Monthly Archives: May 2017

Photo: Michael Tran /FilmMagic

Ann Coulter believes in the free exchanges of ideas. Her enemies do not.

Ann Coulter believes in the free exchanges of ideas. Her enemies do not.

Because the California National Guard couldnt be mobilized in time, Ann Coulter had to withdraw from giving a speech at Berkeley.

If you take it seriously, thats the import of UC Berkeleys decision to do everything it could to keep the conservative provocateur from speaking on campus over safety concerns.

If somebody brings weapons, theres no way to block off the site or to screen them, the chancellor of the university said of Coulters plan to go ahead and speak at an open-air forum after the school canceled a scheduled talk.

The administrator made it sound as if Coulter would have been about as safe at Berkeley as she would have been addressing a meeting of the international criminal gang MS-13 and he might have been right.

We have entered a new, much less metaphorical phase of the campus-speech wars. Were beyond hissing or disinviting. Were no longer talking about the hecklers veto but the masked-thugs-who-will-burn-trash-cans-and-assault-you-and-your-entourage veto.

Coulter is a rhetorical bomb thrower, which is an entirely different thing from being a real bomb thrower. Coulter has never tried to shout down a speaker she doesnt like. She hasnt thrown rocks at cops. She isnt an arsonist. She offers up provocations that she gamely defends in almost any setting with arguments that people are free to accept, or reject, or attempt to correct.

In other words, in the Berkeley context, shes the liberal. She believes in the efficacy of reason and in the free exchanges of ideas. Her enemies do not.

Indeed, the budding fascism that progressives feared in the Trump years is upon us, although not in the form they expected. It is represented by the black-clad shock troops of the anti-fa movement who are violent, intolerant and easily could be mistaken for the street fighters of the extreme right in 1930s Europe. That they call themselves anti-fascist speaks to a colossal lack of self-awareness.

It is incumbent on all responsible progressives to reject this movement, and just as important the broader effort to suppress controversial speech. This is why former Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Deans comments about hate speech not being protected by the First Amendment were so alarming. In Deans defense, he had no idea what he was talking about, but he was effectively making himself the respectable voice of the rock throwers.

Deans view was that Berkeley is within its rights to make the decision that it puts their campus in danger if they have her there. This justification, advanced by the school itself, is profoundly wrongheaded.

It is an inherently discriminatory standard, since the Berkeley College Republicans arent given to smashing windows and throwing things when an extreme lefty shows up on campus, which is a near-daily occurrence.

It would deny Coulter something she has a right to do (speak her mind on the campus of a public university) in reaction to agitators doing things they dont have a right to do (destroy property, among other acts of mayhem).

It would suppress an intellectual threat, i.e., a dissenting viewpoint, and reward a physical threat. This is perverse.

For now there is a consensus in favor of free speech in the country that is especially entrenched in the judiciary. The anti-fa and other agitators arent going to change that anytime soon. But they could effectively make it too burdensome for certain speakers to show up on campus, and over time more Democrats like Dean could rationalize this fact by arguing that so-called hate speech doesnt deserve First Amendment protection.

So, it isnt enough for schools like UC Berkeley to say that they value free speech, yet do nothing to punish disrupters and throw up their hands at the task of providing security for controversial speakers. If everyone else gets safe space at UC Berkeley, Coulter deserves one. If the anti-fa are willing to attack free speech through illegal force, the authorities should be willing to defend it by lawful force.

Heck, if necessary, call out the National Guard.

comments.lowry@nationalreview.com

Visit link:

Ann Coulter, the liberal - mySanAntonio.com

Bill Mahertook aim at liberals who couldnt bring themselves to vote for Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election on Friday.

The Real Time host asked the liberal purists who said Clinton was the lesser of two evils how they were feeling now that President Donald Trump had celebrated his landmark first 100 days in office last Saturday.

This isnt about reliving the last election or my great love for Clinton, which never was, but this is about winning the next election, said Maher. And that begins with learning the difference between an imperfect friend and a deadly enemy.

After noting how various liberal politicians, activists and commentators had said that either a Trump or Clinton administration would be a disaster, Maher asked whether conservatives would now control the Supreme Court if the just-as-evil-Hillary had won.

Just wait until the 5 to 4 decisions start rolling in, gutting unions, making it harder for minorities to vote, siding with polluters, overturning abortion rights, he said. Then maybe youll join me in saying to the liberal purists, go fuck yourselves with a locally grown organic cucumber.

Check out the full segment above.

View original post here:

Bill Maher Shreds 'Liberal Purists' Who Said Hillary Clinton Was 'Lesser Of Two Evils' - Huffington post (press release) (blog)

Whats the most liberal city in America?

Would you say San Francisco?

Berkeley? New York? Los Angeles? Chicago? Washington, D.C.?

