Does God exist ?
- Lots of gods exist; which one do you mean?
- I am God.
- We are all gods.
- Some of us will become gods.
Does God exist ?
- Lots of gods exist; which one do you mean?
- I am God.
- We are all gods.
- Some of us will become gods.
The Pro-Life Democrats are in a tough spot. Most of their colleagues are gone. They could hold their caucus in a Prius. Justice Democrats and Emily’s List are looking to fund primary challengers against them.
The Democrat Party is the Party of Death. There is no room any more for a pro-life Democrat. Abortion is a sacrament of the Left, and the Party demands loyalty to a core principle. In this case the core principle is killing babies. The murderous Democrats will carry out a purge of their own members who dare to support any limits on abortion.
In discussing pro-life Democrats, it is important to keep up to date. Some politicians who were formerly known as pro-life have flipped. Politics is more important to them than life, I suppose. Here is a quote from an article by Religion News Agency:
The most disappointing former pro-life Democrat, however, has been the senior senator from Pennsylvania, Bob Casey Jr.
Casey’s father, a beloved Democratic governor of the Keystone State, was a bona fide leader of the pro-life movement. I’ve defended his son in the past, even recently suggesting he should run for president in a wide open pro-life lane in 2020.
Though he has taken some good anti-abortion votes and been very helpful when it comes to addressing abortion demand, recent disturbing news demonstrates that he has also been forced to capitulate to party dogma. Last week, Politico reported that Casey had attended and supported EMILY’s List’s annual gala, which is a little like a pig attending a hot dog convention. One the group’s reasons for being is to defeat pro-life Democrats.
So there you go. The Anti-American Party is now officially the Party of Death.
Not that anyone will be surprised. I am only posting this now in anticipation of the obituaries that will be written in 2020, when a new congress is elected without a single Democrat who will vote to oppose the murder of babies any time for any reason.
RedState has an interesting post up about recent work by Dr. Eoin Lenihan to establish that a scattered collection of journalists have multiple ties to Antifa.
Antifa, yeah, those guys. The violent mask-wearing thugs who roughed up Trump fans and shut down some free speech rallies. Real terrorists.
What the good professor did was to start with a handful of known Antifa Twitter accounts. Then he collected a long list of associated Twitter accounts and screened for Twitter accounts with multiple associations to the known Antifa accounts. Then he searched that list for journalists, and, sure enough, found plenty.
It is good to have a little sunlight into the dark world of journalism.
This is a post prompted by questions from Ms. Sawatdeeka about traffic flow and traffic rules. Where did the rules of the road come from? Our story begins in New York City in the 1870s. A nine-year old boy was riding in a carriage with his mother and they got caught in a traffic jam. Horses had to be backed up with a wagon and another carriage, and an hour was spent sorting things out before anyone could proceed.
That was typical for any city and had been the way of things for centuries. People would go the best way they could. Traffic was a problem wherever you went, but at the speed of horsedrawn carriages and wagons, crashes were rare.
That traffic jam really impressed young William Phelps Eno. He thought about the problem many times over the years. His father and his mother’s father were both growing wealthy in real estate, and after going to Yale he joined the family business and prospered.
When he was forty years old, in 1900, Eno published an essay about his proposal for rules of the road. He said that if the rules were simple, easy to understand and follow, and were enforced, that movement on all city streets could be improved.
He provided such eloquent arguments and the problems of traffic congestion were so severe that his proposal quickly was circulated among the city fathers. They decided to adopt Eno’s proposed rules of the road as an ordinance. After much debate and a flurry of articles in the newspapers, the rules of the road were implemented in 1903.
It was an instant success. In fact, it was so successful that people were amazed at the difference it made in the time it took to go a few blocks through the city. Stop signs were an innovation of the rules of the road. Everyone driving on the right side of the road, with faster traffic passing on the left, were innovative. City life was much improved.
Eno’s proposed rules adopted the general practice of driving on the right. That had been general practice for a very long time, lost in the dim mists of the past, but it had never been law, except on a few toll bridges.
