Reason Roundup

Palin Faces 'Uphill Battle' in Proving the Times Defamed Her

Plus: Mask mandates and omicron cases, purging "pornography" drives calls for book bans, and more...


Defamation trial could have ramifications far beyond this specific case. Sarah Palin is suing The New York Times for alleged defamation. The case—which went to trial beginning yesterday—stems from a 2017 editorial published by the Times, in which the paper accused the former Alaska governor's rhetoric of being responsible for the 2011 shooting that injured former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D–Ariz.) and killed six others.

"There was no link established between Governor Palin and that shooting," Shane Vogt, Palin's attorney, said during opening arguments yesterday. "There was no link that demonstrated that Palin was responsible for the death of six people."

Published in the wake of a Virginia shooting that left Rep. Steve Scalise (R–La.) badly injured, the op-ed originally suggested that Palin had contributed to making Giffords a target back in 2011 because a Facebook post from her political action committee (PAC) showed Giffords under crosshairs. The next day, the Times added two corrections to the editorial, saying that the image had shown Giffords' district—not Giffords herself—under crosshairs and that there was no established link between Palin's PAC's post and the crimes carried out by shooter Jared Loughner.

Palin filed a defamation lawsuit against the Times and former editorial page director James Bennet, who added the Palin line to the article.

Will Palin succeed? Legal experts say that it's unlikely. Even Palin's lawyer, in his opening statement, admitted that they were "fighting an uphill battle."

Defamation requires several conditions to be met. To be found defamatory, a statement must be false but alleged as a fact, published or communicated to a third person, and damaging or harmful to the defamed party. A plaintiff must also show that the subject of a defamation suit is at fault, which requires a finding that they were at least negligent.

In addition, the Supreme Court has held—in the 1964 case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan—that when statements involve a public figure, they must have been made with "actual malice"—that is, "with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." When it comes to determining that actual malice was present, "clear and convincing" evidence—not just a "preponderance of evidence"—must show this to be true.

Since Palin is a public figure, the actual malice standard must apply here.

Palin's team argues that Bennet and the Times intentionally published misinformation about her out of bias against her and/or Republicans more broadly.

"Those prompt corrections and an apology the Times posted on Twitter seem to undercut Palin's claims," notes Politico. "The Times's swift correction of its mistake strongly suggests there was no reckless disregard for the truth, just sloppy editing and poor judgment," agrees Washington Post columnist Margaret Sullivan.

The facts also undercut the idea that they were motivated by anti-GOP animosity, suggested Times attorney David Axelrod in court yesterday. The op-ed—which called the Scalise attack "evidence of how vicious American politics has become"—commended former President Donald Trump for his words after that shooting and noted that the shooter in this case was a supporter of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) "Bennet and the [editorial] board were especially conscious of not writing a one-sided piece.…The goal was to hold both political parties accountable," Axelrod said.

"The piece of journalism at the center of this dispute was a mess by any standard," commented Washington Post media critic Erik Wemple back in 2019. But was it malicious? That's a tougher call.

The bigger picture. A growing chorus has been insisting that the legal standard set forth in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan is outdated and needs to be updated.

This case reopens this thorny First Amendment question. As such, it could be "a pivotal moment in press freedom in the United States," writes University of Chicago Law School professor Genevieve Lakier.

"Defenders of the [Sullivan] decision argue that [the actual malice standard] is a good thing, because it prevents politicians and celebrities from using libel lawsuits to punish media organizations that publish critical stories about them. For many decades, this was the consensus view, and it probably still is," notes Lakier. "But over the past few years, a growing number of scholars, judges and politicians have argued that the Sullivan rule does more harm than good, by removing any incentive for journalists and other public speakers to be careful with the truth."

So, while the stakes in this case are "relatively low" for The New York Times, "the stakes for what it means for defamation law are huge," as Business Insider legal correspondent Jacob Shamsian put it.

But whether SCOTUS would actually take up the case is another matter. Here's UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh writing on the issue back in late 2020. "Palin's lawyers have argued that the 'actual malice' test should be overruled or at least sharply limited, and in principle the Supreme Court could agree with them, after the decision at trial and then an appeal to the Second Circuit," wrote Volokh. "In practice, it's very unlikely that the Court would grant review in this case, and I don't see much appetite on the Court for overruling New York Times v. Sullivan."




• The National Butterfly Center in Texas is shutting down indefinitely in the face of harassment and conspiracy theories related to child trafficking.

• Washington, D.C., cops are accused in a new lawsuit of keeping a FOIA "watch list" of journalists, activists, and known critics of the D.C. government, whose records requests would intentionally be discouraged, delayed, or denied. The department has denied the allegation.

• Shroom legalization may be up for a vote in Michigan. "Activists in Michigan are launching a ballot initiative that would legalize using, growing and possessing psychedelic plants," reports.

• Sen. Lindsey Graham (R–S.C.) learns what loyalty to Trump gets you.

• Jobs numbers for January are out:

• "The early release of ex-Chicago cop Jason Van Dyke, convicted of killing Laquan McDonald, has enraged several civil rights groups, many of whom protested downtown Thursday evening," reports WGN9 Chicago. (Backstory on the shooting here.)

• "The American color line was…much more forgiving to European Jews than the divisions of the old country were. But they are branches of the same tree, the biological fiction of race," writes Adam Serwer, reflecting on the recent Whoopi Goldberg/Holocaust dust-up.

• Electoral map divisions could benefit Democrats: "Conventional wisdom heading into this year was that Republicans would benefit mightily from the decennial congressional line-drawing process, carving up districts and creating a decidedly friendly national map," notes CNN. "But as states rush to finish their House maps in advance of the rapidly approaching 2022 primary season, a new storyline has emerged: Democrats could well break even or possibly gain an advantage when all of the new lines are finished across the country."

NEXT: Clueless Newsom Shocked at California's 'Third World' Conditions

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. You think ENB is trying to influence a NYC jury with her....reporting?


  2. But was it malicious? That's a tougher call.

    "Oh, very well. Let's go with *racist*."

    1. Anti-racist?

    2. Everything published in the New York Times is malicious.

  3. Glad that jobs numbers are solid. The good news is that there are lots of openings available for people to work. Yeah, a lot of the jobs are menial labor, but the people at the lower rungs of the economic ladder now have more employment options. And wages are rising more quickly for them (good!). I know OBL will be disappointed by that. 🙂

    Really hope we continue to see more job growth over time. That would be good for the country.

