Nazi normalizing, civil heat, neutrality SJW, and the Pocahontas Pickle

The New York Times’ Nazi story goes off the rails By Tammy Bruce – “they were right to be appalled at what they were reading, but they were wrong about what the The New York Times’ agenda really was.”

“The arrogance of the legacy media doesn’t begin and end with biased coverage of existing events; it also involves stories meant to convince Americans of something about themselves and their neighbors which is ugly and untrue.

Their latest? A remarkable piece of agitprop, in the form of a profile of a neo-Nazi who helped organize the white supremacist contingent of the Nazi and antifa Charlottesville Confederate statue demonstrations.

The Times’ agenda wasn’t to generate sympathy for the Nazi, it was to inject into the public discourse the notion that the average American was, and could actually be, a literal Nazi. Without you knowing. It was a story meant to change, in the most horrific of ways, how Americans think about their neighbors. It was meant to sow paranoia and division.

For years, people who do not pay allegiance to the liberal narrative have been condemned as Nazis. President Trump and his supporters are accused regularly. This favorite accusation of the left is meant to shut down debate and isolate the nonconformist, the challenger of orthodoxy.

The Times’ effort to reframe reality as a Nazi America backfired. And big time.

The Times knows how awful it is to agitate for more division, as they work to convince their readers that Americans are awful, disgusting racists masquerading as your next-door neighbor.

Yet, we now have The New York Times, admittedly, trying to convince people that “hate and extremism have become far more normal in American life than many of us want to think,” when the opposite is true. Our becoming a better country has ruined many political agendas, but it’s dangerous when some attempt to artificially recreate what we have worked so hard to banish.

From cold to hot civil war? By Angelo M. Codevilla – “The increasing energy going into the intractable issues that divide Americans is producing a vicious cycle naturally tending toward violence.”

The Pocahontas Pickle has struck nerves. The President tossed an arrow and it hit a bulls eye. There is US News, the Investor’s Business Daily, Don Surber, American Thinker, and Fox News. Jaun Williams stepped into it on The Five by spouting the party line that Trump was a racist. There are many who see that calling the President a racist, biggoted, homophobe, dumb, unfit, facist is, perhaps, just making yourself a tool and a fool to be played by Trump.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai Calls Out Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Silicon Valley for Censorship and Internet Content Manipulation… by sundance – “Chairman Pai righteously called out Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and other platform control agents for being ideologically biased, and using their platforms to target their ideological opposition.”

“This debate needs, our culture needs, a more informed discussion about public policy. We need quality information, not hysteria, because hysteria takes us to unpleasant, if not dangerous places. We can disagree on policy. But we shouldn’t demonize, especially when all of us share the same goal of a free and open Internet.

when you get past the wild accusations, fearmongering, and hysteria, here’s the boring bottom line: the plan to restore Internet freedom would return us to the light touch, market-based approach under which the Internet thrived. And that’s why I am asking my colleagues to vote for it on December 14.”

One law professor’s overview of the confusing net neutrality debate by Orin Kerr – “The most confounding aspect of the contemporary net neutrality discussion to me is the social meanings that the concept has taken on. … The most notable aspect is that net neutrality has become a social justice cause.” Kerr posted the explanation of the topic he received from Gus Hurwitz. It explains the debate and even part of the argument and notes some of the arguments more interesting features.

“Progressive activist groups of all stripes have come to believe that net neutrality is essential to and allied with their causes. I do not know how this happened – but it is frustrating, because net neutrality is likely adverse to many of their interests.

The last comment that I will make is how I think about this entire issue: it’s just the latest example of a fight between bilateral media oligopolists. “Big content” and “big distribution” have always fought over how to split the rents they extract from consumers, users have always distrusted distributors, and content providers have always used this to their advantage. From this perspective, the net neutrality rules are pure rent seeking by a content/edge industry that had largely captured the previous FCC.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson – Speech and Questions, The Wilson Center – Washington DC… by sundance – “Secretary of State Rex Tillerson delivered a speech today outlining the State department engagements throughout the world.”

“The speech was delivered right into the belly-of-the-progressive-beast, with an audience filled with limo-liberals. However, the eloquence and articulation of policy by T-Rex makes him a formidable adversary for the ideological opposition.

It’s an hour well worth our time, with transcript included below:

Case shows judges matter by Don Surber – “I keep bringing up judicial appointments because unfortunately the courts have become the dominant branch of the federal government.” McConnell has been taking a lot of heat but on this topic, he is a key warrior.

“Again, this is Mitch McConnell’s doing. He refused to take votes on Obama’s appointees for two years. He bet on having a Republican president and a Republican Senate.

The trend towards a judicial oligarchy as typified by the efforts to veto the President’s national security efforts is one of the more putrid swamp pools. It is being drained, too.

Comments are closed.