To that, Eno added the stop sign. If you are on a minor street, you have to yield to the traffic on the major street; you don’t get to dart out and jam your way into the traffic flow. Pedestrians have to wait until there is a gap, but then once they get out into the street, carriages or cars have to yield to the pedestrian. If you are going to park so you can load or unload at a business, you have to be parked in the direction of travel on the right.
The improvement was so dramatic that visiting Frenchmen begged Eno to present his scheme to the Académie Française. Paris hosted a demonstration project at the Arc de Triomphe in early 1905, and adopted Eno’s rules of the road later that year. Soon, the rules of the road were being implemented all over the world, including lots of places that never bothered with formal adoption.
One of the graybeard professors who taught traffic to me in the 1970s said that when the British adopted the rules of the road, of course they chose the opposite side, because they were not going to do anything the French and American way. But I have seen historians say that keeping left was an old British tradition, and that it was the Americans who switched the pattern. (Evidently, the way a Conestoga wagon was constructed lent itself to keeping right, on account of the location of the brake lever, and this was in imitation of earlier carriage designs, so that passing on the right had been an old tradition in America. But it had not been a rule, just the common way things were done.)
Eno’s simple project brought order into the chaos of traffic just in time for the motor age. I do not see how the automobile could have flourished as it did without the rules of the road. The 1908 Model T was built with the driver position on the left, and American cars from all other manufacturers soon followed suit.
Eno continued to develop his ideas and wrote subsequent papers. He wrote a bulletin for police enforcement. He wrote a paper about harbor traffic. In 1921 he made a grant to set up a foundation to work to improve traffic safety. The Eno Transportation Foundation still works to improve traffic safety. They moved their headquarters to a suburb near Washington, D.C. about thirty years ago.
I put up a couple of recent posts to observe on a surge of obituaries on the news business. But all y’all internet denizens are still reading news. You just don’t take daily newspapers anymore, and only a very tiny share of y’all subscribe to any kind of news provider. That is the way most of us operate any more. But information flow, especially the flow of recent events information, aka ‘news,’ is now screened for most receivers of news by evil Google.
Yeah, I know; some Ratburghers are boycotting Google by using DuckDuckGo and a couple of other search engine alternatives. But the problem remains. Over half of all news articles that are accessed on the internet were landed on through an evil-Google search, which means that evil Google gets a shot at screening the news for over half of all internet news consumption. This finding comes from a Northwestern University study that was recently presented at the “2019 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems” that was held in Glasgow.
China has been attacking the U.S.A. ever since the days of Richard Nixon, in many ways subtle and not subtle. But their attacks have grown more devious, more corrupting, and are preparing them for assaults on America that will be devastating when they are unleashed.
Yes, they have been spying and stealing technical secrets, violating copyrights, trademarks and the plain language of contracts for decades. But the current state of affairs calls for a confrontation, and I am glad to see President Trump bring a confrontation that is clever and likely to succeed.
I am not prepared to debate the trade issues in the tariffs dispute. What has me concerned at the moment is the leverage China is gaining over our internet. It appears that evil Google is preparing to act as an agent of China to destroy America.
I think that if things keep going the way they are, China will position themselves to be able to kill American internet and cellphone communications, while disabling large portions of basic utilities such as electric power transmission and landline phone communications.
I will put links in a comment. The first item is testimony this week by FCC Chair Ajit Pai, regarding the threat posed by Huawei if they could get embedded into our cellphone services:
“What I will say,” Pai told [Sen. James] Lankford, “is I believe that certain Chinese suppliers, such as Huawei, do indeed present a threat to the United States, either on their own or because of Chinese domestic law. For example, China’s national intelligence law explicitly requires any individual or entity subject to that law to comply with requests to intelligence services.” He said that poses a problem for 5G networks deployed in one country that could be managed by software that is resident in another country.
The second item is a column at American Greatness by Brandon J. Weichert:
“A greater synthesis between the national security sector, the business community, academia, and the political leadership of the United States is needed if we truly and effectively want to prevent American tech firms from building the weapons of tomorrow for China to use against us today.”