    1. A lot of people are menially intelligent

      1. They need to work, too. Let's face it, in the aftermath of 2008, the Obama administration blew it, in terms of policies to promote rapid job growth recovery. The people in lower economic deciles suffered a lot for that. The dimwit we have as POTUS had a front row seat for that jobless recovery.

        POTIUS Biden seems anxious to replicate those Obama policy failures.

        1. Sadly, the government's hands are tied. The ZIR policy of the fed is nearly impossible to get out of once you take it on fully. Japan showed this for 2 decades. We were just a little later drinking the kool-aid.

        2. Indeed most people need to work, and those at the bottom of the pay scale need to adjust their expectations (or improve their market value).

          The problems start with the equity socialists who deny market outcomes, and can't abide much variability in pay.

      2. I read that as "menially indigent" first.

        1. Well, what do You expect from a "mentally indigent" reader? Not that I hold THAT against You... It is the fact that you are ETHICALLY uber-indigent, and yet always deny it, that I hold against You, Oh Perfect One!

          1. Hi ᛋᛋqrlsy, How's Reason's premier shitposter and fascist troll today? Suck much Nazi cock lately?

    2. 10 to 1 odds they get revised down in a few weeks. Takers?

      1. They always get revised, back toward reality and away from the Narrative (c)

      2. Nope, I like my money. But hopefully they don't go too far down. We need a little good economic news.

        1. Right to work states have recovered more more quickly. That's good news, but ignored.

          1. But what about right-not-to-work states?

            1. There’s an article about newsomes “third world” state on this site today.

              Since you asked.

    3. I had multiple contacts I talked with at the end of last year who had been searching for jobs and couldn't get them. Businesses had jobs posted, and they were applying, but they were not receiving call backs. This included some folks in Colorado applying for professional jobs, and kids here in California just trying to get a gig at the AMC or McDonalds.

      And then, this January, they all got call backs. All of them. Every one of them had a job within a few weeks.

      Something else was keeping businesses from hiring. I don't know if it was fear of more lockdowns, some government program incentivizing them to keep employment low, or an actual lizard-people conspiracy. But these jobs numbers back up what I was anecdotally seeing in the market. It is bizarre.

      1. Colorado was affected by a state law that required employers to post salary ranges for advertised jobs. That led companies advertising nationwide to exclude Coloradans from consideration.

        1. This wasn't that. It was even impacting jobs solely based in CO. And again, that law remains, but these people in Colorado all of a sudden all got jobs over the past month, despite almost a year of searching in 2021.

  4. "Democrats could well break even or possibly gain an advantage when all of the new lines are finished across the country."

    Oh look, another of my predictions (#BlueWave2022) will be correct.

    Let the record show I also predicted #BlueWave2018, and that the Democratic Congress would impeach Drumpf, and that Drumpf would lose in 2020 — before we even knew who his opponent would be.


    1. I am just glad ENB didn't mention the amazing gerrymandering NY was able to pull off after prior criticism of other gerrymandering.

      Weird how only gop favorable maps get stopped by the courts.

      1. Also, the NY restrictions on voting that are worse than the New Jim Crow in GA.

      2. Republican did have the opportunity to join in on Federal anti-gerrymandering bills. That they chose not to might come back to bite them.

        1. Why would they when Democrats will gerrymander regardless?

          "Gee, Thelma, why do you make me punch you so often?"

      3. I noticed that too. Dems are always free to gerrymander to hell and back.

  5. ...the paper accused the former Alaska governor's rhetoric of being responsible for the 2011 shooting that injured former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D–Ariz.) and killed six others.

    To be fair, she ran against Obama/Biden. She had to be punished.

    1. So the Times blamed Palin for six deaths? Meh. They have blamed me, a successful white male, for the enslavement and murder of millions, the overthrow of democracy, and the death of the planet.

      1. The Times and Wapo put that woman through the wringer. Remember they asked for volunteers to go though all her official emails looking for dirt, finding nothing. It was all malicious.

        1. I wasn’t aware of that. That could definitely be used to show malice.

  6. Been seeing a lot of governors crediting their mask mandates for "defeating" the Omicron wave. Thought I'd plot COVID cases in states with mask mandates vs. states without them, and, well…

    The red states are hiding their numbers, I'm sure.

    1. What did you expect when those so-called "mandates" were not enforced with prison time for those caught wearing masks improperly?

      1. Looks like we found the Aussie . . .

    2. That’s actually one of the cope responses in the thread.

  7. Re: Whoopi Goldberg

    I do not see why people are getting so worked up about her thoughtless comments. I mean, do you get mad at a dog when they piss on a fire hydrant? No! The dog is just being a dog.

    In a similar manner, Whoopi cannot help herself. She is just a progtard being a progtard. We should understand her obvious limitations, smile benignly, and let the other progtards rip her apart (like they are doing now). No need to join in on the fun.

    1. Didn't we also have a libertarian up in NH make a similar sort of holocaust comment recently?

      In her case it was more about some kooky spiritualist determinism about the nature of the human soul, but still pretty roundly offensive to most people.

      1. She was just being a thoughtless dimwit....mostly because she is. I can't get mad at someone fully realizing and demonstrating so aptly their potential. 🙂

        1. Perfect for morning TV, and suburban moms already into their wine box of the day.

    2. a good rule of thumb for speaking or writing in a public format is, if you feel like you want to comment or make an observation about the holocaust, dont.

      1. "Holocaust begins with an 'H', I say!"

        "BURN that heretical, racist BASTARD!"

  8. So... Sarah Palin, as has often been remarked, knows how to field dress a moose! One tough (as well as hot!) babe!

    Yet Her Precious Baby Feelings are HURT by some lies / insinuations that were retracted within ONE day?!? Sarah Palin... NOT so tough AFTER all!!!

    Plus, frankly, I am FAR more impressed by Bill Clinton, who was willing and able to field UN-dress a moose, and rapidly totally ravish that moose to pieces!

    1. Great argument.
      We'll put your name on the front page of the Times with the headline "He Murdered a Kid" and see if you feel like toughing it out or suing.

      1. So You're saying that Bill Clinton did an EXCELLENT job, up there in Canfuckistanistanistanistanistan, when he field un-dressed You and ravished You to pieces? And You can NOT just be CONTENT with that, but You just keep right after lusting after Der BidenFuhrer cumming up there, and doing soooo MUCH more than just sniffing Your Fashionable Hair?

        Frankly, My Dear, You have ONLY Yourself to blame! I can find NO faults with the stylishness of Your Purse, Your Hairstyle, or Your Whorestyle... They are ALL just as ravishingly beautiful as can be, and will be SURE to keep You "In" with the Cool Kids... But Your "Magic Beliefs" and "Cool Theology" fall WAY short! Oh Great Christian Theologian!

