Liars, liars, skirts on fire

/

Two small examples of why the demagogues and their flacks hate an unfettered Internet: their lies are now being exposed and fact-checked in minutes, instead of being buried by their captive press.

AND:

Kamkam's busy campaigning, Joe's on the beach; maybe we can ask George Bush to help?

/

John Hinderaker, PowerLine:

That Was Then, This Is Now

In Memories of Hurricane Katrina, I contrasted press coverage and Democratic Party hysteria over Hurricane Katrina, which effectively destroyed George W. Bush’s second term and contributed to the Democrats’ 2006 election victories, with the muted (if not altogether silent) reaction to Hurricane Helene and the vastly more problematic governmental response thereto.

It is a theme worth returning to. On CNN, Scott Jennings makes the point effectively:

Hinderaker:

Joe Biden is one step away from the obituary column, and no one has ever in her life relied on Kamala Harris to get anything done. The world takes it as a given that anything that is done in response to Helene will have nothing to do with our president or vice president. Or FEMA.

…

The press has tried to deflect attention from the Biden/Harris administration by blaming global warming for Hurricane Helene and the flooding in North Carolina, despite the fact that neither hurricanes, nor severe hurricanes, nor floods have increased in recent years. In fact, one of my relatives who lives in Asheville, North Carolina, tells me that virtually the exact same flood, maybe worse, occurred in 1916.

Hillary on why Internet forums must be censored: "We'll lose total control"

/

fire!

Hillary Clinton Says the Quiet Part Out Loud

“ … Hillary Clinton let the cat out of the bag during an interview with CNN on Saturday, where she spoke about the need to control social media. She said it should be ‘at the top" of every legislative agenda’. “

We should be, in my view, repealing something called section 230, which gave platforms on the internet immunity because they were thought to be just pass-throughs, that they shouldn’t be judged for the content that is posted. But we now know that that was an overly simple view. Whether it’s Facebook or Twitter or X or Instagram or TikTok, whatever they are, if they don’t moderate and monitor the content we lose total control and it’s not just the social and psychological effects, it’s real harm.

Hillary has company in her quest to shut down dissent, naturally.

Nick Arama: “The First Amendment was specifically created to protect incendiary speech, speech people may not have liked or might find wrong. That’s the very purpose of the Amendment.

“Here's George Washington law professor Jonathan Turley talking about how these are dangerous times for free speech with these thoughts. “

Governor Walz has been out there saying that misinformation and hate speech are not protected under the Constitution. And there's a crushing irony there. I mean, in calling for the censorship of other citizens accused of disinformation, the governor is spreading disinformation. He's been told repeatedly by many of us that he's wrong, that that's just completely and demonstrably wrong. The Constitution does protect those forms of speech.

…. "You have two former Democratic presidential nominees who have been going to this sort of global elite, asking for Europe and others to censor fellow Americans. Hillary Clinton did that after @elonmusk took over Twitter, went to Europe and said, please use the Digital Services Act. This really horrific new law to censor fellow Americans because Musk isn't going to do it, force him to do it." "These are the same voices. Who's saying the same things since the beginning of our republic, that they have a reason to silence others."

Hillary, instigator of the most significant misinformation campaign in recent memory with her Russian conspiracy claim, and her two Democrat friends shown above are not alone in their thirst to place citizens’ speech back under the control of the state; it’s the goal of all Democrat politicians and their corporate allies (as a very tiny example, Google Ad Sense has permanently closed my account for violating its “Publisher Guidelines”, which prohibit, among other topics:

Dangerous or derogatory content

We do not allow content that:

  • incites hatred against, promotes discrimination of, or disparages an individual or group on the basis of their race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, age, nationality, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or other characteristic that is associated with systemic discrimination or marginalization.

Unreliable and harmful claims

We do not allow content that:

  • makes claims that are demonstrably false and could significantly undermine participation or trust in an electoral or democratic process.

    Examples: information about public voting procedures, political candidate eligibility based on age or birthplace, election results, or census participation that contradicts official government records

  • promotes harmful health claims, or relates to a current, major health crisis and contradicts authoritative scientific consensus.

