Rightblogger at World Net Daily seeks to delegitimize Mizzou protesters

This is getting beyond cliche. The World Net Daily, a rabid anti-progressive dumping ground for the ignorant class is doing its best to delegitimize the Mizzou protesters by, you guessed it, calling them liars.

Douglas Ernst, a former employee of Sun Myung Moon’s Washington Times, wrote that Mizzou student protesters Payton Head and Jonathan Butler are full of shit.

Here’s his evidence.

Head hastily posted to social media on Wednesday that there were KKK members on campus and that they were looking for black people to harm. It’s not clear where Head got that information, but it was proven to be inaccurate and he later apologized for the error.

On Facebook, Head wrote, “I’m sorry about the misinformation that I have shared through social media. In a state of alarm, I was concerned for all students of the University of Missouri and wanted to ensure that everyone was safe. I received and shared information from multiple incorrect sources, which I deeply regret.”

How is Butler a liar?

According to Ernst, it’s because his father is an executive at Union Pacific Railroad, and reportedly earns more than $8 million a year. What does that information, while mildly interesting data to include on a Wikipedia page, have anything to do with the University of Missouri’s race problems?

And now for the big lie that tears at the very essence of what the Mizzou students, athletes and faculty are protesting about, which is poop — particularly the so-called feces swastika.

“Perhaps the most egregious claim by students at the University of Missouri,” according to Ernst, “involves a story of a swastika made out of human waste.”

I’ll admit it, if this shit smearing did happen, there would probably be a few photos of it floating around on Twitter, but I’ve not seen one. So there’s a reasonable chance that the poop swastika never happened.

But is this what we’re supposed to believe is the reason for Butler’s hunger strike, which began before the poop story dropped? Because this campus rumor exploded onto the national press, it invalidates — or delegitimizes — all of the grievances that these students and faculty are petitioning the administration for redress?

It’s a textbook tactic that the best way to destroy your opponent isn’t to challenge their specific arguments, but rather, just paint them as liars. The right does the same thing to Hillary Clinton. They do the same thing to President Obama. She’s sneaky. He’s not even an American. And now at Mizzou, or the greater Black Lives Matter movement, they’re liars. They can’t be trusted. What they’re saying is invalid and not even worth responding to.

And this strategy works well for the right because the conservative media echo chamber runs with it every time. Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and all of the fringe publications like World Net Daily blast away at their enemy until there is nothing left but a pack of liars whose grievances are invalid. Game. Set. Match.

Unfortunately, the mainstream news media follow along and provide the necessary credibility to the right’s attacks, and once that happens, it’s over. The status quo remains intact.

Rightbloggers, and even Dave Weigel, work to delegitimize black student protestors

I couldn’t believe it when I woke up this morning and saw the Washington Post’s Dave Weigel joining in on the delegitimize-black-student protesters tip.

Weigel had retweeted a story by Breitbart News with the headline “The Missouri Poop Swastika is the Moment Social Justice Jumped the Shark.” The rightblogger, Milo Yiannopoulos claims that all of the issues Mizzou students are raising are all lies.

“It seems more likely that the swastika is a hoax, just as — whisper it — so many other high-profile black victims on American campuses celebrated endlessly by progressive journalists turn out to be mendacious frauds,” Yiannopoulos wrote.

It’s the age-old tactic of the regressive — delegitimize your opponent. Simply claim that there’s no racial prejudice in Missouri, or anywhere for that matter, it’s all lies from the pit of hell.

Let’s think that through.

What would be the point of making up a bunch of stories, protesting and going on a hunger strike? Because the students really hated the president that much that they would go to these lengths in order to oust him? That seems unlikely. So what is their motive then? Yiannopoulos doesn’t say.

But you can see where Yiannopoulos is coming from in his use of the word “retard” in the story. He’s a “libertarian.” I assume that’s why Weigel, former Reason writer thinks Yiannopoulos is cool. But is that what it takes to be a libertarian today? Just be an asshole?

