|
Our country deserves to be admired, honored and celebrated — not maligned with vicious lies. At this time of enormous threat to the core principles of our nation and the very foundations of our system of government, it is crucial that Republicans and conservatives across Nevada stand together and speak with one voice in defense of our ideals.
We all must fight for the American way of life.
ITEM #2: Those who watched or read a transcript of President Trump’s Mt. Rushmore speech know it was uplifting, patriotic and fitting.
Naturally, the mainstream “news” media hated it — and even went out of their way to lie about it.
Writing for the Wall Street Journal, Holman W. Jenkins, Jr., shares one of the more obnoxious examples of absurdly biased coverage of the President’s speech:
“Every American, regardless of how he or she feels about Donald Trump, should read his July 3 speech at Mount Rushmore and then the Washington Post account of the speech by Robert Costa and Philip Rucker. The Post account begins: ‘President Trump’s unyielding push to preserve Confederate symbols and the legacy of white domination, crystallized by his harsh denunciation of the racial justice movement Friday night at Mount Rushmore …’
“Except that Mr. Trump made no reference to the Confederacy or any of its symbols. His only reference to the Civil War was to Abraham Lincoln and the abolition of slavery as a fulfillment of the American Revolution.”
Dishonest reporting from the Washington Post? Who’d have guessed?
ITEM #3: The Las Vegas Review-Journal reports:
“President Donald Trump announced the arrest of key figures of the MS-13 international gang Wednesday in New York and Nevada and said the Department of Justice would seek the death penalty for MS-13 members convicted of capital crimes.
“‘We have the MS-13 leader on charges of terrorism — that’s a first,’ Trump said during an Oval Office meeting attended by Nevada U.S. Attorney Nick Trutanich.”
Trutanich, you may recall, served as chief of staff in the Nevada Attorney General’s Office when Morning in Nevada PAC President Adam Laxalt was the state AG.
Much credit is owed to President Trump, Trutanich, and members of our law enforcement community for securing this important victory for public safety.
Let’s not forget that the Democrats’ presumptive nominee for President, Joe Biden, is pushing for open-border policies and taxpayer-funded healthcare for illegal immigrants, such as MS-13 gang members. Here in Nevada and across our country, Democrats want to defund our law enforcement agencies.
Let’s also remember that for two consecutive legislative sessions, Nevada Democrats have pushed legislation to turn us into a Sanctuary State.
This is madness. These kinds of busts only occur if we reject those dangerous policies that would put Nevadans at risk. We must continue to do so at every turn.
ITEM #4: We’ve had much to say about the New York Times’ 1619 Project, the series of anti-American essays arguing that the chief motivation behind our nation’s founding was the preservation of slavery.
The project has met with much criticism for its rampant inaccuracies, with even its point person being ultimately compelled to concede that the project’s central premise was wrong.
The latest revelation in this saga exposes a pretty heavy dose of — shock! — hypocrisy on the Times’ part. John Bickley of the Daily Wire reports:
“According to estimates from marketing intelligence platform Pathmatics, the Times spent around $65 million over the course of the last twelve months in Facebook advertising for all of its various promotional campaigns. A review of just three ads promoting the 1619 Project over the course of about two months in Fall 2019 estimates a spend of around $3 million. For three ads. Is it any wonder that the 1619 Project became one of the most talked-about pieces of pseudo-history in American history?”
This would be fine in and of itself, if not for the Times’ efforts, as Bickley puts it, in waging a "massive campaign to pressure social media giants into restricting freedom of information — particularly dissemination from sources other than mainstream outlets."
Free speech for me, but not for thee.
Bickley sums it up nicely:
“As it turns out, the Times isn’t worried about money and politics on Facebook. They’re simply trying to dominate the system themselves, barring all others.”
ITEM #5: The unabashed left-wing bias of the New York Times has become too much for at least one writer.
Bari Weiss, a self-described centrist who worked as an op-ed staff writer and editor, has posted a resignation letter online explaining her departure from the paper.