        We're still waiting for Your "Chapter and Verse" version of the Christian-ethical justifications for ID theft, and for lusting after the suicide-deaths of those people whose politics You find to be unfashionable!

        1. And he immediately changes the subject.
          What's it like being too stupid to even be capable of effectively arguing on the internet?

          1. Your hypocrisy and EVIL are NEVER topics that You want to honestly address, are they, Oh Perfect One?

            M. Scott Peck books costs money, and would severely strain Your reading efforts. Here is some help for You, for FREE!!!

            The intelligent, well-informed, and benevolent members of tribes have ALWAYS been resented by those who are made to look relatively worse (often FAR worse), as compared to the advanced ones. Especially when the advanced ones denigrate tribalism. The advanced ones DARE to openly mock “MY Tribe’s lies leading to violence against your tribe GOOD! Your tribe’s lies leading to violence against MY Tribe BAD! VERY bad!” And then that’s when the Jesus-killers, Mahatma Gandhi-killers, Martin Luther King Jr.-killers, etc., unsheath their long knives!

            “Do-gooder derogation” (look it up) is a socio-biologically programmed instinct. SOME of us are ethically advanced enough to overcome it, using benevolence and free will! For details, see and .

            1. You just said it's okay for the Times to lie and Palin should toughen up, and now you're saying lying is bad. If you're going to troll try and be coherent about it.

              "Oh Perfect One"
              Thanks. Compared to you we all are.

              1. "You just said it's okay for the Times to lie..."

                Citation please!

                I see! So you’re saying that the Intergalactic Sub-Smegmonic Boogoidian-Strawmen-Hybrids have deployed booger-beams (Those unspeakable BASTARDS) and have hijacked your tinfoil hat! You have my sympathies, but no more… I have no good advice for you, sorry! Other victims of the Intergalactic Sub-Smegmonic Boogoidian-Strawmen-Hybrids that I have known? They all ended up on Skid Row, and I could NOT help them!

                1. "Citation please!"

                  Here you go shit-for-brains. Do you think that your posts go invisible after a while?
                  "Yet Her Precious Baby Feelings are HURT by some lies / insinuations that were retracted within ONE day?!? Sarah Palin... NOT so tough AFTER all!!!"

                  1. "You just said it's okay..."

                    Where is the part where I said that this (lying) was OK by me?

                    WHY, in You writings above, did You just say that You LOVE being a lying servant of the Father of LIES?!?!?

                    1. You're not tricking anyone, retard.

                  2. Your QUITE fashionable whorestyle, on the other hand, turns MANY tricks!

  9. Attention KMW! Please have your official LGBTQIA+ correspondent Scott Shackford explain to these female athletes that they're hateful, science-denying bigots.

    Sixteen Penn swimmers say transgender teammate Lia Thomas should not be allowed to compete

    I literally cannot believe anyone still pushes this absolute nonsense about transwoman athletes having an "unfair advantage." It's 2022!


    1. All it takes to become the #1 swimmer from being the #426 the prior year is a sex change.

      1. Uhhhhhhhh, you're just going to eliminate the hypothesis that maybe Ms. Thomas simply practices harder now? That's sexist.


      2. You are assuming that there was a sex change procedure performed.

  10. “there was no reckless disregard for the truth, just sloppy editing and poor judgment”

    It will be funny if the New York Times’ lawyers go with a “sloppiness and poor judgment” defense.

    1. Funnier still if The Old Grey Hag has to pay up for defamation and libel.

    2. Why not? Remember when Rachel Maddow's lawyers went with the 'Well, no reasonable person would take her seriously' defense?

      1. I don’t remember but I take your word for it. I barely know who Maddie is.

        Sidney Powell recently used a similar defense. Unsuccessfully, so far.

        1. LOL. back to the lies of "i don't know who that is" like you did with Rogan, Rolling Stone, etc.


        2. Oh, well, you should enjoy this, because Tucker Carlson (your favorite guy) also used the defense after it worked for Maddow:

          "In sum, ruled the court, Rachel Maddow is among those “speakers whose statements cannot reasonably be interpreted as allegations of fact.” Despite Maddow's use of the word "literally” to accuse OAN of being a "paid Russian propaganda” outlet, the court dismissed the lawsuit on the ground that, given Maddow's conduct and her audience's awareness of who she is and what she does, “the Court finds that the contested statement is an opinion that cannot serve as the basis for a defamation claim."

          What makes this particularly notable and ironic is that a similar argument was made a year later by lawyers for Fox News when defending a segment that appeared on the program of its highest-rated program, Tucker Carlson Tonight. That was part of a lawsuit brought by the former model Karen McDougal, who claimed Carlson slandered her by saying she “extorted” former President Trump by demanding payments in exchange for her silence about an extramarital affair she claimed to have with him."

          1. Well, that should have all been in italics. I forgot that the tag doesn't survive a paragraph break. Everything but the first line is a quote from the linked article.

          2. Yes, that Rachel Maddow shit really sucked! I wonder what would have happened, had she said it in court, or wrote it in court filings! (Instead of "merely" lying to a TV audience).

            Sidney Powell Says She’s Not Guilty of Defamation Because ‘No Reasonable Person’ Would Have Believed Her ‘Outlandish’ Election Conspiracy Theory

            1. Aside from you changing the subject again, you didn't read the article close enough to realize Sidney Powell didn't say that.
              Her lawyer did, and then she made him withdraw the statement.

              Even when the article was written Sullum knew Powell didn't say that, and hasn't bothered to correct it since.

              But that's what you guys do. You lie about stuff, and then when you're caught you just drop the subject and walk away.

              1. Citation please!

                Also, readers, please forgive Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer for "Her" written lies above, 'cause SHE didn't write them; the Evil One MADE Her write them! Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer is currently trying to make the Evil One take these words BACK!!!

                (Next on the Hit Parade: If Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer doesn't manage to bend the Evil One to Her Will, She will tell the Evil One that It should commit suicide, and then Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer will threaten to hold Her Breath till the Evil One obeys!!!)

                1. Citation please!

                  It's in your own fucking link you gibbering retard!

                  Learn to read the articles you post beyond the headline next time.

                  1. From there, "But "no reasonable person would conclude that the statements were truly statements of fact," Powell says in her motion to dismiss the lawsuit."

                    Powell is a LAWYER, and it is ***HER*** MOTION to dismiss! Admitted to court, this motion was!!! Hello?!?! WHO are You blaming for YOUR lies?!?!?

