This cartoon by Stilton Jarlsburg from the Travon Martin verdict last year is at once both sad and amusing. The amusing part is the exposure of the meaninglessness of President Obama’s “circle of compassion” speech (and Jarlsburg goes after the “trapezoid of meaningless rhetoric” and “the dodecahedron of decency.” But the sad part, of course, is the fact that this cartoon points to a deep underlying truth: President Obama got involved for all the wrong reasons. Rather than heal, he chose to inflame and divide.
Frequently, Fox News is attacked as having sued in court to prove that they have the right to lie and to distort the news. Here is a typical example:
“As a U.S. television entity, FOX went to court (AND WON) the right to lie to their viewing audience by way of a right-leaning SCOTUS’ verdict.”
Ralph Nader is an interesting character. He is famous as a crusader, but like Don Quixote in “Man of La Mancha,” his crusades are not always against real villains. And like Quixote, his exploits have been built up in stories so that reality no longer matters much.
Through the State Department — an organization working at cross purposes to American interests since before the first jihadist war in 1805 — US taxpayers are funding a hard-left journalist group. The group operates in 90 countries, and the State Deparment claimed that “[s]ince 2009, Internews implemented more than 25 projects around the world for USAID.” They say that they’ve trained more than 10,000 journalists in the last year, which I would wager includes folks like the Benghazi Insider I mentioned a few days ago.
What’s the difference between 110,000,000 people and 5,000 people?
In one way of looking at it, one of these numbers is 22,000 times as large as the other. But the real difference in these two groups of Americans that have had their phone records obtained by the US Government without prior court approval, is probable cause. From the US Constitution’s Fourth Amendment:
The New Yorker has a new issue out in which they talk about the terrible drought of 2012 and its effect upon corn crops — in the context, oddly, of 2013 being the best year in history for US corn crops. After opening with how great the harvest is right now, they talk about disaster last year:
In 2012, drought struck nearly eighty per cent of the nation’s farmland, and the growing season was the hottest and driest in decades.
That 80% number sounds bad. How bad was it? They use this anecdotal bit made to sound like a factoid:
“Last year was the worst corn harvest in a century.”
All because of climate change and “extreme weather” of course. There are several things about this claim that struck me, right off:
From the carefully released snippets of his “note” and “literature” it would seem that Paul Ciancia, the LAX TSA shooter, is part of the Sovereign Citizen movement. The news media has not, so far, mentioned this phrase. Instead, they simply describe him over and over as “anti-government” — intending to evoke the Tea Party, also portrayed as “anti-government” (it is not, of course).
In December of 2011, a fellow named Jules Manson made comments on his Facebook page against president Obama and his family. Those comments were quite vulgar and arguably “incitement to violence” — and thus the news media decided he must be a Tea Party member. He had run for a minor political office in southern California, and since he was a Mexican immigrant, activist for atheist causes, and had written for the DemocratExaminer, his Tea Party credentials were impeccable.
The three outfits he wrote for (including a fiercely libertarian site) seem to have disassociated themselves with him before that incident, so apparently something was going on in his life … before it got much worse.
Jules Manson became notorious instantly — and his immediate apology did not stave off a visit from the Secret Service. I wrote about this at the time, looking into his supposed “Tea Party” links, here — with a follow up here. As usual, the media got this story completely wrong, but it fit their narrative so out it went. I was informed later that my own research contributed to some of them issuing retractions, or toning down the “Tea Party is racist!” rhetoric. Mr. Manson himself contacted me, but did not follow up when I responded. He had a lot going on at that point, I’m sure.
All of that was in 2011. In the last few days, a surprising number of people have been coming to my site looking at the Jules Manson reporting. Puzzled, I looked around: This is being run as a brand new, October 2013 story, by a variety of outlets — complete with the “Tea Party is racist” headlines. And I’ve discovered that several people posted links to my site at these outlets — whereupon those links (which generated the visits that caught my attention) were killed.
When you have a story to tell, the truth is inconvenient indeed. Here are some headlines obtained by a search for “Jules Manson” limiting the search to the past week. Note the emphasis on Tea Party, including “Tea Party darling” — but few indeed give any hint that this story is from two years ago. In some cases, the dates have been blanked out. The story is being treated as breaking news:
For decades, the Soviet Union and the United States held each other at bay in an uneasy stalemate. It was an active, “hot” war despite the “cold war” moniker, and each side lose thousands of troops. But it never broke into a nuclear conflagration, because each side realized the destruction that would come from it. And that once begun, it could not be undone. The Soviet and American leaders were, in a sense, much alike. Neither side would risk it, though both got very good at the brinkmanship involved.
This concept does not work at all if one side are suicide bombers. They plan to die; it’s merely a question of doing the most damage on the way out.
A brief note on a telling dichotomy:
When the left describes something they don’t like about Christianity or Judaism, they are not shy about it. They’ll even pin bombings or shootings on “Christian terrorists” or “Tea party” people ( which to many on the left seems synonymous), before any evidence is in hand at all. But they are often strangely gently and circumspect when it comes to handling Islam: