is not, in and of itself, anti-Semitic, and Dershowitz and Olohan are being dishonest by claiming it is. Olohan cited criticism of Human Rights Watch by its founder over "the Israeli-Arab conflict," but it's not anti-Semitic to criticize Israel's treatment of Palestinians. He also attacked J Street for trying to "counter the work of the pro-Israel group, AIPAC," but he didn't mention that AIPAC is very much a right-wing organizaiton that supports Republican can didates and spends money to defeat Democratic candidates, especially if they criticize Israel and have expressed support for Palestinians. It's also false for Olohan to call J Street "anti-Israel," and J Street has an entire list of myths about its purported lack of support for Israel it will happily disabuse people of.
Olohan went on to tout how "Dershowitz also quoted an article from the Jewish News Service to emphasize that he wasn’t the only “Jewish American” to be wary of Soros’ radicalism," adding:
The Harvard Law professor also agreed that Soros has had “a pernicious influence” on America, citing leftist Soros-backed candidates for district attorney across the country. Dershowitz also stated that he agrees with Musk that, “Mr. Soros’s acts contribute to fraying the ‘fabric of civilization.’” Ideally, America would have a media that would be curious about the magnitude of Soros’ influence in global politics. Instead, the nation is left with a bloated, Soros-funded propaganda media mill that is intent on nefariously denigrating those who dare to criticize him.
That's a highly ironic statement, given how the MRC works as a propagandamediamill for Musk.
How Has WND's Brown Been Hating LGBT People Lately? Topic: WorldNetDaily
Michael Brown has unspurprisingly continued to heap hate and scorn on LGBT people since we last checked in. He spent his Jan. 23 column raging against bans on anti-gay conversion therapy:
It doesn't matter what your religious beliefs might be. It doesn't matter if you were sexually abused and became confused about your sexual identity. It doesn't matter if you would really like to be heterosexual simply to marry and have a natural family.
No! You must stay gay (or trans, as the case may be), and it is illegal for anyone to help you explore the roots of your same-sex attractions with the view toward change.
Tragically, this "conversion therapy" ban is in place for minors in multiple states in America as well as abroad, while a complete ban for people of all ages, similar to that in Malta, exists in several countries as well.
Talk about extreme overreach. Talk about the exact opposite of live and let live. Talk about making a mockery of "tolerance and acceptance." That street only goes one way.
Brown didn't explain why people must be forced not to be gay, despite the fact that conversion therapy harms LGBTQ people.
Brown lamented in his Jan. 27 column that it's hard to demonize LGBT people when they are actually just like the rest of us:
It's easy to oppose "the LGBTQ+ agenda" when it is brazen and vulgar, marching down our city streets in open display. Or when it supports the genital mutilation and chemical castration of children. But what do you say to that very nice, same-sex couple who lives next door, the ones raising the abandoned child they adopted? Are they also a part of an evil agenda? Should they be demonized and condemned?
[...]
The fact is that there are countless thousands of gay couples whose lives are very similar to the lives of heterosexual couples. They go to work. They spend time with their friends. They have hobbies. And although they are half as likely as heterosexual couples to be raising children, thousands of them are, in fact, devoted parents.
Oh, the horror of having to find ways to demonize people you don't like. The struggle continued:
What do we say to a gay man like [former Rep. Sean Patrick] Maloney, or to the many, loving same-sex couples?
It's easy to point to the gay couples arrested for raping their adopted children or pimping them out for sex. It's also easy to point to the higher levels of promiscuity in the gay community, in particular among men, even those in "committed" or "monogamous" relationships.
[...]
But, to repeat, there are plenty of gay couples where partner swapping is not the norm (in fact, a 2018 study claims that monogamy is becoming more common among gay couples). And there are plenty of gay couples who would die for the kids they are raising.
I could also mention the fact that plenty of heterosexual couples commit sexual sin. Some of them abuse their children too.
Homosexual couples and individuals hardly have a monopoly on sin.
