lifesitenews--2020-02-07--Twitter deviates from its own policy by allowing death wishes for Rush Limbaugh

February 7 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – As left-wing voices continue to wish death and suffering upon conservative pundit Rush Limbaugh after the announcement of his lung cancer diagnosis , Twitter ’ s tolerance for such comments stands in stark contrast to the company ’ s zero-tolerance policy on “ misgendering.
” “ Twitter is showing extreme bias in permitting tweets rejoicing at the severe cancer diagnosis of Rush Limbaugh yet blocking our account based on a tweet identifying a person by his biological sex rather than his preferred self representation , ” LifeSiteNews co-founder and editor-in-chief John-Henry Westen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shocked the conservative world Monday by announcing that he has been diagnosed with advanced lung cancer .
Limbaugh said he plans to continue to “ do this program as normally and as competently and as expertly as I do each and every day , because that is the source of my greatest satisfaction professionally , personally ” while he undergoes treatment with a “ great bunch of doctors.
” The news was met with an outpouring of support from prominent conservatives and Republicans , with President Donald Trump awarding Limbaugh the Presidential Medal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ State of the Union address .
Many on the Left responded with contempt , however , expressing delight at Limbaugh ’ s misfortune and even wishing a painful death on him : All these tweets and more remain live as of February 6 , despite the fact that Twitter ’ s own rules forbid “ wishing , hoping or calling for serious harm on a person or group of people , ” with “ Hoping that someone dies as a result of a serious disease , e.g.
, ‘ I hope you get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of its own examples of “ hateful conduct.
” While most of its Hateful Conduct Policy is framed in terms of racial , sexual , or religious discrimination , they also state that “ individuals do not need to be a member of a specific protected category for us to take action.
” By contrast , Twitter has censored numerous accounts for respectfully disputing left-wing orthodoxy .
Last December , Twitter locked LifeSiteNews ’ account for tweeting a link to the story , “ Trans activist Jonathan ‘ Jessica ’ Yaniv ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t see him.
” Twitter called it a “ violation ” of its rules but didn ’ t specify which one .
LifeSite appealed the decision , but its main Twitter account remains locked to this day .
The Yaniv incident was just one of many examples of Twitter cracking down on conservative and pro-family voices on the grounds that referring to someone by his actual sex rather than his “ gender identity ” is automatically “ hateful ” and therefore forbidden .
Twitter has a long record of bans and suspensions affecting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right-of-center perspectives , while Twitter insiders have admitted to intentionally targeting conservative accounts and topics .
Nor is Twitter ’ s double-standard anything new , with the platform tolerating left-wing or anti-family content ranging from calls to “ eradicate ” Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway to “ discussions of … attraction toward minors .
”

The social media platform forbids 'wishing, hoping or calling for serious harm on a person or group of people,' yet it bans accounts questioning gender ideology.
February 7, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – As left-wing voices continue to wish death and suffering upon conservative pundit Rush Limbaugh after the announcement of his lung cancer diagnosis, Twitter’s tolerance for such comments stands in stark contrast to the company’s zero-tolerance policy on “misgendering.”
“Twitter is showing extreme bias in permitting tweets rejoicing at the severe cancer diagnosis of Rush Limbaugh yet blocking our account based on a tweet identifying a person by his biological sex rather than his preferred self representation,” LifeSiteNews co-founder and editor-in-chief John-Henry Westen said.
The veteran talk radio host shocked the conservative world Monday by announcing that he has been diagnosed with advanced lung cancer. Limbaugh said he plans to continue to “do this program as normally and as competently and as expertly as I do each and every day, because that is the source of my greatest satisfaction professionally, personally” while he undergoes treatment with a “great bunch of doctors.”
The news was met with an outpouring of support from prominent conservatives and Republicans, with President Donald Trump awarding Limbaugh the Presidential Medal of Freedom during Tuesday evening’s State of the Union address. Many on the Left responded with contempt, however, expressing delight at Limbaugh’s misfortune and even wishing a painful death on him:
Almost every minute of Rush’s adult life has been spent purposely making the world worse. He’s a racist, sexist, greedy, hateful man who has sown fear and violence with every dollar he’s made. There is absolutely no question whatsoever that the world is better without him in it. — Reza Aslan (@rezaaslan) February 4, 2020
Rush Limbaugh has spend decades spewing dangerous anti-Black racism. Now he has cancer… I know we shouldn't celebrate one's misfortunes…. but #PartyOverHere pic.twitter.com/NVI1mVg2hW — Tariq Nasheed ���� (@tariqnasheed) February 3, 2020
Prayers for Rush Please God, kill the bastard slowly and painfully. https://t.co/zH0u5WEE6o — Pants McShirt (@pantsmcshirt) February 3, 2020
Good. I’d dance on his grave. He’s been one of the most cynical, destructive forces in American public life for almost 30 years. He was Rupert Murdoch in this country before Fox News. He’s poison & we shouldn’t pretend like he’s anything other than what he’s been. — Ellsworth J. Abercrombie IV (@AnyDemIn2020) February 3, 2020
“I've never wished a man dead, but I have read some obituaries with great pleasure” Your time is coming you rabid vile white supremacist trash bag. — The Left Independent (@Bboone24Brandon) February 3, 2020
All these tweets and more remain live as of February 6, despite the fact that Twitter’s own rules forbid “wishing, hoping or calling for serious harm on a person or group of people,” with “Hoping that someone dies as a result of a serious disease, e.g., ‘I hope you get cancer and die,’” as one of its own examples of “hateful conduct.” While most of its Hateful Conduct Policy is framed in terms of racial, sexual, or religious discrimination, they also state that “individuals do not need to be a member of a specific protected category for us to take action.”
By contrast, Twitter has censored numerous accounts for respectfully disputing left-wing orthodoxy. Last December, Twitter locked LifeSiteNews’ account for tweeting a link to the story, “Trans activist Jonathan ‘Jessica’ Yaniv ‘shocked … confused’ gynecologist won’t see him.” Twitter called it a “violation” of its rules but didn’t specify which one. LifeSite appealed the decision, but its main Twitter account remains locked to this day.
The Yaniv incident was just one of many examples of Twitter cracking down on conservative and pro-family voices on the grounds that referring to someone by his actual sex rather than his “gender identity” is automatically “hateful” and therefore forbidden.
Twitter has a long record of bans and suspensions affecting non-violent, non-hateful, non-obscene tweets from right-of-center perspectives, while Twitter insiders have admitted to intentionally targeting conservative accounts and topics. Nor is Twitter’s double-standard anything new, with the platform tolerating left-wing or anti-family content ranging from calls to “eradicate” Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway to “discussions of … attraction toward minors.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-10--How one pro-life org is harnessing the internet to save countless babies from abortion

February 10 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) — Brian Fisher was a successful businessman before he became a passionate pro-life activist .
In 2009 , he launched Human Coalition in order to prevent unborn babies from being aborted .
Today he is blazing a trail in the pro-life movement with his marketing and analytical skills .
“ In the late 2000s , most for-profit businesses were using internet ads to reach people , ” Fisher told pro-life activist Jonathon van Maren in a recent interview .
“ And the pro-life movement was not doing a lot of that work .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ sort of just a logical gap .
‘ Let 's go online to where our potential clients are and let 's introduce ourselves and invite them to have a conversation with us.
’ ” Fisher says his team realized pretty quickly that there was a disconnect between how pro-lifers were operating and the reality on the ground .
Technology , he said , offered a unique way to reach women who were using the internet to get an abortion .
“ If a woman ... is searching for an abortion provider , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she sees , which means we need to be very wise and aggressive about how we market to her through ads and links online , ” he said .
“ The first ad that you 'll see or the first link you 'll see will belong to us , and she 'll click on the phone number and she 'll be immediately connected to our contact center and we 'll continue to build the relationship from there .
It 's also the exact same sort of cycle that you and I go through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a product online.
” While he admits Google and social media is under pressure to crack down on social conservatives , Fisher believes that his team is effective enough to overcome any sort of censorship .
“ We will continue to find creative ways to find women who need our services , ” he emphatically stated .
Ultimately , Brian Fisher is someone driven by numbers .
After bringing on auditors and a group of marketers to evaluate what sort of improvements could be made , he decided to implement a number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continue to do so going forward .
“ Once we were operational , the data then drove our decisions .
We started a contact center because the data suggested we should .
We began to bring in our own clinics…because the data suggested that we should .
We started a social work program because the data said we should .
We started a political effort because the data was irrefutable.
” Fisher says it ’ s important to create a pipeline where pregnant moms can feel loved and welcomed .
In order to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out to them in ways they haven ’ t before .
“ We continue to find new ways to reach women who are high risk to abort .
We own and operate a fantastic call center…they take calls and chats and texts and instant messages from women all day long , ” he said .
“ And then they set appointments at either a pregnancy center that we work with in different parts of the country or at our own network of clinics that we own and operate.
” Fisher said that Human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that helps women with continual care .
He ’ s also in the beginning stages of setting up a virtual clinic online .
“ It 's a rescue system designed to find women and children who are at risk.
” We need to “ bring them into a loving system of care , ” he said .
Listen to the interview in its entirety below .
The Van Maren Show is hosted on numerous platforms , including Spotify , SoundCloud , YouTube , iTunes , and Google Play .
For a full listing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ various channels , visit our Acast webpage here .
To receive weekly emails when a new episode is uploaded , click here .

February 10, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Brian Fisher was a successful businessman before he became a passionate pro-life activist. In 2009, he launched Human Coalition in order to prevent unborn babies from being aborted. Today he is blazing a trail in the pro-life movement with his marketing and analytical skills.
“In the late 2000s, most for-profit businesses were using internet ads to reach people,” Fisher told pro-life activist Jonathon van Maren in a recent interview. “And the pro-life movement was not doing a lot of that work. And so to us, it was sort of just a logical gap. ‘Let's go online to where our potential clients are and let's introduce ourselves and invite them to have a conversation with us.’”
Fisher says his team realized pretty quickly that there was a disconnect between how pro-lifers were operating and the reality on the ground. Technology, he said, offered a unique way to reach women who were using the internet to get an abortion.
“If a woman…is searching for an abortion provider, we want to be the first link that she sees, which means we need to be very wise and aggressive about how we market to her through ads and links online,” he said.
“The first ad that you'll see or the first link you'll see will belong to us, and she'll click on the phone number and she'll be immediately connected to our contact center and we'll continue to build the relationship from there. It's also the exact same sort of cycle that you and I go through all the time when we're searching for a product online.”
While he admits Google and social media is under pressure to crack down on social conservatives, Fisher believes that his team is effective enough to overcome any sort of censorship. “We will continue to find creative ways to find women who need our services,” he emphatically stated.
Ultimately, Brian Fisher is someone driven by numbers. After bringing on auditors and a group of marketers to evaluate what sort of improvements could be made, he decided to implement a number of changes, and says he will continue to do so going forward.
“Once we were operational, the data then drove our decisions. We started a contact center because the data suggested we should. We began to bring in our own clinics…because the data suggested that we should. We started a social work program because the data said we should. We started a political effort because the data was irrefutable.”
Fisher says it’s important to create a pipeline where pregnant moms can feel loved and welcomed. In order to do that, pro-lifers need to reach out to them in ways they haven’t before.
“We continue to find new ways to reach women who are high risk to abort. We own and operate a fantastic call center…they take calls and chats and texts and instant messages from women all day long,” he said. “And then they set appointments at either a pregnancy center that we work with in different parts of the country or at our own network of clinics that we own and operate.”
Fisher said that Human Coalition has an extended social work program that helps women with continual care. He’s also in the beginning stages of setting up a virtual clinic online.
“It's a rescue system designed to find women and children who are at risk.” We need to “bring them into a loving system of care,” he said.
Listen to the interview in its entirety below.
The Van Maren Show is hosted on numerous platforms, including Spotify, SoundCloud, YouTube, iTunes, and Google Play.
For a full listing of episodes, and to subscribe to various channels, visit our Acast webpage here.
To receive weekly emails when a new episode is uploaded, click here.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-10--Sanders vows pro-Roe litmus tests, ‘significant’ expansion of Planned Parenthood funding

February 10 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Socialist presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders , I-Vermont , reiterated his pro-abortion bona fides to voters Friday evening , pledging to enshrine abortion in federal law and give far more of the taxpayers ’ money to the abortion industry .
Sanders , whom some in the media are dubbing the Democrat primary ’ s new frontrunner , made the remarks Friday evening during a presidential debate in New Hampshire .
“ Is there a litmus test for those of us up here ?
For me there is , ” he said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Supreme Court or the federal courts in general who is not 100 percent pro-Roe v. Wade .
Number two , we have got to codify Roe v. Wade into legislation .
Number three , we have to significantly expand funding for Planned Parenthood.
” Sanders also declared that “ being pro-choice is an absolutely essential part of being a Democrat.
” The answer came as little surprise to those familiar with Sanders ’ record .
His uncompromising abortion platform includes judges that would not only uphold but expand Roe v. Wade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ go after those states ” that restrict abortion “ in every way that I legally can , ” support for overseas abortion funding as part of fighting climate change , voting against medical care for newborns who survive abortions , and refusing to answer whether abortion is ever wrong .
Last week , it was reported that Sanders is considering an executive order that would reverse the Trump administration ’ s Protect Life Rule , which cuts almost $ 60 million from Planned Parenthood ’ s annual federal funding by disqualifying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Title X program .

February 10, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Socialist presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, reiterated his pro-abortion bona fides to voters Friday evening, pledging to enshrine abortion in federal law and give far more of the taxpayers’ money to the abortion industry.
Sanders, whom some in the media are dubbing the Democrat primary’s new frontrunner, made the remarks Friday evening during a presidential debate in New Hampshire.
“Is there a litmus test for those of us up here? For me there is,” he said. “I will never nominate any person to the Supreme Court or the federal courts in general who is not 100 percent pro-Roe v. Wade. Number two, we have got to codify Roe v. Wade into legislation. Number three, we have to significantly expand funding for Planned Parenthood.”
Sanders also declared that “being pro-choice is an absolutely essential part of being a Democrat.”
The answer came as little surprise to those familiar with Sanders’ record. His uncompromising abortion platform includes judges that would not only uphold but expand Roe v. Wade, directing the U.S. Department of Justice to “go after those states” that restrict abortion “in every way that I legally can,” support for overseas abortion funding as part of fighting climate change, voting against medical care for newborns who survive abortions, and refusing to answer whether abortion is ever wrong.
Last week, it was reported that Sanders is considering an executive order that would reverse the Trump administration’s Protect Life Rule, which cuts almost $60 million from Planned Parenthood’s annual federal funding by disqualifying abortion groups from receiving family-planning grants under the Title X program.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-10--Trump unveils budget plan to defund abortion centers like Planned Parenthood

WASHINGTON , D.C. , February 10 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – The White House submitted its $ 4.89 trillion annual budget proposal to Congress Monday , laying out a plan that contains numerous spending cuts , including defunding abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood .
The plan illustrates President Donald Trump ’ s policy priorities , though few expect it to resemble whatever ultimately becomes law .
The Fiscal Year 2021 plan calls for various cuts to the budgets of the US State Department , Department of Education , Environmental Protection Agency , and more , while increasing military @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Departments of Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs , as well as NASA .
It projects a $ 4.6 trillion deficit reduction , but rolls back the timetable for eliminating the deficit from eight years to fifteen .
On the pro-life front , the plan calls for eliminating the taxpayer funding Planned Parenthood receives via US Departments of Labor and Health & Human Services ( HHS ) , as well as funding for the pro-abortion United Nations Population Fund ( UNFPA ) .
It would also strengthen federal conscience protections by adopting the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prioritizes the value of human life by ensuring that Federal funding does not support abortions , ” the plan explains .
“ The Budget proposes to prohibit Federal funding , such as in the Title X Family Planning and Medicaid programs , for certain entities that provide abortion services .
The Budget also protects conscience rights , prohibits coercion in healthcare , and allows private parties to enforce such rights in Federal court .
With these protections , the Administration will continue to ensure robust protection of conscience rights and religious liberty.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will continue to unilaterally block certain pockets of abortion funding , such as the UNFPA and excluding abortion organizations from the Title X program , few expect the FY2021 plan ’ s new pro-life provisions to make it into the final budget that becomes law .
Planned Parenthood has continued to receive over $ 500 million from federal taxpayers every year since 2016 , and reported $ 616 million in its most recent annual report .
Despite numerous pro-life campaign promises from the president and congressional Republicans , the abortion industry ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a variety of factors , including Senate and House GOP leaders that conservatives say are unwilling to fight for the base ’ s priorities , Senate filibuster rules that require Democrats to agree to most bills despite Republicans having a majority , and Democrats taking the House of Representatives in 2018 .
President Trump himself has repeatedly demonstrated he is unwilling to veto spending bills that contain abortion dollars , though conservatives argue that such bugdet fights are winnable with the proper pressure .
“ If outside conservative organizations , media , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ focused , President Trump ’ s second term can be more fiscally conservative , ” Conservative Review senior editor Daniel Horowitz writes .
“ Trump will sign a bad budget if the swamp consensus coalesces around it .
But at the same time , if conservatives work to back the non-swamp elements of the administration pushing for spending cuts the president is clearly OK with , he would sign a good budget as well .
”

'The Budget prioritizes the value of human life by ensuring that Federal funding does not support abortions,' the plan explains.
WASHINGTON, D.C., February 10, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The White House submitted its $4.89 trillion annual budget proposal to Congress Monday, laying out a plan that contains numerous spending cuts, including defunding abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood. The plan illustrates President Donald Trump’s policy priorities, though few expect it to resemble whatever ultimately becomes law.
The Fiscal Year 2021 plan calls for various cuts to the budgets of the US State Department, Department of Education, Environmental Protection Agency, and more, while increasing military spending as well as the budgets for the Departments of Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs, as well as NASA. It projects a $4.6 trillion deficit reduction, but rolls back the timetable for eliminating the deficit from eight years to fifteen.
On the pro-life front, the plan calls for eliminating the taxpayer funding Planned Parenthood receives via US Departments of Labor and Health & Human Services (HHS), as well as funding for the pro-abortion United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). It would also strengthen federal conscience protections by adopting the Conscience Protection Act.
“The Budget prioritizes the value of human life by ensuring that Federal funding does not support abortions,” the plan explains. “The Budget proposes to prohibit Federal funding, such as in the Title X Family Planning and Medicaid programs, for certain entities that provide abortion services. The Budget also protects conscience rights, prohibits coercion in healthcare, and allows private parties to enforce such rights in Federal court. With these protections, the Administration will continue to ensure robust protection of conscience rights and religious liberty.”
Regardless, while the administration can and will continue to unilaterally block certain pockets of abortion funding, such as the UNFPA and excluding abortion organizations from the Title X program, few expect the FY2021 plan’s new pro-life provisions to make it into the final budget that becomes law. Planned Parenthood has continued to receive over $500 million from federal taxpayers every year since 2016, and reported $616 million in its most recent annual report.
Despite numerous pro-life campaign promises from the president and congressional Republicans, the abortion industry’s subsidies have continued. This is due to a variety of factors, including Senate and House GOP leaders that conservatives say are unwilling to fight for the base’s priorities, Senate filibuster rules that require Democrats to agree to most bills despite Republicans having a majority, and Democrats taking the House of Representatives in 2018.
President Trump himself has repeatedly demonstrated he is unwilling to veto spending bills that contain abortion dollars, though conservatives argue that such bugdet fights are winnable with the proper pressure.
“If outside conservative organizations, media, and members of Congress would actually stay focused, President Trump’s second term can be more fiscally conservative,” Conservative Review senior editor Daniel Horowitz writes. “Trump will sign a bad budget if the swamp consensus coalesces around it. But at the same time, if conservatives work to back the non-swamp elements of the administration pushing for spending cuts the president is clearly OK with, he would sign a good budget as well.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-10--Former Bill Clinton strategist excoriates woke 2020 Dems: ‘Not how you win an election’

February 10 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Long-term Democratic Party strategist and political commentator James Carville has accused the party of losing its mind in an interview with Vox , slamming the party for getting “ distracted ” by woke issues and leftist causes , rather than the issues that voters actually care about .
Carville , who was the lead strategist during Bill Clinton ’ s successful 1992 presidential campaign , spoke to Vox following an appearance last week on MSNBC , where he slammed the Democrats for their chaotic mismanagement of the recent Iowa caucus .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on social issues : they support taxpayer-funded abortion on demand and the homosexual/LGBT cause .
At least two candidates – Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg – list their gender pronouns in their Twitter bios .
The latter is in a same-sex “ marriage.
” Warren says she will let a gender-confused child vet her nominee for Secretary of Education if she wins .
Former Vice President Joe Biden has said he would direct the Justice Department to “ do everything in its power ” to block state laws that place any restriction @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ultrasound laws , and waiting periods .
Meanwhile , Sen. Bernie Sanders has threatened that he would “ use the Department of Justice to go after those states ” that restrict abortion “ in every way that I legally can.
” Every Democrat candidate has also pledged to nominate pro-abortion judges to the Supreme Court and federal bench .
In an expletive-laden interview , Carville urged his fellow Democrats to focus on “ building coalitions to win elections ” and on becoming “ a majoritarian party.
” Carville wants the presidential candidates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as “ open borders and letting prisoners vote , ” saying that “ [ m ] ost of the people aren ’ t into all this distracting s***.
” Carville said that the Democrats have “ one moral imperative here , and that ’ s beating Trump .
Nothing else matters.
” But at this stage he is not optimistic about their ability to do that .
“ We have to beat Trump .
And so far , I don ’ t like what I see .
And a lot of people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” He insisted that the primary purpose of a political party was to acquire power , saying : “ The purpose of a political party is to acquire power .
All right ?
Without power , nothing matters.
” Later in the interview he said : “ We can ’ t do anything for anyone if we don ’ t start there [ beating Trump in this year ’ s presidential election ] and then acquire more power.
” Carville identified the key divide within the Democratic Party as being between people who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yearning for a left-wing revolution in this country ” and people like himself who are focused on “ building coalitions to win elections ” and listening to what people think and “ framing your message accordingly.
” “ We have candidates on the debate stage talking about open borders and decriminalizing illegal immigration , ” Carville lamented .
“ They ’ re talking about doing away with nuclear energy and fracking .
You ’ ve got Bernie Sanders talking about letting criminals and terrorists vote from jail cells .
It doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that , or if there are good arguments — talking about that is not how you win a national election .
It ’ s not how you become a majoritarian party.
” “ Bernie Sanders isn ’ t a Democrat , ” he said .
“ He ’ s never been a Democrat .
He ’ s an ideologue.
” Nevertheless , Carville insists that he will vote for Sanders in the presidential election if he wins the Democratic nomination .
But he says that if that happens then the Democrats will have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Senate .
Asked if Sanders could win the presidency , Carville responded : Who the hell knows ?
But here ’ s what I do know : Sanders might get 280 electoral votes and win the presidency and maybe we keep the House .
But there ’ s no chance in hell we ’ ll ever win the Senate with Sanders at the top of the party defining it for the public .
Eighteen percent of the country elects more than half of our senators .
That ’ s the deal , fair @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mitch ] McConnell runs the Senate , it ’ s game over .
There ’ s no chance we ’ ll change the courts , and nothing will happen , and he ’ ll just be sitting up there screaming in the microphone about the revolution .
Carville opined that Warren “ gets distracted and loses her core anti-corruption message ” when she supposedly follows the advice of her aides to adopt “ left-wing ” positions .
He also blames Biden for preventing other potential “ mainstream ” candidates such as Cory Booker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ And then Biden gets in and blocks out good candidates like Cory Booker or Michael Bennet or Steve Bullock by occupying this mainstream lane .
There just isn ’ t enough oxygen and they couldn ’ t get any traction .
But these are serious people , professional people , and they could ’ ve delivered a winning message.
” When the interviewer suggested to Carville that due to the supposedly right-wing bias of the media it was difficult for Democrats to get their messaging to Americans , Carville responded : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrat candidates still in the race for the nomination could beat Trump ?
“ I don ’ t know , I just don ’ t know .
I ’ m hoping that someone gets knocked off their horse on the road to Damascus .
”

'We have to beat Trump. And so far, I don’t like what I see,' said James Carville, who blasted his fellow Democrats for being way too far left.
February 10, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Long-term Democratic Party strategist and political commentator James Carville has accused the party of losing its mind in an interview with Vox, slamming the party for getting “distracted” by woke issues and leftist causes, rather than the issues that voters actually care about.
Carville, who was the lead strategist during Bill Clinton’s successful 1992 presidential campaign, spoke to Vox following an appearance last week on MSNBC, where he slammed the Democrats for their chaotic mismanagement of the recent Iowa caucus.
The 2020 Democrats are all virtually in lockstep on social issues: they support taxpayer-funded abortion on demand and the homosexual/LGBT cause. At least two candidates – Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg – list their gender pronouns in their Twitter bios. The latter is in a same-sex “marriage.” Warren says she will let a gender-confused child vet her nominee for Secretary of Education if she wins.
Former Vice President Joe Biden has said he would direct the Justice Department to “do everything in its power” to block state laws that place any restriction on abortion, including parental notification requirements, ultrasound laws, and waiting periods. Meanwhile, Sen. Bernie Sanders has threatened that he would “use the Department of Justice to go after those states” that restrict abortion “in every way that I legally can.” Every Democrat candidate has also pledged to nominate pro-abortion judges to the Supreme Court and federal bench.
In an expletive-laden interview, Carville urged his fellow Democrats to focus on “building coalitions to win elections” and on becoming “a majoritarian party.”
Carville wants the presidential candidates to move away from talking about issues such as “open borders and letting prisoners vote,” saying that “[m]ost of the people aren’t into all this distracting s***.”
Carville said that the Democrats have “one moral imperative here, and that’s beating Trump. Nothing else matters.” But at this stage he is not optimistic about their ability to do that.
READ: Second Sanders staffer caught praising Soviet Union, fantasizing about violence
“We have to beat Trump. And so far, I don’t like what I see. And a lot of people I talk to feel the same way.”
He insisted that the primary purpose of a political party was to acquire power, saying: “The purpose of a political party is to acquire power. All right? Without power, nothing matters.”
Later in the interview he said: “We can’t do anything for anyone if we don’t start there [beating Trump in this year’s presidential election] and then acquire more power.”
Carville identified the key divide within the Democratic Party as being between people who think “there’s a real yearning for a left-wing revolution in this country” and people like himself who are focused on “building coalitions to win elections” and listening to what people think and “framing your message accordingly.”
“We have candidates on the debate stage talking about open borders and decriminalizing illegal immigration,” Carville lamented. “They’re talking about doing away with nuclear energy and fracking. You’ve got Bernie Sanders talking about letting criminals and terrorists vote from jail cells. It doesn’t matter what you think about any of that, or if there are good arguments — talking about that is not how you win a national election. It’s not how you become a majoritarian party.”
“Bernie Sanders isn’t a Democrat,” he said. “He’s never been a Democrat. He’s an ideologue.” Nevertheless, Carville insists that he will vote for Sanders in the presidential election if he wins the Democratic nomination. But he says that if that happens then the Democrats will have no chance of gaining power in the Senate.
Asked if Sanders could win the presidency, Carville responded:
Who the hell knows? But here’s what I do know: Sanders might get 280 electoral votes and win the presidency and maybe we keep the House. But there’s no chance in hell we’ll ever win the Senate with Sanders at the top of the party defining it for the public. Eighteen percent of the country elects more than half of our senators. That’s the deal, fair or not. So long as [Mitch] McConnell runs the Senate, it’s game over. There’s no chance we’ll change the courts, and nothing will happen, and he’ll just be sitting up there screaming in the microphone about the revolution.
Carville opined that Warren “gets distracted and loses her core anti-corruption message” when she supposedly follows the advice of her aides to adopt “left-wing” positions.
He also blames Biden for preventing other potential “mainstream” candidates such as Cory Booker from gaining more support. He said: “And then Biden gets in and blocks out good candidates like Cory Booker or Michael Bennet or Steve Bullock by occupying this mainstream lane. There just isn’t enough oxygen and they couldn’t get any traction. But these are serious people, professional people, and they could’ve delivered a winning message.”
When the interviewer suggested to Carville that due to the supposedly right-wing bias of the media it was difficult for Democrats to get their messaging to Americans, Carville responded:
I think the other side wants us to think there are no swing voters, that we’re doomed and it doesn’t even matter if you have a message because you can’t reach anyone. I think that’s bullshit. I think that’s a wholly incorrect view of American politics. But look, if no one’s persuadable, then let’s just have the revolution. Falling into despair won’t help anyone, though. I mean, you can curse the darkness or you can light a candle. I’m getting a f*****g welding torch. Okay?
And does he think any of the Democrat candidates still in the race for the nomination could beat Trump?
“I don’t know, I just don’t know. I’m hoping that someone gets knocked off their horse on the road to Damascus.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-10--Ukrainian bishops fraternally correct German bishops for abandoning Catholic sexual morality

KIEV , Ukraine , February 10 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Ukrainian Catholic bishops have delivered a fraternal correction to the bishops of Germany for their “ synodal path ” that , among other things , promotes changing Catholic sexual teaching on contraception , masturbation , and homosexuality .
According to Polish newsmagazine wPolityce.pl , the Ukrainian Episcopate ’ s Commission for the Family , headed by Bishops Radosław Zmitrowicz and Jan Niemiec , sent a letter on Thursday to the German bishops ’ own Commission on Marriage and the Family , headed by Bishop Heiner Koch .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ urge the Germans to stop bowing to LGBT ideology , but instead to remain faithful to the perennial teachings of the Church .
The parts of the letter translated into Polish and published by journalist Grzegorz Górny illustrated that the Ukrainian bishops believe that the German bishops are giving material support to a “ mass ideological attack ” against the young .
“ LGBT circles are leading a mass ideological attack on our young people and children with the aim of demoralizing them , ” the bishops wrote .
“ The above mentioned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their propaganda , among other things , with ‘ the new view ’ of the German Episcopate , ” the continued .
“ It hurts us to observe how LGBT propaganda quotes your wording to fight with Christianity and also with everyone who acknowledges the true anthropology based on Holy Scripture and natural law.
” The Ukrainian bishops underscored that both same-sex attracted people and married couples in their dioceses have been affected by the conclusions made by German churchmen at the end of a conference on sexuality they hosted last December in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ homosexuality is “ normal ” and that “ a sexual relationship after a divorce and remarriage is no longer generally assessed as being a grave sin.
” “ Some of our faithful , who themselves carry the burden of homosexuality and other wounds in the sexual sphere , learning of the statement of your Commission [ for the Family ] , feel powerless in the fight for a chaste life , ” the Ukrainian bishops wrote .
“ Married couples opposed to the contraceptive mentality of this world as well as open to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after reading your opinions about birth control.
” The letter writers reported that faithful Catholics in Ukraine are also having to face accusations of apostasy from their Protestant and Orthodox neighbors .
“ Some of our faithful suffer the claims , and even accusations , of other Christians that the Catholic Church is departing from the truth revealed by Christ , ” the bishops explained .
“ Some Protestant communities accuse us of infidelity to the Word of God , and our Orthodox brethren of infidelity to Tradition , ” they continued .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ position not as your private teaching or even as the separate path of the Church in Germany , but as the position of the whole Catholic Church.
” According to Grzegorz Górny , the Ukrainian bishops then asked the German bishops to become faithful again to the scriptures and traditional Catholic doctrine .
Górny also reported that in an interview with the Ukrainian website Rodyna , Bishop Zmitrowicz said that “ fraternal correction ” was not enough .
“ We understand that this is above all a spiritual battle and prayer and other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Zmitrowicz stated .
“ We have the same temptations .
Writing this letter helped us to see that truth that sets us free , ” he continued .
“ Just as the German Commission publicly presently the first results of its work , so we dare to present publicly our understanding of faith and morals .
We want only to be faithful to the Revelation of God , which we can not change , reduce , or ‘ sugar-coat ’ .
” When asked why the German bishops were so radically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he wasn ’ t sure , but that there is a temptation to “ be like other nations.
” “ How many times did the Chosen People of both the Old and New Testaments experience this temptation ?
” he asked .
“ It seems to me that what strongly influences the thinking of some Catholics in Germany and other countries strongly affected by secularization is the environment in which they find themselves .
It is a society which has lost real contact with faith in God .
That means , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , illness , death , love , marriage , sex and sexuality , education ... apart from Gospel revelation .
Christian proposals for life seem too marvelous , too beautiful , unrealistic , impossible to practice in this world we live in .
People try to adapt teachings and rules for life to the society in which they live.
” Zmitrowicz said that the earliest Christians had the “ power of the Risen Christ ” which helped them set aside their old and unhappy lives .
Their belief in God “ infected others @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he is “ happy and proud ” that the Catholic Church understands sex ( gender ) and sexuality so well , mentioning in particular the “ Theology of the Body ” of St. John Paul II .
However , he has grave misgivings about the ideological current in the German Church “ The German Commission proposes the opposite direction , which destroys people ’ s lives .
It closes them to the love brought to us by Jesus Christ .
Without this love , man can not be happy.
” Zmitrowicz hopes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world will also offer the German Bishops fraternal correction and thinks that the Ukrainians might inspire them to action .
“ Many bishops from different countries have criticized the German ecclesiastical revolution only in their private circles , but they haven ’ t taken any public stand , ” he said .
“ Why ?
I don ’ t know .
But their silence is taken as consent .
”

KIEV, Ukraine, February 10, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Ukrainian Catholic bishops have delivered a fraternal correction to the bishops of Germany for their “synodal path” that, among other things, promotes changing Catholic sexual teaching on contraception, masturbation, and homosexuality.
According to Polish newsmagazine wPolityce.pl, the Ukrainian Episcopate’s Commission for the Family, headed by Poland-born Bishops Radosław Zmitrowicz and Jan Niemiec, sent a letter on Thursday to the German bishops’ own Commission on Marriage and the Family, headed by Bishop Heiner Koch.
In the February 6 letter, the Ukrainians urge the Germans to stop bowing to LGBT ideology, but instead to remain faithful to the perennial teachings of the Church.
The parts of the letter translated into Polish and published by journalist Grzegorz Górny illustrated that the Ukrainian bishops believe that the German bishops are giving material support to a “mass ideological attack” against the young.
“LGBT circles are leading a mass ideological attack on our young people and children with the aim of demoralizing them,” the bishops wrote.
“The above mentioned organizations justify and support their activities and their propaganda, among other things, with ‘the new view’ of the German Episcopate,” the continued.
“It hurts us to observe how LGBT propaganda quotes your wording to fight with Christianity and also with everyone who acknowledges the true anthropology based on Holy Scripture and natural law.”
The Ukrainian bishops underscored that both same-sex attracted people and married couples in their dioceses have been affected by the conclusions made by German churchmen at the end of a conference on sexuality they hosted last December in Berlin. These included the ideas that homosexuality is “normal” and that “a sexual relationship after a divorce and remarriage is no longer generally assessed as being a grave sin.”
“Some of our faithful, who themselves carry the burden of homosexuality and other wounds in the sexual sphere, learning of the statement of your Commission [for the Family], feel powerless in the fight for a chaste life,” the Ukrainian bishops wrote.
“Married couples opposed to the contraceptive mentality of this world as well as open to the gift of life feel deep doubt after reading your opinions about birth control.”
The letter writers reported that faithful Catholics in Ukraine are also having to face accusations of apostasy from their Protestant and Orthodox neighbors.
“Some of our faithful suffer the claims, and even accusations, of other Christians that the Catholic Church is departing from the truth revealed by Christ,” the bishops explained.
“Some Protestant communities accuse us of infidelity to the Word of God, and our Orthodox brethren of infidelity to Tradition,” they continued.
“Why? Because they see your position not as your private teaching or even as the separate path of the Church in Germany, but as the position of the whole Catholic Church.”
According to Grzegorz Górny, the Ukrainian bishops then asked the German bishops to become faithful again to the scriptures and traditional Catholic doctrine.
Górny also reported that in an interview with the Ukrainian website Rodyna, Bishop Zmitrowicz said that “fraternal correction” was not enough.
“We understand that this is above all a spiritual battle and prayer and other forms of penance are of great importance,” Zmitrowicz stated.
“We have the same temptations. Writing this letter helped us to see that truth that sets us free,” he continued.
“Just as the German Commission publicly presently the first results of its work, so we dare to present publicly our understanding of faith and morals. We want only to be faithful to the Revelation of God, which we cannot change, reduce, or ‘sugar-coat’.”
When asked why the German bishops were so radically departing from the faith, Zmitrowicz said that he wasn’t sure, but that there is a temptation to “be like other nations.”
“How many times did the Chosen People of both the Old and New Testaments experience this temptation?” he asked.
“It seems to me that what strongly influences the thinking of some Catholics in Germany and other countries strongly affected by secularization is the environment in which they find themselves. It is a society which has lost real contact with faith in God. That means, they understand their work, rest, health, illness, death, love, marriage, sex and sexuality, education…apart from Gospel revelation. Christian proposals for life seem too marvelous, too beautiful, unrealistic, impossible to practice in this world we live in. People try to adapt teachings and rules for life to the society in which they live.”
Zmitrowicz said that the earliest Christians had the “power of the Risen Christ” which helped them set aside their old and unhappy lives. Their belief in God “infected others and slowly changed society.”
He said that he is “happy and proud” that the Catholic Church understands sex (gender) and sexuality so well, mentioning in particular the “Theology of the Body” of St. John Paul II. However, he has grave misgivings about the ideological current in the German Church
“The German Commission proposes the opposite direction, which destroys people’s lives. It closes them to the love brought to us by Jesus Christ. Without this love, man cannot be happy.”
Zmitrowicz hopes that other Bishops’ Conferences in the world will also offer the German Bishops fraternal correction and thinks that the Ukrainians might inspire them to action.
“Many bishops from different countries have criticized the German ecclesiastical revolution only in their private circles, but they haven’t taken any public stand,” he said.
“Why? I don’t know. But their silence is taken as consent.”
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-10--Bloomberg admits bathroom wars about ‘man wearing a dress’ sharing girls’ locker room in 2016 video

February 10 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Today , former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is a standard-issue progressive , but he ’ s currently under fire from LGBT activists for past comments in which he bluntly acknowledged why the transgender cause was counterintuitive to most Americans .
The 2016 video shows Bloomberg speaking to a crowd at England ’ s Oxford University , during which he addressed the “ disconnect ” between “ intelligentsia ” such as himself and the attendees , versus the “ vast bulk of people ” of the American Midwest .
“ If you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intelligentsia , people who could make it into this room , we believe a lot of things in terms of equality and protecting individual rights that make no sense to the vast bulk of people , ” Bloomberg said .
“ They ’ re not opposed to you having some rights , but there ’ s a fundamental disconnect between us believing the rights of the individual come first and the general belief around the world , I think it ’ s fair to say , that the rights of society comes first.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , is somebody a good salesman , give him the job of going to the Midwest and picking a town and selling to that town the concept that some man wearing a dress should be in a locker room with their daughter , ” he continued .
“ If you can sell that , you can sell anything .
I mean , they just look at you and they say ‘ what on Earth are you talking about ?
’ And you say , well , this person identifies as , her gender @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their birth certificate .
And they say , ‘ What do you mean ?
You ’ re either born this or you ’ re born that !
’ ” LGBT activists , including the Human Rights Campaign ’ s Charlotte Clymer and Vox ’ s Katelyn Burns , responded that the remarks should disqualify Bloomberg from the Democrat nomination : Business Insider reported that the Bloomberg campaign responded with a statement that did not acknowledge the uproar over those specific remarks , but stressed the mayor ’ s past support for transgender employee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ running to defeat Donald Trump and reverse the many policies he has implemented that attack the rights of the transgender community.
” The pro-abortion Bloomberg , who donates heavily to left-wing causes such as gun control and climate change , touts a pro-LGBT record ranging from helping enact same-sex “ marriage ” to having “ presided over New York City ’ s first official same-sex marriage ( sic ) the day it became legal.
” He recently released a “ comprehensive plan ” for “ LGBTQ+ equality , ” which includes signing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Trump administration ’ s ban on gender-confused soldiers , prioritizing “ hate crimes ” investigation , and “ implicit bias training ” for federal law enforcement .

LGBT supporters have turned against the Democrat presidential candidate over his remarks and want him out of the race.
February 10, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Today, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is a standard-issue progressive, but he’s currently under fire from LGBT activists for past comments in which he bluntly acknowledged why the transgender cause was counterintuitive to most Americans.
The 2016 video shows Bloomberg speaking to a crowd at England’s Oxford University, during which he addressed the “disconnect” between “intelligentsia” such as himself and the attendees, versus the “vast bulk of people” of the American Midwest.
Here's @MikeBloomberg in December 2016 at Oxford explaining how trans rights simply won't fly in the midwest because only the “intelligentsia” can understand why “some man wearing a dress should be in a locker room with their daughter.” pic.twitter.com/g6aa8aB1jq — Walker Bragman (@WalkerBragman) February 6, 2020
“If you think about it, we, the intelligentsia, people who could make it into this room, we believe a lot of things in terms of equality and protecting individual rights that make no sense to the vast bulk of people,” Bloomberg said. “They’re not opposed to you having some rights, but there’s a fundamental disconnect between us believing the rights of the individual come first and the general belief around the world, I think it’s fair to say, that the rights of society comes first.”
“If you want to know, is somebody a good salesman, give him the job of going to the Midwest and picking a town and selling to that town the concept that some man wearing a dress should be in a locker room with their daughter,” he continued. “If you can sell that, you can sell anything. I mean, they just look at you and they say ‘what on Earth are you talking about?’ And you say, well, this person identifies as, her gender as different than what’s on their birth certificate. And they say, ‘What do you mean? You’re either born this or you’re born that!’”
LGBT activists, including the Human Rights Campaign’s Charlotte Clymer, and openly transgender and pro-LGBT Vox journalist “Katelyn” Burns, responded that the remarks should disqualify Bloomberg from the Democrat nomination:
This is deeply disgusting and disqualifying, and @MikeBloomberg needs to apologize for it. Trans people were living openly in the Midwest long before Bloomberg woke up one morning and decided to start buying elections. https://t.co/zHIbyjkqg2 — Charlotte Clymer ���� (@cmclymer) February 6, 2020
This is significantly worse than the Rogan thing, the Kamala Harris trans prison thing, and the Liz Warren trans prison thing. — Katelyn Burns (@transscribe) February 6, 2020
There is an elitist tendency among some to suggest they are fully in support of trans rights–but those yokels in flyover country will never be. This is not only demeaning to trans people; it's an entitled dismissal of the intelligence of anyone outside the Acela corridor. https://t.co/pfpc4wu2Kj — Gillian Branstetter (@GBBranstetter) February 6, 2020
Business Insider reported that the Bloomberg campaign responded with a statement that did not acknowledge the uproar over those specific remarks, but stressed the mayor’s past support for transgender employee healthcare, and that he was “running to defeat Donald Trump and reverse the many policies he has implemented that attack the rights of the transgender community.”
The pro-abortion Bloomberg, who donates heavily to left-wing causes such as gun control and climate change, touts a pro-LGBT record ranging from helping enact same-sex “marriage” to having “presided over New York City’s first official same-sex marriage (sic) the day it became legal.”
He recently released a “comprehensive plan” for “LGBTQ+ equality,” which includes signing the so-called Equality Act into law, reversing the Trump administration’s ban on gender-confused soldiers, prioritizing “hate crimes” investigation, and “implicit bias training” for federal law enforcement.
Feb. 11, 2020 update: This report now refers to “Katelyn” Burns as an openly transgender and pro-LGBT journalist who writes for Vox.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-10--Dominican theologian: Pope Francis compromises ‘too much’ with ‘enemies of Christi

Dominican theologian: Pope Francis compromises ‘too much’ with ‘enemies of Christianity’

ROME , February 8 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) ― A respected Italian theologian has signaled that Pope Francis is failing in his duty to protect the doctrine of the Catholic faith In a January interview with Italian Catholic online newspaper La Fede Quotidiano , Fr .
Giovanni Cavalcoli , O.P .
said that Benedict XVI could be an excellent theological resource for Francis , but the pontiff doesn ’ t seem to consult him .
“ My impression is that Francis doesn ’ t listen much to Benedict who , in my estimation , had undertaken a line of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , more in accordance with … the interpretation that sees the doctrine of the [ Second Vatican ] Council in continuity , even if more advanced , with the preceding Magisterium , ” Cavalcoli stated .
“ It seems to me that instead Francis indulges in an interpretation that concedes too much to the progressives [ ... ] which is same as saying that he is conceding too much to the Protestants , to the Marxists and to freemasonry , while struggling to dialogue with the traditionalists and followers of Archbishop Lefebvre [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ X ] , something which Benedict managed to do.
” The prolific author and professor , 78 , told his interviewer that Benedict was a much better defender of the Catholic faith than Francis is .
“ As for the safekeeping of sound doctrine , Benedict was certainly more zealous and diligent than Francis , who is too absorbed by his need for contact with the masses , ” Cavalcoli said .
The Dominican theologian contrasted the German pontiff ’ s approach to regimes hostile towards Christianity to that of the Argentinian .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Islamic world and the communists , while Benedict was more concerned with doctrinal clarity , urging Catholics to patience and to bear persecution , Francis , in order to obtain peaceful co-existence , seems to compromise too much with the enemies of Christianity , ” Cavalcoli said .
The Catholic Church is in a time of unprecedented crisis , he added , saying that the “ Church is living in a moment of serious difficulty and doctrinal and moral decadence , under the semblance of a false modernity , which it has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ As has been diagnosed for 40 years now , beginning with St. Paul VI , while the Council offered hope of theological progress , moral and spiritual , there was an unexpected massive return of modernism … a modernism worse and more dangerous than that of St. Pius X ’ s day , as [ Jacques ] Maritain realized in 1966.
” Cavalcoli said that while Francis has talked of the New Evangelization “ starting processes ” instead of “ occupying spaces ” , in reality modernist theologians are occupying “ all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the few normal Catholics remaining , without starting any true reform , but rolling back theology to the heresies before the Councils of Nicaea [ 325 AD ] and Calcedon [ 451 AD ] and philosophy to the pre-Socratic naturalists and myths of the Amazon.
” The Dominican theologian sees the Holy Spirit more at work in the laity than in the clergy today , but says that Francis is the “ guide ” of the Church , and he must be supported and saved from his “ false friends and flatterers.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , energy and spiritual freedom , wisdom , the sensus Ecclesiae , presence and parresia of the Holy Spirit more in the laity than in the shepherds , ” Cavalcoli told La Fede Quotidiano .
“ Pope Francis is like a helmsman on the barque of St. Peter in a mighty tempest , ” he continued .
“ He struggles to hold the rudder .
However , he is the guide .
We must stay near him , accept him , support him , pray for him , help him , advise him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flatterers , call him back to his duties , [ and ] welcome everything that he does well.
” This is not the first time an influential cleric has voiced concern about the pontiff ’ s “ false friends and flatterers.
” Cardinal Gerhard Müller , former Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith , told EWTN ’ s Raymond Arroyo in a 2018 interview and in a statement to LifeSiteNews in 2019 that Francis is overly influenced by such people .

Italian priest Fr. Giovanni Cavalcoli said that Francis is failing in the 'safekeeping of sound doctrine.'
ROME, February 8, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) ― A respected Italian theologian has signaled that Pope Francis is failing in his duty to protect the doctrine of the Catholic faith
In a January interview with Italian Catholic online newspaper La Fede Quotidiano, Fr. Giovanni Cavalcoli, O.P. said that Benedict XVI could be an excellent theological resource for Francis, but the pontiff doesn’t seem to consult him.
“My impression is that Francis doesn’t listen much to Benedict who, in my estimation, had undertaken a line of reform more balanced than that of Francis, more in accordance with … the interpretation that sees the doctrine of the [Second Vatican] Council in continuity, even if more advanced, with the preceding Magisterium,” Cavalcoli stated.
“It seems to me that instead Francis indulges in an interpretation that concedes too much to the progressives […] which is same as saying that he is conceding too much to the Protestants, to the Marxists and to freemasonry, while struggling to dialogue with the traditionalists and followers of Archbishop Lefebvre [i.e. the Society of St. Pius X], something which Benedict managed to do.”
The prolific author and professor, 78, told his interviewer that Benedict was a much better defender of the Catholic faith than Francis is.
“As for the safekeeping of sound doctrine, Benedict was certainly more zealous and diligent than Francis, who is too absorbed by his need for contact with the masses,” Cavalcoli said.
The Dominican theologian contrasted the German pontiff’s approach to regimes hostile towards Christianity to that of the Argentinian.
“In terms of the relationship with the Islamic world and the communists, while Benedict was more concerned with doctrinal clarity, urging Catholics to patience and to bear persecution, Francis, in order to obtain peaceful co-existence, seems to compromise too much with the enemies of Christianity,” Cavalcoli said.
The Catholic Church is in a time of unprecedented crisis, he added, saying that the “Church is living in a moment of serious difficulty and doctrinal and moral decadence, under the semblance of a false modernity, which it has never experienced in all her history.”
“As has been diagnosed for 40 years now, beginning with St. Paul VI, while the Council offered hope of theological progress, moral and spiritual, there was an unexpected massive return of modernism … a modernism worse and more dangerous than that of St. Pius X’s day, as [Jacques] Maritain realized in 1966.”
Cavalcoli said that while Francis has talked of the New Evangelization “starting processes” instead of “occupying spaces”, in reality modernist theologians are occupying “all the spaces, suffocating the freedom of the few normal Catholics remaining, without starting any true reform, but rolling back theology to the heresies before the Councils of Nicaea [325 AD] and Calcedon [451 AD] and philosophy to the pre-Socratic naturalists and myths of the Amazon.”
The Dominican theologian sees the Holy Spirit more at work in the laity than in the clergy today, but says that Francis is the “guide” of the Church, and he must be supported and saved from his “false friends and flatterers.”
“I see the acuity of diagnosis, energy and spiritual freedom, wisdom, the sensus Ecclesiae, presence and parresia of the Holy Spirit more in the laity than in the shepherds,” Cavalcoli told La Fede Quotidiano.
“Pope Francis is like a helmsman on the barque of St. Peter in a mighty tempest,” he continued.
“He struggles to hold the rudder. However, he is the guide. We must stay near him, accept him, support him, pray for him, help him, advise him, free him from false friends and flatterers, call him back to his duties, [and] welcome everything that he does well.”
This is not the first time an influential cleric has voiced concern about the pontiff’s “false friends and flatterers.” Cardinal Gerhard Müller, former Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, told EWTN’s Raymond Arroyo in a 2018 interview and in a statement to LifeSiteNews in 2019 that Francis is overly influenced by such people.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-10--Feminist prof who practices occult calls for human extinction to save planet

February 10 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – On January 23 , 2020 , Bloomsbury Academic published a call to action for all those who care about “ climate change.
” The Ahuman Manifesto : Activism for the End of the Anthropocene by Patricia MacCormack , a professor of continental philosophy at Angelia Ruskin University , cuts to the chase and advocates for the ultimate solution to global warming : The end of the human race .
For MacCormack , “ Extinction Rebellion ” has a whole different meaning .
MacCormack , who admits to being an “ occultist magician @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weak-kneed climate activist who believes that we should save the planet for our children .
In fact , she doesn ’ t think there should be any children .
A researcher who has “ published in the areas of continental philosophy…feminism , queer theory , posthuman theory , horror film , body modification , animal rights/abolitionism , cinesexuality and ethics , ” MacCormack once argued that animals are equal to human beings .
Now , she ’ s arguing that humans should get out of the way entirely .
The abstract for her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Collapsing activism , artistic practice and affirmative ethics , while introducing some specifically modern phenomena like death cults , intersectional identify politics and capitalist enslavement of human and nonhuman organisms to the point of ‘ zombiedom ’ , The Ahuman Manifesto navigates the ways in which we must compose the human differently , specifically beyond nihilism and post-and trans-humanism and outside human privilege .
This is so that we can actively think and live viscerally , with connectivity ( actual not virtual ) , and with passion and grace , toward a new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ roughly translated , is that the culmination of human progress should be human extinction .
What MacCormack is trying to do is to present “ the apocalypse as an optimistic beginning , ” but for other species , who will do much better once we ’ re all dead , an eventuality she finds positively wonderful to consider .
Her book , according to the Cambridge News , “ argues that due to the damage done to other living creatures on Earth , we should start gradually phasing out reproduction.
” This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more danger to human civilization than climate change does : They are attempting to seize power by declaring a state of emergency , and once they have acquired power on those premises , they will use it to implement an actual state of emergency .
We know what it looks like when the state uses its power to control the reproduction of millions : The forced sterilizations , the women who were kidnapped and had their pre-born children torn from their wombs , the trauma of truncated families and a culture in crisis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Policy , and it only recently began to be phased out in China .
It resulted in 336 million abortions and unmeasurable misery .
MacCormack , at least , does not try to sugar-coat her proposals .
“ I arrived at this idea from a couple of directions , ” she told the Cambridge News .
“ I was introduced to philosophy due to my interest in feminism and queer theory , so reproductive rights [ abortion ] have long been an interest to me—this led me more to learn about animal rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vegan .
The basic premise of the book is that we ’ re in the age of the Anthropocene , humanity has caused mass problems and one of them is creating this hierarchal world where white , male , heterosexual and able-bodied people are succeeding , and people of different races , genders , sexualities and those with disabilities are struggling to get that.
” “ The book also argues that we need to dismantle religion , ” she went on , “ and other overriding powers like the church of capitalism or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ makes people act upon enforced rules rather than respond thoughtfully to the situations in front of them.
” Presumably , MacCormack believes her solution of human extinction is an example of responding thoughtfully to the facts in front of us , although she doesn ’ t explain how she ’ s going to get people to care about “ climate change ” by removing the primary motivation that is offered for caring about “ climate change , ” which is the preservation of the planet for people and their progeny .
She admits @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s okay with the ideas of the book until they ’ re told they ’ d have to act on it.
” Not so very long ago , the term “ death cult ” was considered to be a sinister term , not an aspirational description of the human race .
MacCormack may be fringe for the moment , but she is the future of climate change activism : Actively hostile to the human race , and an advocate of “ phasing out reproduction.
” Mainstream radio programs regularly host long discussion with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ children to preserve the planet for the children , and MacCormack is just a bit ahead of the curve .
Climate activists are utterly convinced of their own righteousness , and totally willing to use state power to force their solutions on all of us .
We should be listening to their proposed solutions very carefully .
Jonathon ’ s new podcast , The Van Maren Show , is dedicated to telling the stories of the pro-life and pro-family movement .
In his latest episode , he interviews Dr. Christopher Yuan , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gay lifestyle .
Dr. Yuan is now a professor at Moody Bible Institute and today , he discusses his powerful journey and conversion and what the LGBT agenda is to the US.You can subscribe here and listen to the episode below :