I agree that there’s more to the Mizzou story than poop smeared on a wall, but this story by Yiannopoulos does nothing to increase our understanding of what’s been happening on the campus for the last two years. Or why these folks are so upset. Investigating that would take work, it’s much easier for to just call the students and protesters liars and move on, right?

I don’t expect more from Breitbart News, but for a supposedly serious Washington Post reporter like Dave Weigel to give this sort of pathetic attempt to delegitimize the plight of these students is very sad indeed.

Joe Scarborough has no idea why Mizzou students are so mad

In a panel discussion that included a grand total of eight talking heads on “Morning Joe” today, host Joe Scarborough is flummoxed to understand why the University of Missouri students are so upset.

It couldn’t be the lack of a sufficient response to a black student being called a “nigger,” or a swastika smeared on a campus wall in human feces, or the college president himself aggressively driving his car through a group of Black Lives Matter protesters. Clearly the students felt that the university administration was failing to create culture on campus that espoused inclusiveness rather than divisiveness. Their complaints were not being heard.

But Scarborough couldn’t see it.

“What are the specifics? I’ve been reading since this photograph was taken, looking for specifics of systemic actions that have made students feel excluded,” Scarborough said to Pulitzer Prize winner journalist Eugene Robinson, who sadly, agreed with Scarborough.

It’s a play from the same old playbook. The slightest slight directed at white Christians, like Starbucks holiday cups that don’t have reindeer on them is valid and an atrocity, but outright unaddressed racism directed at black people, there needs to be much, much more proof that someone has been wronged.

Daily Caller warns of more racial activism by black athletes

Over at Tucker Carlson’s online rag The Daily Caller, Scott Greer prepares readers, white readers, to “brace” themselves for more black athletes will engage in “racial activism.”

What has Greer so fearful is that following the successful protests at University of Missouri this week, spurred by several on-campus racist instances, this is only the beginning, as black athletes across the country may demand justice too.

Quoting The Daily Caller’s comrade-in-arms Breitbart News, Greer wrote, “Breitbart’s Milo Yiannopoulos aptly noted how similar the Yale incident resembled the actions of Mao Zedong’s notorious Red Guards. The Mizzou incident proves that this disturbing activity isn’t limited to New Haven. And in Columbus, the activists got the scalp they so desired.”

For the record, Zedong is responsible for the deaths of as many as 45 million people during his more than three decades in office.

But Greer even scoffs at the students complaints, one which includes the smearing of human feces on a wall in the shape of a swastika.

“The fact that anyone would consider a poop swastika the work of neo-Nazis is pretty deluded,” Greer wrote. “Nazis may love brown shirts, but that doesn’t mean they like to draw their honored icon out of brown matter.”


Apparently Greer is tapped into the thought-process of neo-Nazis. These poop-smearing neo-Nazis must not be real neo-Nazis.

And as for the “alleged” incidents of harassment, one which a black student was called a “nigger.” Greer said, “It’s also not within a university’s jurisdiction to punish speech.”

From there Greer calls the student athletes rapists and espouses sympathy for frat boys in Oklahoma who were expelled after being caught on tape happily singing about lynching black people.

”The expulsion,” he wrote, “was a gross violation of the students’ constitutional rights and would likely be easily dismissed in court.”

I could go on, but doing so would only give Greer more credibility than he deserves. His opinion piece is a laundry list of the most common and hackneyed attempts to distract, diminish, and degrade black people seeking justice by speaking truth to power.

Matt Taibbi is Right, Sanders is Awesome, It is We Who Suck

Matt Taibbi Rolling Stone
When I was a reporter in Vermont I got a chance to meet Senator Bernie Sanders a few times. He often gave town hall meetings to discuss Social Security, or cuts to the Post Office or LIHEAP. My impression is that Sanders is the real deal. I agree with Matt Taibbi, it is we who are fucked up.