Still, Brown concluded, they ultimately must be belittled as "fallen" and subjected to conversion tactics:
As followers of Jesus, then, who know what the Bible says about homosexual practice, what do we say to our gay neighbors, friends and family members? And how do we relate to them?
In the end, it's quite simple.
We treat them like any other neighbor, friend or family member.
We love them. We take a genuine interest in their lives. We treat them as our equals in that we are all created in God's image, we are all fallen, and we are all in need of redemption.
If the door is open, we share the Gospel with them, recognizing that their same-sex attractions are not the root of their fallen nature but simply a manifestation of their fallen nature. And if they come to faith, we seek to disciple them, which, of course, will mean major life changes.
But this is often the cost of following Jesus.
[...]
As for the children raised by that caring gay couple, again, we don't doubt the devotion of the two moms or two dads. And if we are not asked for our opinion, we keep it to ourselves.
But if we are asked how we feel about same-sex parenting, we make clear that we don't doubt the love and devotion of these parents. Yet we restate, without apology, our belief that God's best plan is for a child to have a mother and father, since the world's best dad is not a mom and the world's best mom is not a dad. And there is something unique and irreplaceable in the roles that moms and dads play.
If we are branded bigots and haters and homophobes, so be it. We will do our best to overcome those negative judgments with genuine, long-term love.
We will not demonize these couples, and we will not celebrate them.
Instead, we will join grace and truth together with the goal of introducing them to the priceless, transformative love of God. That's what disciples do.
Acturlly, if you're hectoring them for being gay -- as Brown clearly seems to want despite his expressions of faux compassion -- you are, in fact, demonizing them.
Btown's Feb. 13 column was spent raging at a major church for not hating gay people as much has he does:
With all respect to the responsibilities carried by the leadership of the Church of England, and in recognition of the history of this branch of the universal Body, I make this heartfelt appeal.
Just as Elijah the prophet urged the people of Israel to stop wavering between two opinions, I urge you to stop wavering between the Word of God and the spirit of this age. As Elijah said, "If Yahweh is God, serve Him. If Baal is God, serve him" (1 Kings 18:21). It can only be one or the other.
Your current decision to "bless" same-sex unions while at the same time forbidding your churches from hosting same-sex weddings is not just a deep and fundamental departure from the biblical faith. It is also a hopeless compromise, seeking to play both ends against the middle in a way that can only frustrate, if not infuriate, the principal parties involved.
How can you bless something you will not sanctify? How can you invoke God's favor on something at which you cannot officiate? How can you claim to uphold the church's historic definition of marriage if men or women involved in same-sex relationships can receive "prayers for God's blessing"? And how can you "apologize for the ways in which the Church of England has treated LGBTQI+ people – both those who worship in our churches and those who do not" while barring same-sex weddings from your churches?
How can you repent to the LGBTQ+ community "for the times we have rejected or excluded you, and those you love" and lament for "the occasions on which you have received a hostile and homophobic response in our churches are shameful and for this we repent," while allowing your clergy to refuse to bless same-sex unions, at their discretion?
This is as hypocritical as it is self-contradictory. Why not simply come out and say, "Our views are changing, and we are well on our way to fully embracing practicing 'gay Christians'?" Why the wavering?
[...]
Will you uphold the plain teaching of Scripture and the historic doctrine of the church, namely, that all same-sex relationships, no matter how loving, are sinful in God's eyes? Or will you fully embrace and endorse these relationships as holy, not only blessing them but performing same-sex wedding ceremonies in your church buildings? What will it be?
I appeal to you to choose this day whom you will serve. It is either the Lord or the spirit of the age. It cannot be both.
Brown is unsurprisingly framing his anti-LGBT hate as holy and ordained and that anyone who doesn't share that level of hate cannot possibly be a "real" Christian.
Brown's Feb. 20 column was headlined "An insight about how Gen Zers approach LGBTQ issue," which was largelycomplaining that young people don't see LGBTQ people as an "issue":
If you know anything about the younger generation, you know that many of these teens and young adults have a real passion for justice, even if misguided at times. Many of them are also highly empathetic, commonly siding with the perceived underdog and outcast. That's why so many Gen Z young people stand with the LGBTQ+ community or even identify as such. It is an essential part of who they are.