February 10, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – On January 23, 2020, Bloomsbury Academic published a call to action for all those who care about “climate change.” The Ahuman Manifesto: Activism for the End of the Anthropocene by Patricia MacCormack, a professor of continental philosophy at Angelia Ruskin University, cuts to the chase and advocates for the ultimate solution to global warming: The end of the human race. For MacCormack, “Extinction Rebellion” has a whole different meaning.
MacCormack admits to being an “occultist magician.” She has actually given lectures—often in a get-up that is either supposed to be emulating a witch and bearing an eerie resemblance to the costumes we see frequently at Drag Queen Storytime—on the “invocation” or “convocation” of demons, which she says is an important feminist or queer practice. Invoking demons, she says, is not entirely risk-free, because “madness is as likely as ecstasy.” She says all of this entirely unironically.
MacCormack is not the sort of weak-kneed climate activist who believes that we should save the planet for our children. In fact, she doesn’t think there should be any children.
A researcher who has “published in the areas of continental philosophy…feminism, queer theory, posthuman theory, horror film, body modification, animal rights/abolitionism, cinesexuality and ethics,” MacCormack once argued that animals are equal to human beings. Now, she’s arguing that humans should get out of the way entirely.
The abstract for her book describes her thesis thusly: “Collapsing activism, artistic practice and affirmative ethics, while introducing some specifically modern phenomena like death cults, intersectional identify politics and capitalist enslavement of human and nonhuman organisms to the point of ‘zombiedom’, The Ahuman Manifesto navigates the ways in which we must compose the human differently, specifically beyond nihilism and post-and trans-humanism and outside human privilege. This is so that we can actively think and live viscerally, with connectivity (actual not virtual), and with passion and grace, toward a new world.”
All of that nonsense, roughly translated, is that the culmination of human progress should be human extinction. What MacCormack is trying to do is to present “the apocalypse as an optimistic beginning,” but for other species, who will do much better once we’re all dead, an eventuality she finds positively wonderful to consider. Her book, according to the Cambridge News, “argues that due to the damage done to other living creatures on Earth, we should start gradually phasing out reproduction.”
Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook
This is precisely why these climate fanatics pose far more danger to human civilization than climate change does: They are attempting to seize power by declaring a state of emergency, and once they have acquired power on those premises, they will use it to implement an actual state of emergency. We know what it looks like when the state uses its power to control the reproduction of millions: The forced sterilizations, the women who were kidnapped and had their pre-born children torn from their wombs, the trauma of truncated families and a culture in crisis. It was called the One Child Policy, and it only recently began to be phased out in China. It resulted in 336 million abortions and unmeasurable misery.
MacCormack, at least, does not try to sugar-coat her proposals. “I arrived at this idea from a couple of directions,” she told the Cambridge News. “I was introduced to philosophy due to my interest in feminism and queer theory, so reproductive rights [abortion] have long been an interest to me—this led me more to learn about animal rights, which is when I became a vegan. The basic premise of the book is that we’re in the age of the Anthropocene, humanity has caused mass problems and one of them is creating this hierarchal world where white, male, heterosexual and able-bodied people are succeeding, and people of different races, genders, sexualities and those with disabilities are struggling to get that.”
“The book also argues that we need to dismantle religion,” she went on, “and other overriding powers like the church of capitalism or the cult of self, as it makes people act upon enforced rules rather than respond thoughtfully to the situations in front of them.” Presumably, MacCormack believes her solution of human extinction is an example of responding thoughtfully to the facts in front of us, although she doesn’t explain how she’s going to get people to care about “climate change” by removing the primary motivation that is offered for caring about “climate change,” which is the preservation of the planet for people and their progeny. She admits this, noting that “Everyone’s okay with the ideas of the book until they’re told they’d have to act on it.”
Not so very long ago, the term “death cult” was considered to be a sinister term, not an aspirational description of the human race. MacCormack may be fringe for the moment, but she is the future of climate change activism: Actively hostile to the human race, and an advocate of “phasing out reproduction.” Mainstream radio programs regularly host long discussion with people who have decided not to have children to preserve the planet for the children, and MacCormack is just a bit ahead of the curve. Climate activists are utterly convinced of their own righteousness, and totally willing to use state power to force their solutions on all of us.
We should be listening to their proposed solutions very carefully.
Jonathon’s new podcast, The Van Maren Show, is dedicated to telling the stories of the pro-life and pro-family movement. In his latest episode, he interviews Dr. Christopher Yuan, a former drug addict who lived a promiscuous gay lifestyle. Dr. Yuan is now a professor at Moody Bible Institute and today, he discusses his powerful journey and conversion and what the LGBT agenda is to the US.You can subscribe here and listen to the episode below:
Follow Jonathon Jonathon Van Maren is a public speaker, writer, and pro-life activist. His commentary has been translated into more than eight languages and published widely online as well as print newspapers such as the Jewish Independent, the National Post, the Hamilton Spectator and others. He has received an award for combating anti-Semitism in print from the Jewish organization B’nai Brith. His commentary has been featured on CTV Primetime, Global News, EWTN, and the CBC as well as dozens of radio stations and news outlets in Canada and the United States. He speaks on a wide variety of cultural topics across North America at universities, high schools, churches, and other functions. Some of these topics include abortion, pornography, the Sexual Revolution, and euthanasia. Jonathon holds a Bachelor of Arts Degree in history from Simon Fraser University, and is the communications director for the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform. Jonathon’s first book, The Culture War, was released in 2016.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-10--Harrowing film on forced abortion in China receives Oscar nomination for ‘Best Documentary’

February 10 , 2020 ( LifeSiteNews ) – One Child Nation was nominated for Best Documentary at the Academy Awards .
The film is a harrowing expose of the devastation caused by the womb police who enforced China ’ s One Child Policy .
But the film goes beyond that .
It is a scorching indictment of Communism itself .
First , a caveat .
The film begins with the statement that China ended the One Child Policy in 2015 , making it seem as though the film serves as a memorial to a tragic era gone by .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that forced abortion continues under the Two Child Policy .
The new rule is that every couple is allowed to have two children .
Single women and third children are still forcibly aborted .
In its recent report , released January 8 , 2020 , the Congressional Executive Commission on China stated : “ Local-level officials reportedly continued to enforce compliance with family planning policies using methods including heavy fines , job termination , and coerced abortion.
” The atrocities described in the film continue to this day , and the battle to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ population control in China has ended .
We can not explore China ’ s dark past and ignore China ’ s dark present .
Nevertheless , the film is remarkable in the intimacy of the portraits it paints , while at the same time giving rise to agonizing conclusions regarding the world ’ s most massive social engineering experiment gone shockingly awry .
The Chinese Communist Party has boasted that it “ prevented ” 400 million births through its One Child Policy .
This statistic is mind-numbing , inconceivable .
The filmmakers , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us how this was accomplished in Wang ’ s village .
Wang returned to China after having given birth to her son , to learn what her family and community experienced under the One Child Policy .
The interviews Wang records are heartbreaking in their candor .
Here we meet the uncle who left his infant daughter in a marketplace , hoping that someone would take her in .
No one did .
Over several days , he watched as she slowly starved to death .
We meet the family planning official who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tied up and dragged “ like pigs ” for forced abortions .
We see one of the local “ womb police ” – a midwife personally responsible for more than 50,000 forced abortions and sterilizations – who now seeks to atone for her “ sins ” by helping infertile couples conceive .
We meet the artist who , devastated at finding full-term babies in trash heaps , lovingly preserved and photographed them as a testimonial to the lives that could have been .
Wang was courageous in keeping the disturbing images in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ film to be rated “ R. ” Wang asks those she interviews if they think the One Child Policy was a good thing , worth the sacrifice .
Astonishingly , the answer is an overwhelming yes – it was necessary to fight the “ population war.
” This view is consistent with the collectivist attitude of Communism and its powerful propaganda machine : sacrifice the one for the good of the many .
Do those interviewed really believe that the policy was a good thing , despite the excruciating pain it has caused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say so , because they were being filmed and knew that their statements could get back to the Chinese government , resulting in persecution if they defied the Chinese Communist Party on one of its central policies ?
When asked why they did not take measures to save their babies , the overwhelming answer is , “ We had no choice.
” This is the hallmark of Communism : the peacetime killing of its own citizens .
The true face of Communism is never more clearly seen than in the faces of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of their homes , strapping them to tables , and forcing them to abort babies they want .
Anyone who thinks that Communism is a good thing must see this film .
I asked a pro-life friend if he had seen One Child Nation .
He replied , “ No , I would never see a film that advocates for abortion.
” He was referring to the filmmaker ’ s statement at the end of the film that she thinks it ironic that she has left a nation where women are forced to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nation that restricts abortion , evincing an ill-conceived moral equivalency between China and the United States .
It is unfortunate that the filmmaker , having made a film of unparalleled power regarding the brutality of forced abortion in China , chose to take a wholly unnecessary stand on the America abortion debate .
The filmmaker ’ s comment is a non sequitur .
Ignore it , and see the film .
You can watch the trailer here and rent the film on Amazon Prime here .
Reggie Littlejohn is the President of Women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ video on her work to stop forced abortion in China can be viewed here .