Barak Obama has more faith in the American economy than I do. This faith is shared by all the announced Democrat candidates for the 2020 nomination. They have greater faith in the American economy than President Trump or Andrew Klavan or Steven Mnuchin. It may seem counterintuitive to say that the Anti-American Party has greater faith in the American economy than conservative patriots, but there it is.
I saw an interview of Amy Klobuchar over the weekend that illustrates the point. She refused to grant any credit to President Trump for the economic boom that has brought us record-low unemployment and strong GDP growth. She insisted that the policies of Team Obama were what brought about our strong economy. She implied that President Trump was just a lucky chump who inherited an improving economy from President Obama.
Leftists seem to be lazy thinkers. There are supposedly highly intelligent Leftists who are just as clueless about simple economics as the low-information Leftists that support the Anti-American Party at the ballot box. Rather than work out logical consequences and practical results of policy decisions, they are content to support policies that sound appealing. They support policies that make themselves feel good.
And feeling good fuels the economy. Of course; Keynes himself said so. In 2009 they all felt wonderful because they had elected Obama the Light-Bearer, and they figured all America felt wonderful on this account. The natural result would be a raising of “animal spirits” which would boost the economy out of the ditch and put us all on the road to utopia.
They knew that historic American recessions lasted about a year and took a couple of years to recover. They had every expectation that the American economy would do what the American economy had always done. There was no need to worry about the details; the big picture looked great, felt great; life was going to be fabulous in the Age of Obama, because Obama was fabulous. How could the animal spirits not respond to the fabulousness of Obama?
With that sort of unthinking confidence in the underlying strength of the American economy, they did not need to care about Team Obama regulatory strangulation or uncompetitive tax structure, or the credit crunch. None of that was going to matter, because the American economy is such a powerhouse.
That is what I mean when I say they have greater faith. They have the sort of faith that primitives put in witchdoctors. Which is what I heard from Ms. Klobuchar. When prompted with a question about faith in President Trump’s economic policies, including the Republican tax cut and rollback of regulations, she cut the questioner off to say that she has ‘faith in American businesses who continue to expand and grow in the great economic climate created by President Obama’ [my paraphrase]. Of course she does. “American businesses” is a talisman; it is an incantation to say, and then magically good economic things happen. Isn’t that how it works for President Trump? It does not matter who is in power or what economic policies are implemented; just say the magic words and economic prosperity happens.
They have greater faith in the American economy. When we start talking about marginal tax rates, the costs of government-imposed recordkeeping on matters unrelated to business, competitiveness, efficiencies, marketplace dynamics, debt and other stuff, they are too lazy to listen. They do not address these sorts of questions, and simply talk past them rather than responding to them.
There will be no debate. The good economic news will not result in any credit for President Trump or for the Republicans.
2020 will be a turnout election. We must motivate the low-information voters on our side to keep the barbarians at bay.
The U.S. Navy has plans. They want to build ships. In fact, they want about ten new ships per year for the forseeable future. I am generally in agreement that I want America to have a strong navy.
A new briefing paper was just released today by the Congressional Research Service. They have a bunch of background information for Congress. The people who read this are staffers who work for congresscritters and a ton of Beltway Bandits. But just for your edification, here are a couple of key paragraphs from the executive summary. I will put a link in a comment.
The Navy’s proposed FY2020 budget requests funding for the procurement of 12 new ships, including one Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) class aircraft carrier, three Virginia-class attack submarines, three DDG-51 class Aegis destroyers, one FFG(X) frigate, two John Lewis (TAO205) class oilers, and two TATS towing, salvage, and rescue ships. The Navy’s FY2020 five-year (FY2020-FY2024) shipbuilding plan includes 55 new ships, or an average of 11 new ships per year.