[...]
Recently, I was speaking to hundreds of multi-national, Gen Z ministry students on this very topic, and as always, I did my best to speak with sensitivity and compassion.
I pointed to the hurt and rejection suffered by LGBTQ+ individuals over the years. I said that the vast majority of them are not activists and are simply trying to live their lives in peace. I emphasized that many of them feel hated by God and the church. And I explained that some of our Gospel cliches are highly offensive to them. For example, when we say, "Love the sinner and hate the sin," they hear, "You hate me, since this is not what I do. This is who I am."
[...]
I shared with tears stories of young people "detransitioning" after having life-altering hormone and surgery treatments as teens. And even when I showed shocking examples of LGBTQ+ indoctrination of little children, I explained that those involved, be it the parents or the teachers, really thought they were doing a good thing.
So, the presentation was as caring as could be, spoken with a heart of love.
Yet when most of the students laughed out loud when I read off lists of the latest preferred gender pronouns, a small minority of the students were offended. They felt as if everyone was laughing at one of their friends or loved ones and as if I was ridiculing one of their friends or loved ones.
Brown concluded:
But we must not underestimate the degree to which they have grown up in a radically different world than we did, one in which same-sex "marriage" is the law of the land. In which trans is trendy and gay is cool. In which any rejection of LGBTQ+ activism is perceived as hateful. And in which, even for some Gen Z Christians, there is a deeper sense of solidarity with LGBTQ+ people than with the ways and Word of God.
And so, just as the older generation focused so much on LGBTQ+ issues that we lost sight of the people, the younger generation has focused so much on LGBTQ+ people that they have lost sight of the issues.
If Brown continues to insist that LGBTQ people are "issues" instead of humans who deserve basic respect and rights regardless of who they love, he's only preaching to the choir.
MRC Lashes Out At CNN's Darcy Over Trump Town Hall Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center's defense of Donald Trump following the CNN town hall included taking shots at a CNN reporter the MRC obsessively hates. Nicholas Fondacaro started things in a May 13 post:
Following the airing of CNN’s town hall with former President Trump Wednesday evening, many bloviating pontificators in the liberal media registered their outrage at the network for daring to give the Republican candidate a platform. A surprising voice to register their disproval came from inside CNN’s house in the form of senior media reporter Oliver Darcy via the so-called “Reliable Sources” Newsletter. According to reporting from Puck News on Friday, CNN boss Chris Licht responded to Darcy’s insubordination by putting “the fear of God into him.”
With the dust still settling from the rowdy event, Darcy clutched his pearls into diamonds as he fired off the newsletter proclaiming this at the top: “It's hard to see how America was served by the spectacle of lies that aired on CNN Wednesday evening.”
He touted the performance of his colleague Kaitlan Collins by calling her “as tough and knowledgable [sic] of an interviewer as they come. She fact-checked Trump throughout the 70-minute town hall.”
[...]
Darcy even called Licht out by name. “CNN and new network boss Chris Licht are facing a fury of criticism — both internally and externally over the event,” he stated, airing their laundry and leaving it an open-ended question of how Licht would respond to criticism.
Well, according to former CNN media reporter Dylan Byers, Darcy would soon learn how Licht dealt with critics firsthand.
[...]
What’s obvious from Puck’s reporting was that the Jeff Zucker weed runs deep and it would require a lot of work from Licht to pluck it out root and branch.
Only an authoritarian-adjacent right-winger like Fondacaro would think that honest, factual reporting (he cited no inaccuracies in Darcy's work) should be treated as "insubordination."