You could say, All the urban areas in America are liberal. Take those cities out of America and youve got a very genuine conservative America with lots of open space, no smog, few commuting problems, a Republican utopia.

Of course, I didnt say that. But I know what you were thinking.

But arguably the most liberal city in America is none of those I previously mentioned. It could very well be Boston. When you factor in nearby Provincetown, Cambridge and Amherst, its solidly progressive, which, to me, is a misnomer. Liberalism and leftism has nothing to do with progress. It is a throwback to the idea that government knows best. Government is God to liberals.

What we shouldnt expect in such a bastion of liberalism as Boston is crude, disgusting, boorish, indecent racism.

Yet that is exactly what we witnessed last weekend in Boston when the Red Sox hosted the Baltimore Orioles.

Some Red Sox fans threw bags of peanuts at the Orioles black star center fielder Adam Jones while shouting racial epithets.

This is 2017, by the way. Its a long time after Jackie Robinson endured this kind of treatment back in 1947 70 years ago when he broke Major League Baseballs color barrier.

I suppose you could say this stuff can happen anywhere and thats fair. It only takes a few rotten apples to spoil the barrel. And one cannot condemn an entire city because of the actions of a few racist freaks.

But, as a baseball fan, I can tell you even black Boston players have said theyve heard these slurs. Its bizarre. But it confirms my theory that the most racist constituency in America is actually found among liberals. Anecdotally, Ive seen it all my life.

It comes in three forms black racism, standard anti-black racism and, perhaps most insidious of all, is the kind of white paternalism that manifests itself as what my colleague Erik Rush has dubbed Negrophilia.

(This is a theory that has never been fully appreciated. Rush Limbaugh has recently been making the case that Barack Obama won two terms as president largely because white voters were so sick of hearing about their own racism. They wanted to end that talk, but found only that they heard more of it.)

In any case, it seems strange that Boston baseball fans would be so abusive to star black players when some of their most beloved players have been black like the recently retired David Ortiz, or Big Papi, as he was affectionately known.

Yet, its undeniable that its there right under the surface. All it takes is a few beers and a few defeats at the hands of an opposing rival for it to manifest itself.

Anyway, let me conclude by saying the behavior in Boston was inexcusable.

As Jones tweeted after the game: Boo me, tell me I suck just leave the racial stuff out of it.

Thats good advice for Boston baseball fans, and its equally good advice for the Democratic Party, which has done nothing to end racism in America with all its finger-pointing and hand-wringing. Not since the Ku Klux Klan served as the military wing of the party has Americas racial divide been more obvious and pronounced.

Get Joseph Farahs new book, The Restitution of All Things: Israel, Christians, and the End of the Age, and learn about the Hebrew roots of the Christian faith and your future in Gods Kingdom

Media wishing to interview Joseph Farah, please contact media@wnd.com.

Read the original here:

BETWEEN THE LINES - WND.com

A local election breakthrough for the Liberal Democrats fuelled by pro-European Union supporters angry about Brexit failed to materialise with overall losses of 37 seats.

Despite the poor showing, the partys vote share increased, prompting the party to claim it could win scores of seats at the general election on June 8.

The news came as the LibDems announced plans to put 1p on income tax to raise an extra 6billion to spend on hospitals and and social care.

Party president Baroness Brinton said the party was breathing down Labour's necks with a projected national vote of 18 per cent, up four per cent, against 27 per cent for Jeremy Corbyn's party.

Party sources said that, if repeated at the general election on June 8, seats from Bath and Cambridge to Cardiff Central and St Albans would fall to the LibDems.

Some forecasts said the party could win as many as 27 seats, treble the partys nine seats in the last parliament.

Lady Brinton said: We have halved the gap on Labour in just one night and scored our best national election result in seven years.

Labour is collapsing and we will stand up for people to provide the strong opposition this country needs.

Continue reading here:

Liberal Democrats pledge to put 1p on income tax to pay for NHS as local election fightback falters - Telegraph.co.uk

Fake news purveyors circulated a story saying former Fox News Channel host Bill O'Reilly had been beaten unconscious in New York on May 4, 2017. (AP photo)

Ousted Fox News host Bill OReilly had already taken a drubbing over sexual harassment allegations, but fake news purveyors then started circulating a false story that hed been beaten unconscious, too.

"Bill OReilly in critical condition after being attacked by tolerant liberals," read a headline on a May 4, 2017, story at DailyUSAUpdate.com. We found the story posted on other websites, as well.

The article was flagged by Facebook users as being potentially fabricated, as part of the social media sites efforts to winnow fake news from users news feeds.

The post which again, is fake said OReilly was buying bagels in New York when three men and two women began complaining about his treatment of women.