                    If You don't believe lies, then do NOT submit them willingly, willfully, under YOUR name! WHY is this so hard?

                    But You're lying about Your lies, which You clearly lied about, but The Evil One MADE You lie, and then the Evil One lied about having the lawyer lie about Your lies, when You told the lawyer about maybe telling some BETTER lies instead... Wait! Wouldn't it be better to start out by NOT lying in the first place?!?!

                    But... But we ALL need to destinkmatize Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer for all of HER lies, 'cause She can't help it! She's got BPD!

                    Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer isn't merely an A1-grade Asshole... Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer is a STIGMATIZED asshole with a "borderline personality dis-odor" that stinks!!! So we need to DE-STINKMATIZE Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer, who has NO free will, NO volition at ALL! It has NO choice but to be an A1-grade Asshole!!!

                    Why Are People with Borderline Personality Treated Unfairly?
                    New research shows the stigma attached to borderline personality disorder.

                    1. Howard Kleinhendler made the claim. Not Powell. It's right there in Sullum's links, liar.

                      I know you're not particularly literate, and like you Sullum is being spectacularly dishonest, but as I said, always read the article links, fucknut.

                    2. Oh, so now it is buried in the LINKS, not in the article like You said! And if I go to check, it will be MORE made-up BULLSHIT by Mamma the servant of the Father of Lies, quite likely!

                      Powell submitted this crap in HER name! Just like YOU constantly LIE, and blame other people! This time around, was it Sidney Powell or the Evil One that made You do it, Oh Perfect One?

                      This is just Sidney Powell throwing up UTTER SHIT (just like Mammary-shit) to see what sticks, and what doesn't! Had the courts bought ALL of her shit, would she STILL be blaming her lawyer for her lies? If fascists like You and Sidney managed to kick Biden out and put Der TrumpfenFuhrer back in office, with lies and Big Lies, would Sidney STILL be blaming her lawyer for lies?

                      You are SOOOOO full of disgusting lies and utter SHIT!!!

              2. "Aside from you changing the subject again, you didn't read the article close enough to realize Sidney Powell didn't say that.
                Her lawyer did, and then she made him withdraw the statement."

                I've read the article a few times now AGAIN, and what You say is TOTALLY yet another one of YOUR Evil Big Lies!!! You just make up TOTAL lies, out of thin air combined with Your lethally stinky farts, and call them TRUE!

                HOW can You even tell Your mouth from Your asshole any more? Do You eat with Your asshole half the time, by now?

                  1. Bullshit excuses made up by Powell after her ass got kicked! "Oh, the courts aren't gonna buy my bullshit after all. Better cover my ass good and well, to fend off getting charged with perjury. Make sure that the courts know I can always cook up more bullshit, and fend off REAL justice."

                    Would YOU buy this kind of shit from Der BidenFuhrer, Oh Great Perfect Tribalist?

          3. I kind of remember the Tucker Carlson incident.

            Maddow, Carlson, Powell, the New York Times, should all be embarrassed, yet somehow they aren't. Sigh.

  11. When it come to most ENB articles I have started to think of a quote from the great James lindsey
    "okay groomer"

  12. Vitamin D’s power to fight COVID

    Researchers from Bar Ilan University and the Galilee Medical Center say that the vitamin has such a strong impact on disease severity that they can predict how people would fare if infected based on nothing more than their ages and vitamin D levels.

    What?! Not based on their vaccination status?!

    1. Thats not possible. Vitamin d isn't patented.

      1. What about vitamin (D)?

    2. "vitamin D levels" is code for white.

      1. The Sun is racist.

  13. Quote of the day—Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn

    In the Criminal Code of 1926 there was a most stupid Article 139 – “on the limits of necessary self-defense” —according to which you had the right to unsheath your knife only after the criminal’s knife was hovering over you. And you could stab him only after he had stabbed you. And otherwise you would be the one put on trial. (And there was no article in our legislation saying that the greater criminal was the one who attacked someone weaker than himself.) This fear of exceeding the measure of necessary self-defense lead to total spinelessness as a national characteristic. A hoodlum once began to beat up the Red Army man Aleksandr Zakharov outside a club. Zakharov took out a folding penknife and killed the hoodlum. And for this he got….ten years for plain murder! “And what was I supposed to do?” he asked, astonished. Prosecutor Artsishevsky replied: “You should have fled!” So tell me, who creates hoodlums?

    1. This still happens to this day - one of the reasons that dash cameras became so popular in Russia (way before they were used here) is that in the case of most car accidents, the police would just arrest everyone involved and wait for the courts to sort it out. Even when it was obvious who was at fault, even if there were multiple witnesses.

    2. At least they did not have to sort out race-gender-body shape oppressed status as a major determinant in relative guilt.

    3. This is literally their plan. They read Solzhenitsyn as an instruction manual.

  14. Remember this when the same left sends these kids to die for the Ukraine. Hunter Biden gets millions from the Ukraine; working class kids get body bags.

    In the midst of last year’s summer of unrest sparked by police killings of Black Americans across the nation, Army Gen. Mark A. Milley, who is also the Department of Defense’s Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told congressional leaders the military cannot afford racism or discrimination.

    “We who wear the cloth of our nation understand that cohesion is a force multiplier,” Milley said. “Divisiveness leads to defeat. As one of our famous presidents said, ‘A house divided does not stand.’”

    Austin pledged to rid the ranks of “racists and extremists” during his confirmation hearing before Congress, which came on the heels of the Capitol insurrection.

    “The job of the Department of Defense is to keep America safe from our enemies,” he said. “But we can’t do that if some of those enemies lie within our own ranks.”

    1. If milley was serious about the dods job he would commit suicide

    2. I'm more interested in the new recently released documents that completely undermine the testimony of the democrats and state department employees in Trump Impeachment 1.

      First they released documents showing the State department congratulating Sokin on fighting corruption in the Ukraine and giving him grants for the fights against corruption, just 3 months before they claim Biden and State thought Sokin was corrupt in testimony during impeachment.

      Then they released state department communications showing their concerns Hunter was stopping investigations into Ukranian corruption and Burisma.

      All the documents withheld by State during the impeachment.

        1. haha. caw caw!

          1. Except I really want a cite. To actually read.

    3. “The job of the Department of Defense is to keep America safe from our enemies,” he said. “But we can’t do that if some of those enemies lie within our own ranks.”

      And by enemies they mean anyone expressing disagreement with the dominant party ideology.


  15. I hope she wins. I really dislike her, but what does she have to do with some loon shooting at people? Such allegations are neither journalism nor an opinion, that is pulling crap out of someone´s ass.