The MRC's chief Darcy-hater, Curtis Houck -- who loves to smear Darcy as a "Benedict Arnold" because he escaped the right-wing media bubble -- doubled down in a May 15 post:
Two days after Puck's Dylan Byers reported that CNN’s Oliver Darcy was shaken by the proverbial call to the principal’s office for insubordination, Darcy defenders pushed back Sunday night and comically tried to downplay the notion that it was bad news for Darcy to have been called to CNN boss Chris Licht’s office to discuss his analysis trashing his own employer for hosting a town hall with former President Trump.
Darcy’s allies and Semafor may try to have you think otherwise, but other than being told you were being promoted, receiving an award, or discussing, say, a loss in the family, receiving a summons to the office of the president of your company with other executives is never a good sign.
Semafor’s Max Tani had the details in co-founder Ben Smith’s weekly media newsletter: “Two people with knowledge of the meeting told Semafor that Darcy was not pleased with the depiction of the meeting, which noted that Licht told Darcy that he was emotional and had ‘put the fear of God’ in the CNN media correspondent.”
Earth to Darcy: How does it feel to perhaps have received a taste of your own medicine? Not so fun having anonymous sources denounce you, is it?
Houck concluded by begging Licht to make an example of Darcy:
Tani did have a kicker in which he shared “Darcy has wondered to colleagues whether he should resign or if he will be fired.”
And there it is. If Darcy were to be fired, it’d be a strong signal to CNN employees, media watchers, and viewers that Licht is intent on materializing calls from his Warner Bros. Discovery bosses to haul CNN back to the center and away from obsessions with Fox News and anti-conservative venom.
Houck, of course, was silent about Fox News' obsession with CNN, and he did not demand that Fox News tone down its anti-liberal venom.
In addition to being a homophobe and a Vladimir Putin stan, Scott Lively is also a Trump dead-ender who believes the conspiracy theories about election fraud. He pushed the bogus narrative again in his May 8 WorldNetDaily column:
A few days ago, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton gave a brilliant short talk at the Heritage Foundation explaining how the Democrats pulled off the election coup of 2020/21 and why the most insidious element of it can't technically be proven. In appreciation for his courage and to help that video get more attention, I am dusting off and refreshing an article I first published two weeks after the (literally unbelievable) "Biden landslide." Sarcasm alert, here goes:
Election fraud is the art of stealing or trying to steal an election by cheating.
When it is done by an individual it is called voter fraud. When it is done by a group of extremely powerful people conspiring together to take down Donald Trump it is called "the most secure election in U.S. history."
Conspiracies are usually very difficult to prove because the people doing them work super hard to hide the evidence so they don't get caught. The best way to get away with it is to do it in places where all the people who could expose or punish you, such as the police, judges, news reporters, election officials, etc., are your friends. Groups of friends with expertise in election fraud all networking together are called "Defenders of Our Democracy."
Democrats really, really like having those kinds of friends, so the places that have the most election "intervention" are cities which have the most Democrats in power.
Lively then listed the ways he thinks elections are stolen: voting lists that are not continally purged (though overagressive purging tends to remove eligible voters as well as dead ones), mail-in voting (which doesn't actually increase election fraud no matter what Lively wants you to think), and electronic voting. Regarding the latter, Lively claimed without evidence that one can "stop the vote counting in the middle of the election night and change the software to help your guy catch up – AFTER everyone saw that the other guy won." He concluded:
But, that won't really matter much in the long run so long as you get that election "certified" by Congress with the help of strategically placed co-conspirators. It might cost you a few pence you didn't expect to spend, but once you've firmly taken dominion over the seats of power there will be lots more ethically flexible people who will want to be your friends. And eventually you'll be SO strong that no one can stop you even if they know exactly how you're cheating.
So, that's how it works. Happy voting!
Nope, that's not how it works at all. But then, Lively isn't being paid to tell the truth.
MRC's Jean-Pierre-Bashing, Doocy-Fluffing Watch Topic: Media Research Center
Kevin Tober served up the Media Research Center's ritual hatred of White HOuse press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre over the June 5 press briefing:
They say politics makes strange bedfellows. Monday’s White House press briefing held by the always incompetent White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre (KJP) and National Security Council Coordinator for Strategic Communications John Kirby proved that when both Daily Caller White House correspondent Diana Glebova and CBS senior White House correspondent Ed O’Keefe asked about the allegations that then-Vice President Joe Biden was involved in a bribery scheme.