The entire letter is well worth a read, as it lays out many of the problems plaguing not just the “paper of record” but so much of the modern-day “news” media. Here’s one excerpt, on the backlash Weiss received for daring to challenge the leftist dogma that predominates among the Times’ staffers:
“My own forays into Wrongthink have made me the subject of constant bullying by colleagues who disagree with my views. They have called me a Nazi and a racist; I have learned to brush off comments about how I’m ‘writing about the Jews again.’ Several colleagues perceived to be friendly with me were badgered by coworkers. My work and my character are openly demeaned on company-wide Slack channels where masthead editors regularly weigh in. There, some coworkers insist I need to be rooted out if this company is to be a truly ‘inclusive’ one, while others post ax emojis next to my name. Still other New York Times employees publicly smear me as a liar and a bigot on Twitter with no fear that harassing me will be met with appropriate action. They never are.
“There are terms for all of this: unlawful discrimination, hostile work environment, and constructive discharge. I’m no legal expert. But I know that this is wrong.”
Weiss proceeds to directly call the Times out on its left-wing editorial bias, noting that, “If a person’s ideology is in keeping with the new orthodoxy, they and their work remain unscrutinized. ... Online venom is excused so long as it is directed at the proper targets. ... And if, every now and then, [a writer] succeeds in getting a piece published that does not explicitly promote progressive causes, it happens only after every line is carefully massaged, negotiated and caveated.”
In sum:
“The paper of record is, more and more, the record of those living in a distant galaxy.”
No doubt the intolerant left-wingers who run the Times circus are cheering Weiss’ departure. They’ve succeeded in effectively forcing out another one of the non-conformists, the same way they got the Times to disavow the op-ed by U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton it had published just last month.
Which means the emboldened staffers, and therefore the paper in general, will only grow more hostile to dissenting views. That’s regrettable, of course, but bravo to Weiss for having the courage to speak up.
ITEM #6: Speaking of ideological conformity, Corey A. DeAngelis of the Reason Foundation recently tweeted about a survey conducted by the Harvard Crimson on the political persuasions of the Harvard University faculty.
The results:
Liberal: 80%
Moderate: 19%
Conservative: 1%
And here is how Harvard’s faculty voted in the 2016 presidential election:
Hillary Clinton: 73%
Donald Trump: 2%
Of course, this overwhelming predominance of left-wing viewpoints is common on campuses across the country. (Morning in Nevada PAC President Adam Laxalt encountered much the same situation while attending Georgetown University Law Center.)
Again, it’s a lamentable situation. But it’s good to see the bias getting exposed.
ITEM #7: Want another example of how mail-in voting undermines election integrity and leads to chaos?
New York 1 reports:
“After more than two weeks since the New York Primary, the city Board of Elections on Wednesday finally began tallying absentee ballots. But the process does not come without controversy.
“The BOE faces a snail-paced process as it deals with an unprecedented number of absentee ballots, due to the coronavirus pandemic, more than 403,000 ballots. Moreover, thousands of voters may not have their mail-in ballots counted, despite meeting the June 23rd postmark deadline.
“Brooklyn Assembly Member Rodneyse Bichotte told NY1 that many ballots might be thrown out because of the postmarking issues.
“‘What we found was that there were a number of ballots that were sent through the post office, but were not postmarked. In the statute, the board of elections is not to validate any absentee ballots that are not postmarked that we received after the 23rd. So that becomes the problem,’ she said.
“Bichotte, who has championed election reform, said that about four percent of the mail-in ballots may be thrown out.”
Ari Fleischer tweeted in response:
“Almost 20,000 ballots might be thrown out because the postal service failed to postmark envelopes.
“Better hope the Nov election is not close. ‘No postmark’ vs. ‘Every vote counts’. Anyone want to bet close states will be pressured to count these votes?”
Cue the Democrats and their left-wing media enablers, insisting there’s nothing at all to see here.
NOTABLE QUOTES
“Perhaps more than anything, the millions of Americans who have voted with their feet, fleeing tyranny elsewhere in the world, to seek freedom in this country across the centuries, more effectively demolish the left’s anti-American narrative than mere rhetoric ever could.” ― Morning in Nevada PAC President Adam Laxalt
"The integrity of our elections shouldn’t be a partisan issue, but unfortunately, Democrats have turned it into one." ― Justin Clark
|