  16. Returning travellers made to hand over phones and passcodes to Australian Border Force
    Sydney man says he doesn’t know what officials looked at on his phone or what happens to his data

  17. "Published in the wake of a Virginia shooting that left Rep. Steve Scalise (R–La.) badly injured, the op-ed originally suggested that Palin had contributed to making Giffords a target back in 2011 because a Facebook post from her political action committee (PAC) showed Giffords under crosshairs. The next day, the Times added two corrections to the editorial, saying that the image had shown Giffords' district—not Giffords herself—under crosshairs and that there was no established link between Palin's PAC's post and the crimes carried out by shooter Jared Loughner.

    If I'm on the jury, the only thing saving The New York Times is that Palin is both a public figure and in politics. We should be free to criticize political figures, and the law has no business restricting those criticisms to things that are only technically accurate.

    If you want to tell people that they should vote against Joe Biden because the emails on Hunter Biden's laptop say that Joe Biden has been accepting money directly from the Chinese government for a very long time, you should be free to print that without reservation--even if Hunter's emails say that Biden was getting the money through a middle man rather than getting the money directly from Chinese government officials.

    Palin would have a better case if she went after another news source that continued to repeat the Times' story about the crosshairs being on Gifford's district rather than her face--long after the Times had corrected the story.

    1. Discovery will make or break this case. Particularly, the emails between the legal staff and the editors who approved the story as written (and subsequent articles).

      While I agree that public figures and politicians are fair game for criticism, I do not go so far as to say that 1A protects intentional and malicious lying by the press. If they engage in that behavior (the jury will decide that), NYT should be liable for their actions and pay up.

      1. NY judge will state that there is no discovery until Palin's team can prove malice to find discovery of malice. Book it.

      2. XY so we will see whether the NY Times followed the old adage, "write all emails as if they will be published on the front page of the New York Times."

        1. They should have read your screen name three times before publishing that article. 🙂

    2. Is she "in politics" though? She wasn't in office or running for anything in 2017 when this was written.

      1. 1 drop rule. Once you pollute your body by becoming a politician, the effects last for years.

      2. She was close enough. She'd been out campaigning for Trump. I thought she'd get Secretary of the Interior. She probably did, too. She had Tea Party/Trumpist bona fides, and she was still ambitious.

    3. I love the piece that leveling this claim about Palin somehow isn't a sign of anti-GOP sentiment because they were trying to balance out the actual evil acts of a Democrat against Republicans with false statements about a Republican, so balance.


    Swiss Researchers Use Brain Electrodes to Stimulate Climate Concern

    Bern [Switzerland], January 8 (ANI): During a recent study by the University of Bern researchers used brain stimulation to demonstrate that the ability to sympathize with the future victims of climate change encourages sustainable behaviour.

    “The fact that people aren’t acting in a more climate-friendly way isn’t because we know too little about this critical situation, though,” explained Daria Knoch, Professor for Social Neuroscience at the University of Bern.
    To find out more about the reasons that prevent us from acting sustainably, Daria Knoch and her team have conducted a neuroscientific study.

    “It is precisely our inability to mentalise with these strangers that discourages climate-friendly action,” said Daria Knoch, commenting on the findings of the new study that she carried out with her research group in the “Social Neuro Lab” at the University of Bern.

    During the study, participants received stimulation to a part of their brain which plays an important role in taking the perspective of others. This stimulation led to more sustainable behaviour.-stimulate-climate-concern/

    1. So, if they make shit up, and stimulate us with brain electrodes, it becomes of concern?

      1. Pretty much the exact dystopian conclusion I reached

    2. This study has great implications for covid policy. If people aren't scared of covid, just zap their brains until they are.

      1. I believe this is video of said experiment.

      2. Oh, rats!!! Y'all are ON to us now!!! We SQRLS and Lizard People have been conspiring for a LOOONG time, to turn humans into remote-controlled, brain-electrodes-wired rats! But the news is OUT!

        Scientists wire up rats for remote control
        By implanting electrodes in rats’ brains, scientists have created rodents that can do their bidding remotely.

    3. Next, reserachers will focus on how to stimulate compliant parts of the brain with a "vaccine".

    4. Jesus.

  19. "Those prompt corrections and an apology the Times posted on Twitter seem to undercut Palin's claims," notes Politico.

    Those corrections only made after people pointed out the NYT own reporting prior showed no links and earlier corrections had to be made. It wasn't caught or fixed by the editors prior to publication.

    What a silly assertion.

    1. Now tell us in what way (and to what measurable monetary extent) did Sarah Palin's "brand" take any sustained damage from the briefly asserted, questionable "facts"? Besides "they hurt My Precious Baby Feelings"?

      Or do you think that our courts (and our taxes) should be tied up in addressing "they hurt My Precious Baby Feelings"?


        Don't get too mad about what I said there ᛋᛋqrlsy. After all it's only your "Precious Baby Feelings" being hurt.
        Strange too that you're saying it's okay for a national newspaper to purposefully lie after all the times you posted M. Scott Peck. Almost like you're a hypocrite or something.

        1. "Strange too that you're saying it's okay for a national newspaper to purposefully lie..."

          Citation please, evil liar! Stolen any IDs, and then posted child porn under the stolen ID lately, Oh Christian-Theologian-ID-Thief?

          Hey MammaryBahnFuhrer… How is Your new org coming along? Are You gaining many new converts and perverts to “Expert Christian Theologians for Identity Theft?” And where do we sign up for your newsletter?

          In Mamma fesses to her being an identity-thief and sock!
          chemjeff radical individualist
          March.21.2021 at 4:27 pm
          Uh oh, I think you left your sock on.
          1. SQRLSY 0ne
          March.21.2021 at 5:06 pm
          Yeah, sigh.

          Hey MammaryBahnFuhrer, Expert Christian Theologian! Did Jesus appear to You in a vision, and tell You that ID theft is a GREAT, wonderful thing? Or ARE You Jesus, returned to us, maybe?

          1. But didn't you just boast about stealing my ID?

            SQRLSY One
            December.2.2020 at 7:09 pm
            Bimbosday, 43 Bimbobember 2020 at 6:66 PM
            Mother's Lament: I lust after being abused by power-mad politicians, because I am power-mad myself! And I suffer under the utterly stupid illusion that power-mad politicians will feed me, like a doggy under the table, a wee few, tiny scraps of their vast powers. Biden came up here to Canoodlestanistanistanistanistan to noodle me and my poodle, and give me nookie, with my Wookie and my bookie, but all that Biden would do, is smell my hair! So I lust after Der TrumpfenFuhrer to come up here and grab my pussy good and hard!