Along the way, Tober embarassingly gushed that biased Newsmax reporter James Rosen displayed a "line of questioning worthy of an Ivy League lawyer" (no mention that Rosen was forced to ply his skills at Newsmax because he got canned from Fox News for serial sexual harassment) and sneered that there was "what WMAL radio host Vince Coglianese refers to as the children’s press briefing hosted by KJP" that involved questions that don't advance right-wing narratives.
For the next day's briefing, Tober hypocritically cheered a Fox Business writer for going the children's briefing route:
At Tuesday's White House press briefing, the inept Biden White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre (KJP) was grilled by NewsMax’s James Rosen on Biden’s frequent falls. What started as a simple question turned into a full blown argument over whether Biden frequently stumbling is an issue to Americans.
The briefing started off on a humorous note with Fox News White House correspondent Jacqui Heinrich asking KJP if humans are alone on planet Earth:
On UFOs, real quick though. This whistleblower report, alleging that the US military has been retrieving craft of non-human origin for at least several decades. Are we alone? And if we were not, would you even tell us?
There were chuckles in the room from the other reporters. As per her usual arrangement, KJP dodged the question. “I would refer that question to Department of Defense and let them answer that question for you,” she replied.
Tober then devoted four paragraphs to gushing over how Rosen "wasn’t playing around" in his biased questioning, whining about Jean-Pierre's response: "KJP once again played dumb: 'you've paid a lot of attention to that particular situation. I Actually, did not see that. I was with him in Hiroshima so this is something that I was not aware of, so I can't speak to that particular moment.' She then listed off a number of Biden’s accomplishments in an attempt to deflect from Rosen’s actual question." He then complained when Jean-Pierre had enough of Rosen's bias:
KJP then got nasty and sneered: “You're asking me if we're going to change anything from here, the Chief of Staff has asked for it to change anything from here. And here's the thing, here's the thing. We are not. Things happen. Other Presidents have had similar situations.”
She then walked off and ended the press conference like a petulant child.
Funny, we recall when the MRC called them "mic drops" and cheered when Kayleigh McEnany did that.
Curtis Houck returned for more Karine-bashing in writing about the June 7 briefing, attacking a Voice of America reporter for asking about Pride Month:
Along with PBS and NPR, there’s another taxpayer-funded outlet in the White House Briefing Room many Americans probably forget about: Voice of America. And why it matters is, in part, Wednesday’s briefing revealed how they’re just as far to the left as VOA reporter Anita Powell put a softball question about Pride Month on the tee for Press Secretary (and heralded lesbian) Karine Jean-Pierre.
Powell mentioned that Thursday would feature a Pride Month event at the White House, but fretted this would “provoke some political or politicized pushback, especially from, you know, some of the states that have passed legislation targeting sexual minorities or from countries that have done the same.”
In turn, Powell askedif she “could...just hear from you why does the White House feel that this event is important, especially in this context.”
Puketastic. Worthless media we have.
Houck apparently believes that media outlets have worth if they share his right-wing bias and hate LGBT people as much as he does.
Houck's writeup of the June 13 briefing complained that Jean-pierre called out a biased reporter for using a question to attack transgender people:
Transgenderism was the center of attention for key moments in Tuesday’s White House press briefing as Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre denounced the “disrespectful,” “not appropriate,” and “unacceptable” behavior of a transgender woman (a man pretending to be a woman) flashing their upper region at a White House pride event, while also trashing pro-life reporter Owen Jensen for an “irresponsible” question about girls being forced to compete against biological men.
The Jensen exchange came near the end of the briefing, starting with Jensen citing a tweet from Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) that “having biological males in women’s sports is unsafe, unfair, and wrong” and a letter from “72 elite female athletes” denouncing being forced to compete “against biological males is not only unfair, it is discriminatory and illegal.”