OReilly was forced off Fox News Channel on April 19 and lost his show, The OReilly Factor, after multiple reports of sexual harassment. The New York Times had reported the network paid about $13 million to settle claims.

The confrontation turned aggressive when the liberals (as identified in the story) attacked OReilly, dragging him into the street and kicking him until "until he was unconscious and bleeding."

The attackers ran off, the post said, leaving OReilly with four broken ribs and a punctured lung. He possibly suffered "a cardiac event," the story said.

Except none of the details about an attack are true. There is no apparent way to contact DailyUSAUpdate.com administrators, who have hidden the sites registration information.

There were no reports from legitimate media sources that this event occurred, in any case. Surely such an attack would have been widely covered.

The hoax came about a week after other reports that Ted Nugent had been killed in a hunting accident and Sarah Palin had been run off the road and was in a coma.

The fake OReilly story originally came from TheLastLineOfDefense.org, a parody website that has been the source of several fake news stories that weve previously checked.

TheLastLineOfDefense.org publishes bogus posts keyed to topics designed to inflame conservatives. The articles quite often end up being passed around on multiple websites, often without an indication that they are fake.

TheLastLineOfDefense.org doesnt immediately indicate that any of its stories are fake, but its About Us link notes that "all articles should be considered satirical and any and all quotes attributed to actual people complete and total baloney."

And thats what we call this fake report baloney.

Actually, we rate it Pants On Fire!

Here is the original post:

Fake news says Bill O'Reilly beaten unconscious by liberal New Yorkers - PolitiFact (blog)

Do you believe in hoax after hoax after hoax?

Bryan R.Smith/AFP/Getty Images

A daily roundup of the biggest stories in right-wing media.

Shortly after the presidential election last November, vandals struck a Bean Blossom, Indiana, church, defacing it with graffiti featuring a swastika, along with the phrases Heil Trump and Fag Church. The trouble, as many conservative media sites reported late this week, is that the perpetrator wasnt actually a Trump supporter. To the contrary, it was a liberal member of the congregation.

As Independent Journal Review explained: "Six months later, the culprit has been discovered: the same organist who originally reported the graffiti on the side of the church." That organist, George Nathaniel Stang, reportedly confessed to his actions, claiming that they had been a "false flag" designed to help galvanize resistance to the then newly elected Trump. "Stang admitted to wanting to 'mobilize a movement' but did not expect the national media coverage that the incident received," IJR wrote.

Many outlets stressed Stangs sexuality when discussing the hoax. Gay Choir Director Admits to Spray-Painting Heil Trump Graffiti on His Church After Election, read a headline on Glenn Becks the Blaze. Though the accompanying article also brought up this point, it did so only in passing. The sites commenters, however, focused on it, variously suggesting that it indicated Stangs church was not really a church at all and that since they have a gay choir director, they certainly arent doing everything right, among other observations. Breitbart likewise referred to Stang as a gay activist as well as a Hillary supporter.

In an article titled Yet Another Hate Crime Turns Out to Be a Hoax, the Daily Caller connected the arrest to what it saw as larger trends in the representation of hate crimes. The vandalism was mentioned in 15 articles by [the Washington Post], yet, as of publication time, they have yet to write about Stangs arrest, it reported. Noting that CNN had also not yet published an updated story on the topic, the site stated: "In the wake of Trump's election there has been a surge in reported hate crimes, however, they frequently end up being hoaxes." (In the month after the election alone, the Southern Poverty Law Center recorded 1,094 bias-related incidents. The Daily Caller says that it reported on five hoaxes during that same general time period.)

An opinion survey accompanying the Daily Callers article asked readers whether they Think There Is an Epidemic of Hate Crime Hoaxes in America. Completing the survey automatically enrolls voters in "Daily Caller news updates free of charge."

Several conservative outlets mocked Cher for a series of tweetswhich Fox News website called bizarre and unhingedin which she worried that there would be no support for conditions like asthma, from which she suffers, under the AHCA. Noting, "Cher was an outspoken supporter of Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential election," that Fox News post mostly took the opportunity to revisit many of her stranger Twitter moments.

Though Cher seemed to be using her own illness as an example (and suggesting that it was just one of many conditions that would be endangered by the bill), Breitbart also wrote that she was "lamenting that the bills signature into law would threaten to cut funding to treat her asthma." Embracing this framing, some of the sites commenters mocked the singer and actress for believing that the government should pay for health care. They weren't alone in that understanding: "Isnt it about time Cher paid her fair share?" asked Gateway Pundit before pointing out that the pop star is "worth $305 million" and suggesting that she will be just fine.

Posts mocking Cher also performed well on Facebook:

Go here to see the original:

Today in Conservative Media: A Liberal False Flag - Slate Magazine (blog)