The Navy’s FY2020 30-year (FY2020-FY2049) shipbuilding plan includes 304 ships, or an average of about 10 per year. If the FY2020 30-year shipbuilding plan is implemented, the Navy projects that it will achieve a total of 355 ships by FY2034. This is about 20 years sooner than projected under the Navy’s FY2019 30-year shipbuilding plan—an acceleration primarily due to a decision announced by the Navy in April 2018, after the FY2019 plan was submitted, to increase the service lives of all DDG-51 destroyers to 45 years. Although the Navy projects that the fleet will reach a total of 355 ships in FY2034, the Navy in that year and subsequent years will not match the composition called for in the FY2016 FSA.
Today the beginning of Ramadan falls on the fifth of May. This may send shivers across the Intersectionality world, but I am not a part of that world. My Intersectionality Score is zero. But I noticed the calendar, and went looking to see what to expect for Ramadan. Sure enough, I found a recent kid’s program from an American madrassa. The Umma Day program was really interesting, and will just make your day for the first day of Ramadan. Here is a little blurb about the kids’ program at the Muslim American Society Islamic Center of Philadelphia:
young children wearing Palestinian scarves sang: “Glorious steeds call us and lead us [to] the Al-Aqsa Mosque. The blood of martyrs protects us… Take us, oh ships… until we reach our shores and crush the treacherous ones… Flow, oh rivers of martyrs!” A young girl read a poem praising martyrs who sacrificed their lives for Palestine, and she asked: “Will [Jerusalem] be a hotbed for cowards?” Another young girl read: “We will defend [Palestine] with our bodies… We will chop off their heads, and we will liberate the sorrowful and exalted Al-Aqsa Mosque… We will subject them to eternal torture.”
Just a day in the multicultural life of the City of Brotherly Love.
I posted a few months ago with a story that was broken by LifeSiteNews.com. That is a small Catholic pro-life news aggregator and blog based in Toronto. They are very well-known in pro-life activist circles, and were otherwise unknown until they published the famous letter from Archbishop Viganò. Archbishop Viganò said that the Vatican had known about Cardinal McCarrick for several years, but that Pope Francis had rehabilitated him anyhow. The reason the letter was published by LifeSiteNews is that they are the only English-language journalists that Archbishop Viganò trusted with his letter. I bring this up as an introduction to a new story from LifeSiteNews that you do not see in mass media journalism, this time from Houston:
Now, it turns out that a second Houston Public Library Drag Queen was convicted of multiple sexual assaults against young children, according to records uncovered by Houston MassResistance activists. The man has also written a lurid article describing his work as a transgender prostitute. And he was photographed at a Drag Queen Story Hour (DQSH) event carrying a rubber chicken — a symbol used by homosexuals to indicate a sexual preference for young boys. …
It’s becoming clear that the outrages we’re exposing are not an anomaly, but more likely the norm — not only in Houston, but probably around the country.
Yes. LifeSiteNews ran an article back in March that was investigated by Catholic activists MassResistance, in which they broke the story about a drag queen from Drag Queen Story Time who had a record of sexual abuse of minor boys. Houston brushed it off as a one-time thing, of course; an anomaly.
So here we are with a second DQST drag queen from the Houston library program with a record of sexual abuse of minor boys. I searched evil Google News for the name of this second drag queen. Google News did not turn up the LifeSiteNews article at all, because evil Google is suppressing everything by them. But it did turn up a media criticism article by my favorite media critics, whose angle is that this is yet another instance of a story that would be considered newsworthy but got suppressed by all the journalists because it goes against the Leftist narrative.
This is the sort of thing that is only known by those of us who follow Christian niche media. It might or might not get picked up in conservative niche media. Then, if it stirs up enough social media outragey quarrels, it might, just might, get a footnote in legacy media. A more likely way for an item like this to make it into Big Media coverage would be if President Trump mentions it in a tweet. Otherwise, this story will remain buried.
Why is academia Atheist ?
How did the universities come to be an anti-religion project? What is it about higher education that makes it Secularist? Continue reading “Spiritual Question 25”
Is there such a thing as a spiritual aspect to human existence ?