            Pretty obvious you're trying to pretend to be me here, retard.
            So are you a liar? a hypocrite? or both?

            Also, why do you always try to switch the subject, retard?

            1. So YOU are stupid enough to believe that YOU posted shit under MY name? With my name, right up front? And You believe to be real, time-stamps such as...

              Bimbosday, 43 Bimbobember 2020 at 6:66 PM

              This is in TOTAL contrast to when you hijacked my posting ID, flat-out! If You are TOOO stupid and-or dishonest to see that, I can NOT help you! "Go to the Light, Servant of the Evil One"!

              Seek the healing powers of The Light, sincerely, and You CAN obtain healing! But I can't do this for You... YOUR case is ENTIRELY too stubborn and willful for me to put even a TINY dent into Your Perfect Ego-Defense!

    2. Yeah... That is easy to reach. They knew it was false when they published it. They did it anyway. It is per se defamation.

      The only way they lose on this case is baby playing the "we are a big important news organization and she is an icky republican politician" card.

      Cardi B just won a similar defamation suit on a set of defamatory statements that are at least arguably partially true. But the podcaster in question knew it was a lie when she said it (and didn't know about elements that might have been true).

      If we follow the standard, there is no question of defamation. It was defamatory the first time around. They just made it up out of whole cloth. Years later?


      "We apologized" is not a defense against defamation. It is a mitigation of damages. Apologies are admissions of guild, by definition.

  20. Soon we're going to see a story about nyt working with the fbi in a raid on Palin house

    1. But mostly malice-free.

  21. Mike Stabile
    Under the guise of purging "pornography," thousands of books on race and sexuality have been pulled from library shelves in Texas over the past few months.

    Books aren't banned because they are not taught in K-12 or not in a school library. The school library is not the Library of Congress. They do not have every book ever written.

    Can we stop with this idiocy? This isn't protests to cancel books from the publisher like Suess or various authors.

    1. Schools are just pissed that they can't circumvent parents anymore.

      I have to laugh about how the educational-industrial complex stepped on its own crank by refusing to go back to the classroom. Virtual learning allowed parents to become aware of what's happening in those classrooms, and to hear it with their own ears and see it with their own eyes, and they're PISSED at what they saw.

      1. I surely hope that the wuhan virus was the death knell of public school. Silver linings at least.

    2. It's super disingenuous to pretend that libraries are just not stocking these books because they don't have room for every book ever written. If they are selectively cleaning house on a few types of books that is obviously not what's going on.

      School libraries don't have to have every book ever written, but they should have a wide variety of books on topics relevant to students written from a wide variety of viewpoints. They don't have to have every book on race and sexuality, but they should have an ideologically diverse range of them. To do otherwise is irresponsible and failing in the library's responsibility to provide access to information.

      Back in high school I remember looking through the politics and current events section at my high school library and seeing lots of books written from different ideological perspectives. It would have been a bad thing if all the liberal in town got books written by conservatives pulled or vice versa. Kids deserve both perspectives. Ditto for race and sexuality.

      If there are bad parents who don't want their children to see other perspectives, tough. The library is serving their kid, not them. That's one thing that makes libraries awesome. Kids should not be deprived of books that could be of use or interest to them just because there are bad parents out there. And if the bad parents claim anything that they disagree with is "pornography" no one should be stupid enough to fall for it.

  22. Friday Funnies:

    Golden Corral in Philidelphia devolves into barroom fight over who gets the last piece of steak.

    "No one was arrested at the time but the investigation is continuing."

    1. I lived in Philly for about 6 years. This is not at all surprising.

      1. Come soon to urban America everywhere. Well, everywhere there is a Golden Corral, I guess.

        1. I think it's probably already in urban America everywhere, and starting to spill over into suburbia.

          1. Starting? You tube is has plenty of this stuff. This is from 2010.


      2. With regards to the Great Philly Steak Fight, You stake your claim that...

        "I lived in Philly for about 6 years. This is not at all surprising."

        I stake my claim that in Philly if you are VERY lucky, your horsemeat steak is a filly steak, or, you'll sit down and sea you have PhillaDolfin meat, or, yet FAR more likely, your Philly Steak will be made out of Phellow Philadelphians, Soylent-Green-style!

    2. The "Corral" part of the name is accurate.

    3. Fighting over bits of food? Now that's how to equity.

    4. This does raise some meaty issues about handling bones of contention in public settings.Of course I personally have no steak in this so I can afford to rib.

  23. People have questions about the stock gain and sell from Sen Raskins wife regarding a bank given special access to various federal resources.

    1. JesseAZ, her phone calls to regulators after being hired by a FinTech company are frankly more of a concern, from an ethics perspective. She knew what she was doing, and I have no doubt her uber-lib husband being a prominent congressman had no influence either, right?

      You know, if I did not know better, I would call her behavior influence peddling.

      1. Leave Hunter out of this!

        1. What about that Pelosi guy?

        2. Hunter is just a sick, amoral human being.

    2. Made my day, especially if it sinks Jamie. But gerrymandering keeps him in power.

      1. Slight correction: gerrymandering consolidates his power.

        1. Yes, that's a superior description of the facts.

      2. Why can’t Gerry Mandering mind her own business? Who the hell elected HER anyway?

  24. • Washington, D.C., cops are accused in a new lawsuit of keeping a FOIA "watch list" of journalists, activists, and known critics of the D.C. government, whose records requests would intentionally be discouraged, delayed, or denied. The department has denied the allegation.

    First they came for conservatives... then they came for parents... don't you dare come for journalists.

    1. I have James O'Keefe on line one...

  25. But they are branches of the same tree, the biological fiction of race...


    1. "Race is like pornography: I know it when I see it."

    2. What are you saying? You don’t think race is a fiction or ???

      1. I'm saying that Jesus was Jewish.

        1. Oh, so you actually meant, "Jesus.", not "Jee-sus!".

        2. Now, I'm wondering. At the height of the Dark Ages, did the Catholic Church consider/acknowledge Mary to be Jewish?

      2. What are you saying? You think race is a fiction?

        1. Imagine how obtuse Dee must be to continue posting responses like these to Fist’s comments.

      3. Yet, I'm sure you believe those icky Republicans are a bunch of racist huh?

        Feelings based logic on display here...

    3. The word "race" is like "gender".
      It definitely exists biologically as defined over the last 100 years, but like gender the left recently redefined the word and then claimed it's a social construct.