    Examples: Anti-vaccine advocacy, denial of the existence of medical conditions such as AIDS or Covid-19, gay conversion therapy

  • contradicts authoritative scientific consensus on climate change.

Mine is a very small matter; sites with real influence, however are also being demonetized, and that threatens to put them out of business. PJ Media, parent host of Town Hall, Red State, Hot Air, Daily Caller, and Twitchy, and has been hammered by Google, as detailed in the article below, and the list of articles shown includes only articles that appeared on PJ Media itself; dozens more on the other sites have also been flagged and demonetized.

Google Is Completely Out of Control

PJ Media, like all independent conservative/populist media outlets, is constantly demonetized by Google.

(Emphasis on “independent; we’re not competing on an even playing field with certain unnamed “conservative” outlets that are boosted in the algorithms via sweetheart Silicon Valley deals and then pretend they are besieged by “cancel culture,” nor are we talking about legacy media behemoths like Fox News that are not throttled in the same manner.)

A little definitional housekeeping: by “demonetized,” we mean that any article smeared by the fickle Google gods with this black mark of shame is no longer eligible to host Google ads, which means it cannot generate any ad revenue for the company.

Many readers might be generally aware of the demonetization warfare tactic designed to suppress dissident media but may not be aware of just how many PJ Media articles are demonetized on a regular basis, which has the intended effect of crippling revenue and, ultimately, putting us out of business forever.

So, just how many PJ Media articles has Google demonetized?

One? Two? A dozen?

Oh, you sweet summer child!

The answer is 109.

Google currently has attached “demonetized” flags to 109 PJ Media articles.

Here we have the complete list of demonetized PJ Media articles:

Demonetized PJ Media Articles - PJMedia (1) by PJ Media on Scribd

https://reason.com › 2022 › 10 › 27 › yes-you-can-yell-fire-in-a-crowded-theater

Yes, You Can Yell 'Fire' in a Crowded Theater - Reason.com

Oct 27, 2022Free Speech. Yes, You Can Yell 'Fire'inaCrowdedTheater On Tuesday, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito repeated the common myth that "shouting 'fire'inacrowdedtheater" is unprotected speech.

"Shouting fire in a crowded theater" - Reason.com

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., photographed by Frances Benjamin Johnston (1902), from the Library of Congress. People often argue some speech is unprotected by analogizing to shouting fire in ...

How To Yell 'Fire' in a Crowded Theater - Reason.com

Just as you cannot yell "fire" in a crowded theater, they argue, you can't say insert false speech here. But you often can utter or publish a falsehood without a regulator or court having the ...

theatlantic.com

Only include results for this siteHide site from these results

Share feedback about this site

https://www.theatlantic.com › ideas › archive › 2022 › 01 › shouting-fire-crowded-theater-speech-regulation › 621151

America's Favorite Flimsy Pretext for Limiting Free Speech

Shouting "Fire" inacrowdedtheater, a metaphor that dates to a 1919 Supreme Court ruling by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., is widely—and wrongly—held to be a far-reaching exception ...

yahoo.com

Only include results for this siteHide site from these results

Share feedback about this site

https://www.yahoo.com › news › yes-tim-walz-shout-fire-175907630.html

Yes, Tim Walz, You Can Shout 'Fire' In A Crowded Theatre (opinion) - Yahoo

4 days agoIt's a common misconception that shouting "fire" inacrowded theatre isn't protected by the First Amendment—a myth that originates from a hypothetical used in Justice Oliver Wendell

Joe, we'll never notice you've left

/

we're in for a seamless transition

Kamala Harris Chokes After Teleprompter Glitch Derails Campaign Speech

Matt Margolis:

…. But, the true moment that everyone will remember, the moment that has gone viral on social media, is when Kamala's teleprompter briefly failed, and she had no idea what to say. 