Fake News, you say? Indeed, this is to discuss the turmoil in the field of journalism, which is both a cause and a consequence of the Leftist tilt of the entire field. Journalism is in crisis, you see, and Leftist media watchers are looking for scapegoats. President Trump figures high on their enemies list, with his “fake news!,” “Enemy of the People,” and Sarah Huckabee Sanders. See my previous post on this topic. In that post I reacted to a journalist who blamed the end of professionalism in journalism on President Trump. In this post I will discuss the reasons for the collapse of journalism as we knew it.
I am happy to see the recent obituaries for Big Journalism. But before we discuss the real problems with journalism, please consider what the crisis looks like to the journalists. There have been a rash of articles and editorials from journalists that have expressed fear and frustration. This is an excerpt from an article that appeared in the New Yorker back in January:
Conglomeration can be good for business, but it has generally been bad for journalism. Media companies that want to get bigger tend to swallow up other media companies, suppressing competition and taking on debt, which makes publishers cowards. … Craigslist went online in the Bay Area in 1996 and spread across the continent like a weed, choking off local newspapers’ most reliable source of revenue: classified ads. … By 2000, only three hundred and fifty of the fifteen hundred daily newspapers left in the United States were independently owned. … Then came the fall, when papers all over the country, shackled to mammoth corporations and a lumbering, century-old business model, found themselves unable to compete with the upstarts—online news aggregators like the Huffington Post (est. 2005) and Breitbart News (est. 2007), which were, to readers, free. News aggregators also drew display advertisers away from print; Facebook and Google swallowed advertising accounts whole. Big papers found ways to adapt; smaller papers mainly folded.
(When researching for this post, I saw an article from 2016 that said local newspapers had shed 60 percent of their workforce over the previous 26 years.)
In January of this year they had a particularly tough day, in which 1,000 journalism jobs were chopped in one day.
Now, I have been part of several Ratburgher discussions in which we generally agreed that mass media journalism is the Enemy of the People, so I don’t expect to hear a lot of sympathy for the journalists here. But there is a problem that I want to address.
Where does news come from?
Yes, there are some intrepid conservative organizations that do great investigative journalism. But they are few in number and are concentrated on political matters. When your local paper dies, how do you get local news about the ordinary life of your community? You would have to join a dozen local blog sites to be able to continue to be aware of the shenanigans at City Hall, or the hoo-rah at the School Board, or the embezzler in the suburbs, or the police blotter, or area high school sports, or any of a number of local matters. You might not be very much interested in any of those matters, but it used to be that you could be generally well-informed about the community you live in by just skimming the headlines in the local paper on a regular basis.
Those days are gone. My local Memphis paper is now owned by the USA Today Network, which is part of Gannett. The people who lay out the paper work in a rival city in another state (Louisville). Shortly before I canceled my subscription last year they ran an article in the “Local News” section about an industrial park. That industrial park is in my state, but it is a seven-hour drive from my city. So much for “local news.” It was fine in two other papers that are owned by the USA Today Network, so it was just too easy to pretend that it belonged in our paper, too. Their “customer support” is in the Philippines, Sales is in Phoenix, and the payment processing center is in Cincinnati.
So, what now? There are the local TV stations, but they just pretend to do news. They only have “reporters” who are transcribers. They look into stories after they are alerted by citizens who call, or mostly they just pass along the police blotter and the stuff that comes to them in press releases. After they learn that something is going on, they scramble a camera guy (no longer a camera crew) to race out and act like they covered the event for hours. Also we have a couple of local blog sites that are attempting to make a name for themselves as the go-to place for local news. But they are the same old Leftist journalists who recently lost their jobs due to downsizing at the newspaper, and so their political coverage is the same old Leftist bilge through and through.
Killed by the Internet
Local papers were killed by the internet. On the internet, “information wants to be free.” Local stories get picked up by aggregator services, and it became really easy to check out Google News for local news. Facebook tried to provide local news links for a while, but the way they promoted Leftist news and suppressed conservative news caused such a backlash that they dropped that effort.
What gets blamed a lot for killing local papers is Craigslist, which is where all the classified ads went. But the real culprits are Google and Facebook, which now have all the ads by the big chain retailers.