      This is actually dangerous as drug interactions and disease affect different populations differently. Like in individuals, but amplified and can be assumed.

      You're not going to bother investigating sickle-cell anemia in a Japanese or Tay-Sachs in a Yoruba. Sub-Saharan Africans and Europeans have a different type of earwax in predominance than East Asians or Native Americans, and the same with placement of apocrine sweat glands. Different populations are more susceptible to heart disease, diabetes and arteriosclerosis. Some populations handle starches better than others.

      Just because someone doesn't like a biological factor doesn't mean they can't pretend it doesn't exist. That's a little kid's mentality, and only fools the credulous.

      1. "That's a little kid's mentality, and only fools the credulous."

        In other words, politicians and voters.

  26. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R–S.C.) learns what loyalty to Trump gets you.

    Your concern-trolling doesn't get any less credible than admitting right up front that Lindsay Graham is a shit-eating dog willing to do or say the most cravenly degrading, disgustingly weaselly crap imaginable. Lindsay Graham is the cheapest of cheap whores and you're going to criticize him for sucking a dick? Please.

    1. He's not being criticized for sucking a dick. He's being criticized for sucking the wrong dick.

      1. Orange Dick Bad.

    2. Too bad Graham is not a literal dick sucker, since then he would be a sex worker hero.

  27. Why are so many leftists afraid and still support authoritarian covid restrictions? The primary news outlets ignore science like the John Hopkins study on effectiveness of lockdowns.

    1. The data has actually been against them for almost this entire time, but the political science demands they play pretend for a little while longer. My guess is until March 1 when Biden takes credit for spring and declares victory over covid.

  28. Still waiting on my free covid tests. I could be diseased right now and wouldn't know it. Thanks Biden.

    1. LOL when did you order it?

      1. 3 weeks ago now maybe, same day the website was announced.

        1. Same here, but i think i ordered second day. You think the mailing staff got covid? Toxic paste sealing the envelopes?

        2. My wife also ordered some on the second day and we haven’t gotten them.

          1. Wow with this amazing government efficiency it's staggering that they haven't stopped covid in its tracks.

        3. Any chance that by ordering a test the feds put you on (another) special list? Nah.

          1. That was my first thought though too, but I reasoned that if I did this it would increase my social credit score enough that I'll still be able to board a plane. That's how it works now, right?

    2. Likewise. I suspected that would happen.

      Given where the tests were manufactured it would probably be just as well if I never get them.

  29. Democrats could well break even or possibly gain an advantage when all of the new lines are finished across the country.

    And Biden's talk of new gun restrictions only helps their chances further!

  30. "EU nations agree step-by-step approach to migration reform"
    "Denmark, for example, suggests a reference in the reform plans “to the funding opportunities for physical barriers under the Border Management and Visa Instrument (BMVI),” given that the European Council’s legal service “has made it clear that it is possible to fund physical barriers from the EU budget.”..."

    Don't dare call it a "wall".

  31. Under the guise of purging "pornography," thousands of books on race and sexuality have been pulled from library shelves in Texas over the past few months.

    *SCHOOL* library shelves. Public schools. It's not that hard to understand why giving sexually explicit material could be objectionable to the parents of those children.

    1. Notice that private schools have no such controversies.. Just sayin

      1. My kids go to private school. I don't get any financial aid for tuition. The schools like the piles of cash I give them every year.

        1. But how are your kids going to learn to CRT, and how to inform on their parents?

          1. I actually picked a school that says in its mission statement, "Parents are the primary educators of their children." Their teachers are non-union and parents are encouraged to observe classes.

            I just hope they're allowed to stay open long enough for my kids to graduate.

    2. It's an attempt at distraction from all the banning, deplatforming and censorship they've been doing lately.

      1. The contradiction between coverage of different examples of “censorship” at Reason is telling.

        1. Come on man! ENB knows the government has authority to tell private companies to sensor icky conservatives about COVID misinformation. Parents having ANY say-so about what their kids read/learn, those parents should just STFU and listen to the government. This is the mind of ENB and most of Reason staff and progressives.

    3. There have been some sillier objections like those showing nudecmice on the way to the gas chambers in Maus, to genuinely crazy things like children's books showing a child giving an adult fellatio in the some of the edgier "queer" categories. You cannot lump all these "bans" as one hysterical reaction. You have to judge case by case, if you want to be honest.

      1. If you want to be honest you wouldn’t call curriculum decisions censorship at all.

      2. "You have to judge case by case, if you want to be honest."

        They don't want to be honest.

    4. Let's see, they cancelled Huckleberry Finn, Dr Seuss, Laura Ingalls but let's cry when “Gender Queer: A Memoir” gets yanked.

    5. It sounds like most of the books being challenged are young adult books, not children's books. So they are probably for teenagers, not children. I suppose in smaller schools they might all have one library, but really we are talking about high schoolers, maybe middle schoolers reading these books. They can get into a PG-13, and sometimes R-rated movies by themselves. If my memories of high school are anything to go by, a lot of banter was just as "explicit" as these books.

      I can't really understand why parents would find these books objectionable unless they're some paranoid helicopter parent who makes their 16-year olds ride in booster seats.

  32. Maybe old news:

    Citing its powers under the COVID state of emergency beginning March 2020, the government of Nova Scotia, Canada, has declared it illegal to:
    •Finance, organize, aid, or participate in a truck convoy
    •Line the roadside in support of a truck convoy
    Violators face $10,000 fines.

    1. The Nova Scotia premier needs to go to jail.
      He's flagrantly violating the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (part of the Canadian constitution), and he knows it. He knows that this won't stand up in court but he's striking while the irons hot. In a month when this is thrown out of court if won't matter.

      1. As I told my son, first amendment [equivalent] freedoms don't mean much without second amendment freedoms backing it up.

        1. Does the Second cover tar and feathers?

      2. Meh. The Canadians are descendants of people who did not mind oppressive rule. Royalists literally moved from US colonies to Canada during and after the Revolution. Since then, they have simply rebranded submissiveness as politeness.

        1. We come from the exact same places as Americans, but Nova Scotia, the province in question, did have a lot of United Empire Loyalists who fled the colonies. Western Canada had essentially none.
          That said Britain was no more oppressive than the Revolutionaries.

    2. this is CCP level insanity

    3. These are the same people who bent a knee to BLM and shrugged at having their downtown bombed out.

      I'm sure of it.

    4. Holy shit

    5. New news to me, thanks! I made it a post.

  33. 'In addition, the Supreme Court has held—in the 1964 case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan—that when statements involve a public figure, they must have been made with "actual malice"—that is, "with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not."'