"Remember his number? 32. Today, we got 32 days until the election," she said, full of energy. And then the teleprompter failed, and their was a long, awkward pause, and Kamala had no idea what to say, and started to wing it. "So 32 days. 32 days. Okay. We got some business to do. We got some business to do. Alright. 32 days. And we know we will do it. And and this is gonna be a very tight race until the very end. This is gonna be a very tight race until the very end. We are the underdog, and we know we have some hard work ahead."

You can literally see the moment it happened by her facial expression. It's pure panic. 

Remember, she was delivering a scripted speech she’s given some version of countless times since becoming the Democratic nominee, yet she completely crumbled. Imagine someone running for president who can’t even think on their feet in such a situation. Does that inspire confidence in her ability to handle high-stakes negotiations with foreign leaders—especially our adversaries?

Trust the experts, and shut up

/

first, do no harm

Study: COVID-Vaxxed Kids SIX TIMES Likelier to Die Than Unvaxxed Peers

The ostensible takeaway, per the authors, of a poorly-publicized study from June of this year was that children vaccinated for COVID had much higher rates of asthma — almost double, in fact — post-COVID infection than their unvaccinated peers.
That’s compelling enough of a headline, but what should really have been the lede in any sane world got buried deep in the weeds.

Via Infection (medical journal):

Two cohorts of children aged 5 to 18 who underwent SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing were analyzed: unvaccinated children with and without COVID-19 infection, and vaccinated children with and without infection. Propensity score matching was used to mitigate selection bias, and hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI were calculated to assess the risk of new-onset asthma.

Our study found a significantly higher incidence of new-onset asthma in COVID-19 infected children compared to uninfected children, regardless of vaccination status. In Cohort 1, 4.7% of COVID-19 infected children without vaccination developed new-onset asthma, versus 2.0% in their non-COVID-19 counterparts within a year (HR = 2.26; 95% CI = 2.158–2.367). For Cohort 2, COVID-19 infected children with vaccination showed an 8.3% incidence of new-onset asthma, higher than the 3.1% in those not infected (HR = 2.745; 95% CI = 2.521–2.99). Subgroup analyses further identified higher risks in males, children aged 5–12 years, and Black or African American children. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the reliability of these findings.

The study highlights a strong link between COVID-19 infection and an increased risk of new-onset asthma in children, which is even more marked in those vaccinated. This emphasizes the critical need for ongoing monitoring and customized healthcare strategies to mitigate the long-term respiratory impacts of COVID-19 in children, advocating for thorough strategies to manage and prevent asthma amidst the pandemic.

Double the rate of asthma, sure, but wait — there’s still more!

Via Alex Berenson :

The study about Covid and asthma in American kids and teens has gone mostly unnoticed. It hasn’t been cited once since it was published in June.

Which may be why no one has raised an alarm over the stunning figures buried in its appendix about deaths among mRNA Covid-vaccinated kids.

They show that 354 of the 64,000 children and teenagers who received a Covid mRNA shot died within a year after vaccination - a death rate of almost six kids per 1,000.

In contrast, only 309 out of 320,000 unvaccinated kids died, fewer than one per 1,000.

would we lie to you?

It's not just the bosses, it's everyone in our fourth branch of government

/

As you read this, these same “know-better-than-you” administrators and experts are attempting, badly and calamitously, to respond to a natural disaster they’ve supposedly been planning for for decades. Our government is doing its best to turn us all into self-sufficient preppers and, ultimately, that’s probably a good thing. So next time you see one, thank a bureaucrat.

Biden’s agency bosses say Americans have ‘too much freedom’

The bosses of federal agencies were asked in a new Napolitan Institute survey about the “individual freedom” Americans have, and 51% said they have “somewhat” to “far too much freedom.”

But just 16% of voters agreed and 57% believe the government has too much control over their lives.

Democratic “swamp” managers felt the country has too much freedom at the highest levels in the survey, at 68%. Among Republican federal agency chiefs, just 33% agreed.

But the partisan bureaucrats were more in agreement when it came to choosing who is best at deciding if new regulations are needed, found the polling outfit headed by Scott Rasmussen.

“Fifty-four percent (54%) of government managers say that if, after carefully researching an important issue, they determine that a regulation is needed, yet voters overwhelmingly oppose it, they should follow their research and issue the regulation anyway. This includes 49% of Republican government managers and 60% of Democrats,” it said.