But if there is no local paper, then Google cannot steal their news any more. Nor can Facebook or any conservative alternative aggregator.
Follow the Money
There was about 129 billion dollars in digital advertising in America last year. Google slurped up about half. Facebook took in about 25%. Youtube, Instagram, Microsoft, Verizon and Amazon combined for about 22%. All newspapers combined brought in about one percent. All magazines combined brought in about one percent. Craigslist brought in about one percent.
Facebook and Google to the rescue?
So I was sort of amused to see that both Facebook and Google have new initiatives to muscle in on the local news business. Now that they have killed off the newspapers, they want to take over. The trend going forward looks like our people becoming even more dependent on Google and Facebook. This is not good.
There have been several recent articles advocating “slow news.” They come from journalists who are observing that the field of journalism has been overtaken by a rush to clickbait. The Editor of NewYorker.com quoted Pablo Boczkowski, a professor of communications at Northwestern University:
“If you’re an average site, you have five to seven seconds to tell your story.”
The solution preferred by journalism ‘leading lights’ is the digital subscription model. Only a handful of outlets are likely to survive via that model. Journalists are hungry for readers who will read a full slate of news articles at one site, the way we used to read the morning newspaper over breakfast. But, as Professor Boczkowski observed, contemporary consumers of news learn the news one click at a time from dozens of sources, mostly those that are shared on social media by their circle of Facebook friends or the people they follow on Twitter.
A “news desert” is a place that does not have any source for local news. Lots of America is heading into news desert status.
As happy as I am to see the obituaries for Big Journalism, we still need news. How do we get real information about our community and our state? Conservative and Christian niche media seem to me to do somewhat well on the national scene. But I really hate the thought of being dependent on evil Google for information from my state capitol.
I don’t have any answers. I suppose we will have to hope for a cadre of citizen journalists to blog the news of the day. The problem is finding them amidst all the competing noise on the internet. And, if they also blog with conservative opinions, then their posts will be suppressed when you try to search for them.
Perhaps all you Ratburghers could start posting local news here. Ratburger.org could become a rival for Google and Facebook, right up until Google or Facebook noticed us and took us out.
Anybody out there have any bright ideas?
“It’s almost as if the effort to undo Trump has had an unexpected effect — that Trump has somehow broken the news media.”
That is a quote from a long essay at Esquire last month by Peter Boyer. Boyer wrote about changes to news coverage of the President of the United States because of Donald J. Trump. He, of course, blames Trump. But he is clearly distressed at the current state of affairs. His essay concentrates on the New York Times, with a long section about the Washington Post and a couple of asides about CNN. I bookmarked the link to Boyer’s essay. It is an interesting read. I think it will make a helpful addition to the obituary for the national press.
Elite newsrooms jettisoned everything they learned in that required Sophomore class “Ethics of Journalism.” They tossed the New York Times Manual of Style right out with the trash, at least the parts about “neutral voice” and “counterbalance” and context and completeness and anonymous sources and several other picky matters that used to be important to them.
Further from Boyer:
Back in the early months of the Trump presidency, I had asked Liz Spayd, the public editor, if the Times’s new business model was to become a sort of high-end Huffington Post.
“I hope that is not the case,” she said. “I think that would be a sad place for this country to find itself, that one of the strongest and most powerful and well-financed newsrooms in the country would speak and have an audience only on one side of the political aisle. It’s very, very dangerous, I think.” Spayd had become the voice of the old traditions at the Times, a position that earned her the opprobrium of progressive critics outside the paper (“This editor appears to be from 1987 or earlier,” Keith Olbermann tweeted. “Sorry—get in the game or get out”) as well as inside the newsroom. Five months into the Trump presidency, her job was eliminated; she now consults for Facebook.
The very thing Ms. Spayd warned about had come to pass. The New York Times subscriber base consists entirely of Leftists and hotels and libraries. Nobody reads the New York Times except the white woke Leftist elites who control the Democrat Party, and then the rest of us read the things that make the top of the Google News feed, or we read them if they are cited for some particular outrage in the conservative niche media. They have become profitable again as the Opposition Party. Nobody expects the NYT to be anything else besides the PR of the far Left.