I first met Bernie Sanders ten years ago, and I don’t believe there’s anything else he really thinks about. There’s no other endgame for him. He’s not looking for a book deal or a membership in a Martha’s Vineyard golf club or a cameo in a Guy Ritchie movie. This election isn’t a game to him; it’s not the awesomely repulsive dark joke it is to me and many others.

And the only reason this attention-averse, sometimes socially uncomfortable person is subjecting himself to this asinine process is because he genuinely believes the system is not beyond repair.

Not all of us can say that. But that doesn’t make us right, and him “unrealistic.” More than any other politician in recent memory, Bernie Sanders is focused on reality. It’s the rest of us who are lost.

Interest Rates Low Because of Impending Doom, or the New Normal

I read this story today in the Huffington Post. The point of the story was that the Federal Reserve is keeping interest rates low because they can see impending economic doom in our future.

Reporter Daniel Marans includes a lot of data and graphs and quotes, but it comes across as pseudo-economics. So I wondered about Paul Krugman’s take on the Federal Reserve decision to not increase interest rates.

Krugman took a very different view, he said that it’s poppycock to blame the Fed for keeping interest rates low, and that low interest rates are the new normal.

Nothing in the economic situation suggests that rates are too low right now. And don’t tell us that we need to start “normalizing”: all indications are that “normal” has changed a lot since 2008, and trying to set interest rates as if the old normal were still valid is a recipe for very bad outcomes.

Can Sanders Really Win?

I like Bernie Sanders. I think he would make an amazing president. If he could truly lead this nation, we could do so much to move this nation forward. But putting aside the liberal fantasy of a Sanders presidency, I don’t think it happens.

Sanders is doing OK against Clinton in Iowa. But let’s be honest, despite the public relations campaign to make it appear so, Iowa is not a bell weather state. New Hampshire is, and Sanders is kind of walloping Clinton. The latest CBS poll has Sanders beating Clinton 15 points.

Things start to turn sour for Sanders after New Hampshire. The next big primary state is South Carolina where Clinton currently leads by 43 points. Now that Biden is definitely out, things will shift in the polls a bit, but I’d wager most of Biden’s support will go to Clinton.

Imagine Sanders wins Iowa and New Hampshire, where does he go from there? He might win Wisconsin, Washington state, Oregon, but where is his path to lockup the nomination? Maybe a wave of enthusiasm created by Sanders winning Iowa and New Hampshire will propel him to the nomination, but I just have a hard time seeing it happen.

I’m prepared to be wrong, but at this point, even though Sanders is my preferred candidate, this is Clinton’s nomination to lose.

The Hillary Clinton Email Issue Explained

Hillary Clinton
I’m an expert in information technology. I’ve been in this game for nearly 20 years, I’ve done just about anything and everything you could do as a technologist. I’m going to explain this Hillary Clinton email server story to you.

Set aside all of the partisan chatter and the lame attempts by journalists to understand Clinton’s decision as secretary of state to use a private email server, rather than the one provided by the federal government. None of these people understands the issue at a basic level and so none of their “analysis” makes any sense.

Here’s the real reason why Clinton used her own private email address and server. It was easier. The decision was made, as Clinton has said, out of convenience. If you’ve ever had to deal with a large organization’s information technology, you know why Clinton used her own server.

I’ve spent countless hours writing code to work around cumbersome information technology system in large corporations.

Large organizations put lots of restrictions on what you can or can’t do with their information technology, and for good reason. From an organization’s perspective, every new feature IT offers has to be supported, usually with the same staffing levels. So if Clinton wanted to be able to send and receive email using a mobile device, that might not have been available going through the government’s email server.