“So, in the light of this administration’s proposed changes to Title IX, does the White House worry about the physical safety of females directly competing against males in sports,” Jensen asked.
Jean-Pierre insisted this was “a complicated issue” with “a wide range of views,” but nothing was set in stone to have the Department of Education force schools into putting men who identify as women in women’s sports.
Jensen pushed back:
[...]
Jean-Pierre was incensed, blasting him for “saying that transgender kids are dangerous.” Jensen repeatedly denied it, but Jean-Pierre didn’t care: “Well, you’re saying — you’re saying that their safety is — isn’t — is at risk?”
She added that Jensen was “laying out a broad — kind of broad example or explanation of what could potentially happen” and thus describing transgender people in a way that was “dangerous” to them.
“[T]hat’s something that I have to call out. And that is — that is — that is — that is irresponsible. I have just laid out how complicated this issue is. I have just laid out why it’s complicated,” she said.
Houck also hyped another anti-LGBT question from a different right-wing reporter: "Heinrich also had a question about how they displayed of the pride flag at said event in a way that violated the U.S. flag code, but Jean-Pierre brushed that aside as a discussion meant to 'distract us from' supporting LGBTQ people."
Because Houck and Tober care only about trashing Jean-Pierrre and promoting right-wing reporters without identifying their ideological bias, so they failed to write about the June 14 briefing in which she mocked Fox News for its ridiculous chyron calling Biden a "wannabe dictator," laughing and declaring that "there are probably about 787 million things that I can say about this."
Newsmax Still Defended Trump After Arraignment Topic: Newsmax
Newsmax aggressively defended Donald Trump on arraignment day for his latest indictment, though it had to throw in some actual news for balance. Afterward, Newsmax returned to being mostly about being in attack-and-defend mode. Here's what it published on June 14 and 15 the two days after the arraignment:
Newsmax columnists rushed to Trump's defense as well. Jeff Crouere huffed in a June 14 column:
Eight years of abuse of President Donald Trump culminated in the 37 felony count indictment that was unsealed on Friday. The 49-page document alleges the mishandling of classified documents after he left the White House.
President Joe Biden was found to have classified documents at his home, in his garage and in his office, which received communist Chinese donations, and nothing has happened to him. In fact, the special counsel named to investigate this issue has been quiet and has not even interviewed Biden.
In contrast, Trump's special counsel, Jack Smith, has been aggressive and subpoenaed dozens of employees at Trump's Mar-a-Lago home. At his press conference on Friday, Smith ludicrously said that "We have one set of laws in this country. They apply to everyone."
Really? Hillary Clinton was not prosecuted for sending and receiving 33,000 emails, including top secret and classified materials, using an unsecured computer.
While former President Trump faces 400 years in prison, Clinton received a pass from former Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director James Comey who infamously claimed that "Although there is evidence of potential violations regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case."
In fact, there is no reasonable comparison between Trump and Hillary on this issue. Neverthless, he continued whining:
He was charged under the Espionage Act, which has never been used against a president in our 247-year history. Yet, unhinged prosecutors in the Biden administration do not care about precedent or dividing the nation. They are determined to prevent Trump from getting elected president again.
In contrast, House Republicans are too scared to impeach a President who deserves it more than any other in our nation's history. If Biden is not impeached, House Republicans should abdicate their power and turn it back over to the Democrats.
The one disruptor is facing the mighty weight of the federal government against him. His only true allies are the 75 million Americans who voted for him.
The latest witch hunt will only embolden his voters. Too bad House Republicans do not possess similar courage.
It's not a "witch hunt" if there are actual witches -- and again, there are tapes.
WND Joins MRC Touts Dubious AllSides Work To Push 'Liberal Media Bias' Narrative Topic: WorldNetDaily
One big way you can tell that "media solutions company" AllSides has a right-wing bias is by looking at who is promoting its work. The Media Research Center is a big promoter, of course, but another is WorldNetDaily. An anonymously written May 4 article stated:
Conservatives looking for an alternative to Google news to escape the leftist ideological bent need not look at Bing for an answer, according to a new report.