How sad. This is what prompted P. Boyer to write that essay. The theme is despondency over the death of the old “American model of Journalism.”
We have now fully transformed America into the “European model of Journalism.” The Europeans have parliamentary governments. This led to a multiplicity of parties. The newspapers generally all serve as the PR mouthpiece of one or another of the dozens of parties. With the legacy media now champions of open borders, Communism, and hostile to traditionalist religions, we can comfortably call them the “Enemy of the People.”
We have been a long time in making this transformation. Looking back, it is easy to see how the press always leaned left, how the leftward tilt got a huge push when the universities started up degree programs in journalism in the late 50s and 1960s. Mass media news in America slid further and further leftward until they went into full-on campaign mode in 1992 to boost Bill Clinton past G.H.W. Bush. It was the campaign of 1992 that turned Rush Limbaugh into a household name. He single-handedly saved AM radio by turning it into the media refuge for conservative thought.
The internet completed the transformation. Now the NYT is just a bigger, badder HuffPo. But the demise of mass media journalism is not because of President Trump. It is only partly because they lurched even further Left than they previously were during the Obama Administration. The internet brought them down. More on that in my next post. First, another couple of points about Boyer’s essay.
My favorite media critics are liberals (pro-life Democrats). They noticed P. Boyer’s essay. They have been saying the same thing pretty much ever since the campaign of 1996, which is when they became frightened at the excesses of supposedly ethical journalists at elite publications. They connected the adoption of full Leftist advocacy “journalism” to the decades-old tradition in elite media for full Leftist advocacy “journalism” in culture war issues.
As a Social Conservative, I have noticed that elite newsrooms think that people who share my views on matters such as abortion, sex, sin, privacy and personal responsibility are people who are not worth covering accurately. This was revealed anew earlier this month by the fawning coverage that Mayor Pete Buttigieg received when he launched a religious attack on Mike Pence.
Terry Mattingly of GetReligion concluded:
Thus, elite newsrooms were no longer interested in doing accurate, fair, objective coverage of about half of the United States of America.
I am actually happy to see the obituaries begin. Leftist mass media helped put Obama in office and keep him there. They nearly delivered the White House to Hillary. They have opposed President Trump in every particular, revealing that they only care about scoring political points. They do not care about what is good for America or the American people, nor do they particularly care about the accuracy of the information that they sell as “news.” As Leftists, they are anti-American and anti-Christian. They oppose everything I value. They are the Opposition Party.
They needed killin’.
“Christ the Lord is Risen Today,” by Charles Wesley
1 Christ the Lord is risen today, Alleluia!
Earth and heaven in chorus say, Alleluia!
Raise your joys and triumphs high, Alleluia!
Sing, ye heavens, and earth reply, Alleluia!
2 Love’s redeeming work is done, Alleluia!
Fought the fight, the battle won, Alleluia!
Death in vain forbids him rise, Alleluia!
Christ has opened paradise, Alleluia!
3 Lives again our glorious King, Alleluia!
Where, O death, is now thy sting? Alleluia!
Once he died our souls to save, Alleluia!
Where’s thy victory, boasting grave? Alleluia!
4 Soar we now where Christ has led, Alleluia!
Following our exalted Head, Alleluia!
Made like him, like him we rise, Alleluia!
Ours the cross, the grave, the skies, Alleluia!
5 Hail the Lord of earth and heaven, Alleluia!
Praise to thee by both be given, Alleluia!
Thee we greet triumphant now, Alleluia!
Hail the Resurrection, thou, Alleluia!
6 King of glory, soul of bliss, Alleluia!
Everlasting life is this, Alleluia!
Thee to know, thy power to prove, Alleluia!
Thus to sing, and thus to love, Alleluia!
I picked this because Christianity Today said that as near as they can tell it is the most popular Easter hymn in America.