And on the issue of security, whether Clinton’s email server was less safe than the government’s servers, that’s a valid question, but there’s been no evidence the server wasn’t secure. But in terms of classified information, email as a mode of conveyance is inherently not secure. You can secure the sending and receiving of email from Clinton’s computer or handheld to her server, but once the email goes beyond her server, or the government’s server, it can no longer be considered secure. Unless you can guarantee that the email you sent to Frank in Baghdad never traverses an unencrypted pipe, you have to assume the information has been exposed.

What’s also silly is the argument that because Clinton’s email messages were stored on her own server, as opposed to the government’s, she is somehow shielded from reporters’ requests for information and the prying eyes of Congress.

The New York Times published a huge front page story, underpinning the reporting was this notion that Clinton’s email messages were outside the scope of a Freedom of Information Act request because they resided on her email server and not the government’s. That is not accurate.

Everything Clinton wrote down as secretary of state is a public record. It doesn’t matter where it resides. It could be a napkin at a bar or a sticky note stuck to her laptop. Those are all public documents and legally must be kept as part of the public record. Of course, Clinton could delete emails from her personal server in an attempt to destroy the public record. She could do that with the government server as well. If that happened, it would be pretty easy for computer forensics to determine whether email messages are missing.

So the notion that Clinton used her own personal email server in an effort to sidestep Freedom of Information Act requests or members of Congress is ridiculous. Those who think that don’t understand the concept of open records, public records and the Freedom of Information Act. Those who believe this “theory,” also have to provide some sort of evidence that shows Clinton engaged in destroying public documents, which is a felony.

The real reason Clinton used her own email server was because it was easier. It was the wrong choice, but that’s why she did it.

If I had been advising Clinton when she started as secretary of state, I would have told her that she should not use her own email server. I would have said that using your own server is extremely risky politically. For instance, if her server had been hacked, and messages stolen and leaked, Clinton’s political career would be over. While there’s no evidence that the email server had security holes, if it didn’t, that’s because someone was actively managing it and applying all of the latest security updates. Properly managing an email server for a high-ranking government official is a big deal, and shouldn’t be taken on lightly. If done poorly, it could have been catastrophic for Clinton’s career. I don’t think the risk was worth the reward from a technological or a political perspective.

Refugee Crises: Will We Act With Dignity, or Fail, Again?

We as a nation will be judged by how we treat those who need help the most. And on that day, how will our response to the current refugee crises be adjudicated?
From Iraq to Syria, Afghanistan, Honduras and Guatemala, hundreds of thousands of people are running for their lives from war and gangs of kidnappers and certain death. Right now, these crises provide us an opportunity as Americans, as a nation, to lead.

If you haven’t been paying attention, just read Humans of New York for a week, and you’ll read tragic stories about people being killed and those how aren’t murdered, fleeing for their lives. Lives are being destroyed right now. The time to act is now. Not in a year. Not after the election. The time to help these people is now – they desperately need it. These mothers, daughters, sons and fathers need a safe place to live so that they can begin to rebuild their shattered lives. These are human beings that need comfort and support.

In ten years, we will look back at this time, like we do at previous tragedies which we failed to react with grace and dignity, like the genocide in Rwanda in 1994. But our history isn’t a total failure to act. After we helped destroy Vietnam and Cambodia, the global community, and the US, successfully resettled millions of people. It can be done, but we have to choose to do it. The only dignified response to this crisis, or any crisis, is to hold our arms open wide and say, “Please, come to America. We will help you.”

Bernie Attacks Corporation for Massive Price of Medicine

Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) wants answers. Sanders is running for president and he wants to know why a company jacked up its price per pill of a drug called Daraprim from $13.50 per tablet to $750.

Sanders and US House Representative Elijah Cummings wrote, “The enormous, overnight price increase for Daraprim is just the latest in a long list of skyrocketing price increases for certain critical medications.”

His opponent for the Democratic presidential nomination has yet to address the issue of medicinal price gouging, other than to say it’s outrageous. Hillary Clinton said, she’ll release a plan to combat this problem tomorrow.

Bernie 2016 T-Shirts and Junk for sale