Unlike Democrats and Republicans in America, and even on Capitol Hill, partisans that work in the swamp generally think like the other, according to Napolitan’s latest poll of America’s 1% elitists.

“On many topics, there is a disturbing level of bi-partisan agreement among federal government managers. Fifty-three percent (53%) of Republican government managers and 48% of Democrats believe the federal government should be allowed to censor speech that is posted on social media platforms. Forty-three percent (43%) of ‘Elites’ and just 16% of voters share this view. Seventy-four percent of Republican government managers and 79% of Democrats favor banning private ownership of guns. This view is shared by 77% of ‘Elites,’ but just 36% of voters,” said the analysis.

Manufactured for Hollywood

/

Texans to Hollywood: "Don't dangle your dingle in our faces and demand we call it a vagina"

Will Ferrell regrets awkward Texas restaurant visit after co-star booed for trans rights toast

It happened while Ferrell and Steele, a former "Saturday Night Live" head writer, were filming their new Netflix documentary, "Will & Harper," which follows their 17-day road trip across the country "to bond and reintroduce Harper to the country as her true self" after Steele came out as transgender in 2022.

They received what they described as an unexpected and uncomfortable response from diners at a Texas restaurant after Steele mentioned the state hadn't done enough for trans rights, the New York Times reported. 

"I'm from Iowa, but I will raise a glass to your great state of Texas," Steele said to a receptive audience of diners at the Big Texan Steak Ranch in Amarillo, where Ferrell and Steele planned to attempt the restaurant's famous 72-ounce steak challenge. 

"I wish you guys would do more for trans rights in this state," Steele added, which silenced the cheers and was met with a few groans from the audience, Chron reported. 

"Cheers to Texas and trans rights, right?" Ferrell added. The toast didn't make it into the documentary, but Steele and Ferrell shared their responses to the moment afterward. 

That’s worth repeating: “The toast didn't make it into the documentary, but Steele and Ferrell ‘shared’ (how nice) their responses to the moment afterward. Pro Tip: If you want to make a film that “proves” Golden Retrievers are a vicious breed, poke one repeatedly with sharp sticks off-camera, then film its reaction.

"The room started to feel very wrong to me," Steele said in the film. "I was feeling a little like my transness was on display, I guess, and suddenly that sort of made me feel not great." 

So, they set out to make a film about friendship, how one male accepts his long-time friend’s decision to put on a dress and say “call me Shirley”. Fine; I’d hope I could be as accepting and tolerant if one of my own friends went that route (looking at you, Mick). But it’s obvious that the producers felt a need to introduce an element of oppression and intolerance into what otherwise is the standard Hollywood trope, a story of “boy meets (sort of a) girl. So they go to Texas to enter a steak-eating contest, but, instead of just doing that and waving to the audience, Miss Steele, with cameras rolling, stands up in front of crowd and deliberately provokes a reaction (“silence, mixed with a few groans”) that the director can include in the film (after deleting Steele’s toast and Ferrell’s own comments that prompted that reaction) and impress his fellow Hollywood swamp denizens and media sycophants. And, of course, it worked:

Time Magazine, aping the NYT, was “appalled and shocked”

[T]heir cross-country adventure between New York and L.A. (with stops that included Iowa, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Texas) eventually became the Josh Greenbaum-directed documentary Will & Harper, a nostalgic, heartfelt, and witty road movie, and one of the most beautiful films about friendship ever made. The film by Greenbaum (best known for the 2021 comedy Barb and Star Go to Vista Del Mar) organically captures the duo’s vibe, charged by similar temperaments and a sense of humor fully in sync ever since they met at Saturday Night Live in 1995.

The trip wasn’t always smooth sailing. Amid all the pleasant encounters and family visits, there was an experience at a steakhouse in Amarillo, Tex., where they were met with hostility. The transphobic social media attacks that came after, also included in the film, were equally painful. As Ferrell puts it, one of the themes of the movie is whether the country that Harper loves so much loves her back. The answer that the Amarillo experience offers is a distressing one.