    In other words, the official NY Times editorial policy. How else are they going to win against racists and fascists?

    1. Anything agreeing with the 1619 fiction is by definition recklessly disregarding the truth.

  34. "Under the guise of purging "pornography," thousands of books on race and sexuality have been pulled from library shelves in Texas over the past few months.
    'Pornography' isn't a defined category of content. It's anything they want to ban"

    They've been desperately trying to portray (lie) routine decisions about curriculum and purchasing as "book burning".

    I think it's because they know that they've overstepped with their Twitter bans, and the attacks on Rowling and Rogan, and the actual fucking book burning; so are now trying to pull a "both sides".

    1. I don't think "both sides" is fallacious in a two-party system where people are forced to pick between two sides. If someone is thinking of voting Republican because Democrats are censorious fanatics who try to ban books, finding out that Republicans aren't any better is important info. It lets them know that when choosing which side to support, they need to base their selection on other qualities.

  35. The biggest story yesterday was Emperor Xi and Putin coming out of the closet about their intimate relationship. This may not be as significant as the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact between Hitler and Stalin before World War II, but, then again, historians of the future may date the formal beginning of the Second Cold War to the day Emperor Xi and Putin made their relationship open, public, and explicit.

    In recent weeks, it was hard not to notice that China was coordinating with Russia in attempting to turn Germany against NATO. China is boycotting anything sourced in any way from Lithuania, and that meant Germany had to stop sourcing materials and components through their supply chain--from another EU member--if Germany wanted to keep exporting to China. China pushed this in Lithuania while Putin continued to taper off natural gas supplies to Germany in the middle of winter ahead of his push into Ukraine.

    China and Russia have both been actively insulating their economies against international pressure for a long time. China has forbidden Chinese companies from going public in western stock markets, pushed its domestic industrial base to seek growth in China rather than depend on exports, and Xi has blown up China's property bubble in a controlled way--and put the Chinese government in charge--so as not to put the Chinese economy and its lenders at the mercy of western credit markets.

    It should be noted that as much as American trade protectionists fear the loss of industrial jobs in the U.S., China probably fears the influence of American consumers on Chinese companies even more. When Emperor Xi couldn't coax Chinese companies to move into Xinjiang as a follow up to his Uygur "reeducation" efforts, it freaked him out. How much of an emperor is he really if he can't make Chinese manufacturers move into Xinjiang because American and European consumers will boycott any western retailer that knowingly stocks their shelves with materials sourced from Xinjiang?

    Our sanctions have had a similar impact on Russia. Once the power players and oligarchs in Putin's circle have been cut off from the west financially, they have little to lose from Putin's antics--and all of their power now depends on Putin. There's no escape route to the west. Cancel culture has no place in trade policy or foreign policy, and it's ultimately self-defeating. We've isolated Putin's cronies from western support--now what? Like Xi in China, Putin has been actively insulating Russia's economy from western influence, and we've been helping him with sanctions. Meanwhile, Putin has built up enormous currency reserves, run lean budgets, and reoriented Russia's trade dependencies in preparation for this.

    "Over the past several years, Mr. Putin, Russia’s president, has restructured his country’s economy for the specific purpose of withstanding Western financial pressure.

    Russia has drastically reduced its use of dollars, and therefore Washington’s leverage. It has stockpiled enormous currency reserves, and trimmed its budgets, to keep its economy and government services going even under isolation. It has reoriented trade and sought to replace Western imports.

    Russian economic officials “are pretty proud, and have good reasons to be, for the work they have done to make the Russian economy more immune to sanctions,” said Alexander Gabuev, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Moscow Center."

    ----The New York Times

    We appear to be entering a new Cold War, with China and Russia coordinating their activities rather than competing like they did in the First Cold War. In the First Cold War, our adversaries coalesced around the ideology of communism. In the Second Cold War, our adversaries appear to be coalescing around the ideas of nationalism and authoritarianism. Both Xi and Putin enjoy a certain amount of support from their people, who seem to believe that a strong leader is needed to impose national unity in the pursuit of national interests--and without a strong leader, there would be chaos.

    The United States was less capitalist, in various ways, during the Cold War than we are now, but even in the 1960s and 1970s, we were considered the champions of capitalism in the Cold War. If the Second Cold War is more about pluralistic democracy, we need to get our own house in order. Progressive ideas that divide us by setting genders and races against each other need to be defeated. Treating Americans like sexists, xenophobes, homophobes, and racists--just because they aren't behind the only approved ideology of progressivism--needs to be consigned to the ash heap of history.

    1. Mr. Putin should be very careful, adopting a pet tiger (Red China). Invariably, the tiger turns and eats their prey when they sense the time is right. Putin would do well to remember that.

      Of course they are coordinating. Does anyone think the dimwit POTUS we have can conceive new creative foreign policy choices to address this? Biden? C'mon man.

      War is coming. We are not prepared.

    1. So Biden approves of walls but only if they keep Americans out.

    2. "When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; but when the government fears the people, there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson

      Sorry Tom, but I don't think that brand new White House wall indicates oncoming liberty by the government.

  36. How can Palin prove malice when the NYT always cites two or more named, reliable, verifiable sources?
    Oh, wait.

  37. I just saw a news story that Michael Avenatti was convicted of stealing from Stormy Daniels. So I guess all the people who were going on about what a badass he is and how he's gonna get Trump and how he ought to run for President are now going to insist that they "knew it all along" and "hey, I never liked him anyway".

  38. John McWhorter recently said that liberals need to stop being so terrified of being called racist, because it lets the Elect (his term for "antiracist" SJWs) control them through fear.

    I think conservatives have recently realized that words like "pornography" and "child pornography" have a similar effect to the word "racist." You can use those words to intimidate people, no matter how wildly inaccurate they are. It is analogous to the way that progs use "racist" to describe anyone who disagrees with them, even if they don't have a racist bone in their body. In its most extreme form this leads to all that Qanon nonsense. In a milder form we have this library censorship, where books that would barely be PG-13 if they were movies are accused of being "pornography" that "children" (actually high school students in their late teens) are "exposed" to (i.e. read of their own volition").

    People need to stop falling for this stupidity the same way they need to stop falling for being called "racist."

  39. Constitutional laywer and scholar Alan Dershowitz sees it differently.
    Dershowitz: Sarah Palin will win in court
    Harvard Professor Emeritus and legal scholar predicts the outcome of Sarah Palin's defamation case against New York Times.

    Does anyone at Reason have his credentials?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.