Tag Archives: culture

More Political Censorship

Posted on by
Reply

Alphabet‘s CEO Sundar Pichai strikes again. Alphabet wholly owns Google (of which Pichai also is CEO), and Google wholly owns YouTube.

Pichai has just engaged—again—in political censorship:

Social media giant YouTube took down an interview of Democrat presidential candidate Robert F Kennedy, Jr, claiming that chemicals in the water are turning kids transgender.

What makes this especially insidious is that Kennedy is a political candidate for the Progressive-Democratic Party’s nomination for President. Pichai is actively putting his thumb on the scale in an American election by censoring one of the candidates. His excuse for this, through his carefully anonymous Google spokesperson, is this:

YouTube “removed a video from the Jordan Peterson channel for violating YouTube‘s general vaccine misinformation policy, which prohibits content that alleges that vaccines cause chronic side effects, outside of rare side effects that are recognized by health authorities.”

Therein lies an additional act of censorship: no one is allowed to question vaccines (which is not what Kennedy was talking about with his allegations of those chemicals, anyway); the science is settled, Damn it!

Pichai objects to open debate and to the correction of false, mis-, or erroneous information by the provision of other information via free discussion and debate. His behavior provides yet another reason to heavily modify, or remove entirely, social media’s Section 230 protections. Social media has gotten too big, become too central to our nation’s public square, to be allowed to continue to abuse that protection.

“He needs to be shot”

Posted on by
Reply

That’s the threat [skip ahead to ~3:30] the Progressive-Democratic Party’s US Virgin Islands Delegate to the House of Representatives, Stacey Plaskett, said on MSNBC Sunday about Party’s political opponent, former President Donald Trump (R).

She changed her phrasing right away and then followed her threat with her pro forma claim that Trump “should have his day in court,” but that’s just her claim that Trump should have his fast trial and prompt firing squad. What concrete, publicly accessible action has Plaskett taken since to indicate that she didn’t really mean her statement that Trump should be murdered?

This is the stuff of lower tier third world countries where political opponents routinely are murdered, when they’re not simply thrown in jail. And then murdered.

This is what the Progressive-Democratic Party wants to inflict on their political opponents here in our nation. Wait—she’s not typical of Party? It’s been three days since Plaskett made her threat. How many Party politicians have spoken publicly in repudiation or rejection of her threat? Their silence is their roaring approval.

Joe Biden and Women

Posted on by
Reply

And no, I’m not writing about the Progressive-Democrat President’s penchant for sniffing women’s and little girl’s hair. This is much more general than that.

Biden tweeted out his congratulations for a Las Vegas National Hockey League Stanley Cup victory, tweeting that the team’s win last week was

the first major professional franchise in such a proud American city.

Never mind that the Las Vegas Aces of the WNBA won the league championship last year.

It’s clear that Biden disdains women and women’s sports so thoroughly that he doesn’t even recognize women’s teams exist. Which may be why he’s so enthusiastic about allowing men to play in women’s sports.

One More Reason…

Posted on by
Reply

…to disband—not merely defund—the Federal Bureau of Investigation, relocate the bureau’s [sic] databases and forensics labs to small towns in the Midwest, reassign the line agents to the Marshals Service and Secret Service, and to return all other FBI personnel from field office agent in charge on up through Director to the private sector—not to any other assignment in the Federal government—and reallocate the FBI’s putative budget dollars to other uses, including payroll funds to the Marshals Service and the Secret Service to cover those added agents.

Senator Ted Cruz (R, TX), during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, quizzed FBI Deputy Director Paul Abbate regarding an FD-1023, alleged recordings between a Burisma executive and Hunter Biden and between that executive and then-Vice President Joe Biden (D), and FBI supposed investigations of the allegations therein. Abbate’s repeated answer was nothing but FBI stonewalling:

I’m not going to comment on that, Senator.

And

I’m just not going to comment on information we’ve received [regarding] investigations or other matters.

And

This is an area that I’m not going to get into with you, Senator.

In the course of all of this, Abbate uttered the FBI’s Stonewall of Stonewalls:

I’m going to answer within the parameters that we operate in.

Those are FBI parameters, and for the most part, they’re useful. But the overarching, the controlling, parameter within which the FBI operates is the requirement to be responsive to Congressional oversight questions—in the present case, to be responsive to Senate Judiciary Committee oversight questions.

Congressional oversight requirements supersede FBI internal procedures, as Congressional oversight requirements do all Executive Branch agency internal procedures.

The FBI has long since outlived its legitimacy.

Libraries, Book Banning, and Funding

Posted on by
Reply

Illinois’ Progressive-Democrat politicians, including the State’s Governor, JB Pritzker, have produced a law that will withhold State funds—Illinois citizens’ tax monies already remitted—from libraries that “ban books.”

The only books being banned, though, are books on the subjects of LGBTQ+, the gay culture, and transgenderism, including books nominally on these subjects that contain graphic sexual images, that are inappropriate for young children—and they’re not even being banned, just withheld from children too young to read them or to be exposed to pornographic imagery.

Illinois Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias actually insists with a straight face that the threat to withhold State funds from libraries that move to withhold access by children to these sexualizing books is not really a matter of State centralization of librarians’ decisions.

Local librarians [he says] “have the educational and professional experience to determine what’s in circulation. Let them decide.”

Sure. They can decide as long as their decisions are approved by the State.

This is an example of the price organizations pay when they accept government funding. The strings attached are more akin to chains.

These libraries need to adjust their budgets and funding sources to eliminate the need for Illinois government-allocated dollars and go right ahead withholding from children, on age-based criteria, sexualizing, transgenderizing books.