And the critics ate it up

Wikipedia

Critical response

On the review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, 99% of 90 critics' reviews are positive, with an average rating of 7.9/10. The website's consensus reads: "Endearing and heartfelt, Will & Harper is an ode and testament to long-lasting love, acceptance and evolution within a friendship."[9] Metacritic, which uses a weighted average, assigned the film a score of 75 out of 100, based on 22 critics, indicating "generally favorable" reviews.[10]

The New York Times critic Manohla Dargis called the film, "A Transcendent Road Trip," and summarized that, "A documentary about Will Ferrell and his friend Harper Steele brought the house down" at the Sundance Film Festival.[11] At Collider, Taylor Gates rated this an 8 out of 10 and characterized it as a "must-watch", praising the principals' openness and the mixture of educational and entertainment elements, but critiquing the pacing.[12] The Daily Beast's Kevin Fallon opined that this film will save lives for being "brave and characteristically unusual".[13] Benjamin Lee of The Guardian rated this film 3 out of 5 stars, writing that "there are enough earned moments of piercing sadness and shaggy humour that those that feel more engineered can distract, the film trying to force itself into the structure of something it doesn’t need to be, pushing us away just after we’ve been pulled in close".[14] Lovia Gyarkye of The Hollywood Reporter stated that the film "works because, at its core, the doc is a tribute to Ferrell and Steele’s evolving friendship" and that the pair's "level of honesty keeps the conversations grounded and helps the documentary avoid turning Steele into a prop for Ferrell’s education".[15] Lauren Wissot of IndieWire graded this work a B−, stating that the narrative is "admirable and understandable" but "trapped in a mushy middle state, forever prevented from rising to the level of either great drama or great comedy".[16]

In a capsule review out of Sundance, Brian Tallerico of RogerEbert.com praised Greenbaum's direction and continued that the film shows "a pure, true companionship here that should serve as a reminder to call that person in your life who might need someone to talk to".[17] In Rolling Stone David Fear called Will & Harper "a portrait of a friendship and how the fundamentals of a deep and lasting bond doesn’t change even when the people within it do" that is "flawed" but "priceless".[18] Writing for United Press International, Fred Topel ended his review calling this "a touching journey with two friends sharing laughs that can help start more conversations amongst people Steele and Ferrell will never meet".[19] Peter Debruge of Variety wrote that "It can sound like a cliché to say that any given movie is what the world needs now, but Will & Harper earns that distinction. Struggling to recognize her own beauty in a society that often seems determined to deny her identity altogether, Steele brings the trans experience down to earth. Meanwhile, by accepting his fledgling gal pal on her own terms—and asking how to make her more comfortable in her own skin—Ferrell sets the best kind of example. We should all be so lucky as to have friends like these."[20] Bilge Ebiri of Vulture ended his review: "The film’s familiarity may well be part of its design. It clearly wants to help change hearts and minds, and find purchase with audiences that would otherwise avoid a movie with a subject like this."

Humbug.

Cops

/

When You Can't Lose Weight, Litigate! DOJ Wins Suit Against MD State Police 'Discriminatory' Fitness Test

According to the DOJ’s lawsuit, 81% of males and only 51% of females passed at least once.

“The rate at which female applicants passed the FFAT at least once is statistically significantly lower than the rate at which male applicants passed the FFAT at least once; and the female applicant pass rate is less than 80% of the male applicant pass rate,” the complaint read.

Unable to perform eighteen push-ups in one minute; something to ponder.

Is this settlement an acknowledgement that women are physically weaker than males? Reached for comment, Transgender Unqualified Sports Heroes — TUSH — spokesman Joe, “Call me Josephine”, Flabbycheeks declined comment.

As for blacks being a weaker race, we could ask the NFL. We could, but the DOJ won’t.

And of course, disappointed applicants could always just join the Army — they’ll take anyone.

Army Opens its Doors to Recruits Who Fail to Meet Initial Body Fat and Academic Standards Amid Recruiting Crisis

And now, for your viewing pleasure ….