The Daily Signal, citing an AllSides study, said Bing skews even further left than Google.
"People completely underestimate the dangers of bias when it comes to search engines. They think they are getting balanced information, and they’re not," John Gable, co-founder and CEO of AllSides, the organization that conducted the study, explained to the Daily Signal.
"Instead, they’re being thrown into divisive filter bubbles that make them confidently ignorant."
AllSides dedicates itself to presenting balanced news, and analyzed Bing during March.
"The analysis found that 83% of the articles on Bing News’ homepage came from media outlets AllSides rates as Lean Left or Left, while only 13% came from media outlets rated Center, and 0% came from sources rated Lean Right or Right," the Daily Signal reported.
As we documented when the MRC promoted this same "study," AllSides offers no evidence that the content of the individual stories themselves have any sort of bias -- it's just a broad-brush attack on outlets it doesn't like -- and it proclaims major news outlets as the New York Times, CNN, CBS, ABC and Politico to be "left-leaning," something it even admits is subjective.
Joseph Farah invoked this study in his May 5 column as an excuse to whine yet again how WND has been demonetized:
Slowly but surely, the leftists got their way and happily and effectively destroyed the First Amendment in one lifetime. Poof, and it was gone.
They did this through monopolizing advertising and search results for leftist sites while denying conservative ones. When that didn't work, sites like WND were PERMANENTLY DEMONETIZED, severely inhibiting our ability to participate in the online advertising world.
Google not only controls the flow of advertising and search results, but its No.2 competitor, Bing, the Microsoft-owned search engine, is arguably worse, according to a recent study.
[...]
This fascinating portrait of the state of the cyber media was done by Tyler O'Neil, the managing editor of the Daily Signal.
Is this what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they crafted the Constitution and made the First Amendment the shrine of our bill of rights, the most important of our freedoms? No.
It cannot be an accident or chance. WND does not come up at all in Bing searches. We're considered fringe – though we arguably speak to the biggest populous movement in the U.S., the MAGA community.
In March, a Google spokesperson countered the earlier survey's results, claiming AllSides' "methodology is deeply flawed" and arguing that the study "cherry-picked a few topics and ran for a very brief period of time, presenting a misleading picture of Google News."
Google News is a very important tool of the search engine. Before Donald Trump became president as the "biggest threat to freedom in the United States," WND often found its news reports prominently placed in those Google reports. Obviously, not anymore as our nation continues marching toward fascism.
[...]
Google is failing the nation. Period. And Bing skews even further left than Google.
Farah concluded:
To quote Gable, again: "People completely underestimate the dangers of bias when it comes to search engines. They think they are getting balanced information, and they're not. Instead, they're being thrown into divisive filter bubbles that make them confidently ignorant."
That's the state of the nation – becoming confidently ignorant. And that's the intent. Better to manipulate us. They're having their way with America.
Given the amount of fakenewsandmisinformation WND publishes -- which is the real reason WND has been demonetized by people like Google who don't want to be associated with such shoddy work -- it seems that Farah is the one who wants his readers to be "confidently ignorant."
The DeSantis Defense Brigade at the Media REsearch Center has been working so hard, we're still trying to keep up. The MRC has been giving DeSantis' partisan war against Disney special attention. Tierin Rose Mandelburg did her best DeSantis PR job in an April 18 post:
The Media Research Center is 
It's been a while since we 
We've documented
The Media Research Center 
Right-wing columnist Michael Letts is 
The Media Research Center 
The Media Research Center 
Michael Brown has unspurprisingly continued to heap hate and scorn on LGBT people since we 
The Media Research Center's 
In addition to being a homophobe and a 
Kevin Tober served up the Media Research Center's ritual hatred of White HOuse press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre over the June 5 
Newsmax 
One big way you can tell that "media solutions company" AllSides has a right-wing bias is by looking at who is promoting its work. The 