February 10, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – One Child Nation was nominated for Best Documentary at the Academy Awards. The film is a harrowing expose of the devastation caused by the womb police who enforced China’s One Child Policy. But the film goes beyond that. It is a scorching indictment of Communism itself.
First, a caveat. The film begins with the statement that China ended the One Child Policy in 2015, making it seem as though the film serves as a memorial to a tragic era gone by. The film does not mention, however, that forced abortion continues under the Two Child Policy. The new rule is that every couple is allowed to have two children. Single women and third children are still forcibly aborted. In its recent report, released January 8, 2020, the Congressional Executive Commission on China stated: “Local-level officials reportedly continued to enforce compliance with family planning policies using methods including heavy fines, job termination, and coerced abortion.”
The atrocities described in the film continue to this day, and the battle to stop them must continue until all coercive population control in China has ended. We cannot explore China’s dark past and ignore China’s dark present.
Nevertheless, the film is remarkable in the intimacy of the portraits it paints, while at the same time giving rise to agonizing conclusions regarding the world’s most massive social engineering experiment gone shockingly awry.
The Chinese Communist Party has boasted that it “prevented” 400 million births through its One Child Policy. This statistic is mind-numbing, inconceivable. The filmmakers, Nanfu Wang and Jialing Zhang, shows us how this was accomplished in Wang’s village.
Wang returned to China after having given birth to her son, to learn what her family and community experienced under the One Child Policy. The interviews Wang records are heartbreaking in their candor. Here we meet the uncle who left his infant daughter in a marketplace, hoping that someone would take her in. No one did. Over several days, he watched as she slowly starved to death.
We meet the family planning official who said that women with illegal pregnancies were tied up and dragged “like pigs” for forced abortions. We see one of the local “womb police” – a midwife personally responsible for more than 50,000 forced abortions and sterilizations – who now seeks to atone for her “sins” by helping infertile couples conceive. We meet the artist who, devastated at finding full-term babies in trash heaps, lovingly preserved and photographed them as a testimonial to the lives that could have been. Wang was courageous in keeping the disturbing images in the film, though doing so caused the film to be rated “R.”
Wang asks those she interviews if they think the One Child Policy was a good thing, worth the sacrifice. Astonishingly, the answer is an overwhelming yes – it was necessary to fight the “population war.” This view is consistent with the collectivist attitude of Communism and its powerful propaganda machine: sacrifice the one for the good of the many.
Do those interviewed really believe that the policy was a good thing, despite the excruciating pain it has caused them personally? Or did they merely say so, because they were being filmed and knew that their statements could get back to the Chinese government, resulting in persecution if they defied the Chinese Communist Party on one of its central policies?
When asked why they did not take measures to save their babies, the overwhelming answer is, “We had no choice.” This is the hallmark of Communism: the peacetime killing of its own citizens. The true face of Communism is never more clearly seen than in the faces of the Family Planning Police, dragging women out of their homes, strapping them to tables, and forcing them to abort babies they want. Anyone who thinks that Communism is a good thing must see this film.
I asked a pro-life friend if he had seen One Child Nation. He replied, “No, I would never see a film that advocates for abortion.” He was referring to the filmmaker’s statement at the end of the film that she thinks it ironic that she has left a nation where women are forced to have abortions only to come to a nation that restricts abortion, evincing an ill-conceived moral equivalency between China and the United States.
It is unfortunate that the filmmaker, having made a film of unparalleled power regarding the brutality of forced abortion in China, chose to take a wholly unnecessary stand on the America abortion debate. The filmmaker’s comment is a non sequitur. Ignore it, and see the film.
You can watch the trailer here and rent the film on Amazon Prime here.
Reggie Littlejohn is the President of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers. A video on her work to stop forced abortion in China can be viewed here.
Share


lifesitenews--2020-02-07--The treasures of Sacred Scripture

The treasures of Sacred Scripture

Formerly Heart to Heart with Mother Miriam , Mother Miriam Live brings you inspiration and solutions for life ’ s @ @ @ @ @ Miriam is a Catholic nun on a mission to bring hope to a world that @ @ @ @ @ let her share that hope and joy with you !
To tune into Mother Miriam @ @ @ @ @ Facebook page here every Monday to Friday at 10am .

Watch Mother Miriam's Live show from 2.7.2020. Mother continues her series reading from The Catechism Explained. Today, she focuses on sacred Scripture, the Bible, and the rich treasures that are found in scripture.
You can tune in daily at 10 am EST/7 am PST on our Facebook Page.
Subscribe to Mother Miriam Live here.
Will you join LifeSiteNews on the Battlefield? Join us here.


lifesitenews--2020-02-11--Conservatives shocked as Facebook, Twitter refuse to censor pro-Trump video

February 10 , 2020 ( American Thinker ) — One of the most worrisome things in America today is that the public square is n't public .
Instead , it 's owned by tech oligarchs , all of whom hew left politically .
For years , Google ( and its subsidiary YouTube ) , Twitter , and Facebook have systematically shut down conservative speech while giving almost unlimited passes to speech coming from the Left .
Twitter has been especially fierce in silencing conservatives , but Facebook has had its moment .
Of late , private Facebook groups are finding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 're being shared only among members of like-minded communities .
Facebook also has a revolting habit of appending to certain links that it does n't like claims that the link could be false and directing people instead to `` reputable '' sources such as the New York Times , the Washington Post , the AP , or Reuters .
For this reason , it 's noteworthy when social media outlets allow a popular conservative video to remain on their sites .
In this case , the video was a re-cut showing highlights from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , intercut with endlessly repeated footage of a vindictive , petty Pelosi ripping that same speech .
Those who opposed the video , which has been viewed millions of times , claimed that it 's a `` manipulated video , '' which violates Facebook 's current rules and Twitter 's upcoming rules .
Both outlets , however , rejected that viewpoint — and rightly too .
The concept of a dangerously manipulated video arises in the context of `` deep fakes '' — that is , videos so subtly manipulated that people do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ altered .
In this case , it 's clear even to the meanest intelligence that the video has been altered to make a point ( a good point ) : Sooner or later ( with sooner being better ) , Trump is going to have to address the way in which the social media giants systematically suppress conservative speech .
In an ideal world , competition would create competitive sites .
However , it 's been years now , and none of the competitive attempts have taken off .
The unique status of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to challenge in the free market .
In many ways , they have become the internet equivalent of the restaurants and hotels that the Civil Rights Act addressed when it passed legislation overriding private property rights and holding that people who own places of `` public accommodation '' can not discriminate .
Given social media 's extraordinary reach and control over communications among members of the public , it 's dangerous to allow these tech sites to hold such unlimited power over the content of speech in America .
Published with permission from @ @ @ @

February 10, 2020 (American Thinker) — One of the most worrisome things in America today is that the public square isn't public. Instead, it's owned by tech oligarchs, all of whom hew left politically. For years, Google (and its subsidiary YouTube), Twitter, and Facebook have systematically shut down conservative speech while giving almost unlimited passes to speech coming from the Left.
Twitter has been especially fierce in silencing conservatives, but Facebook has had its moment. Of late, private Facebook groups are finding their posts censored, even though they're being shared only among members of like-minded communities. Facebook also has a revolting habit of appending to certain links that it doesn't like claims that the link could be false and directing people instead to “reputable” sources such as the New York Times, the Washington Post, the AP, or Reuters.
For this reason, it's noteworthy when social media outlets allow a popular conservative video to remain on their sites. In this case, the video was a re-cut showing highlights from Trump's State of the Union speech, intercut with endlessly repeated footage of a vindictive, petty Pelosi ripping that same speech.
Those who opposed the video, which has been viewed millions of times, claimed that it's a “manipulated video,” which violates Facebook's current rules and Twitter's upcoming rules. Both outlets, however, rejected that viewpoint — and rightly too. The concept of a dangerously manipulated video arises in the context of “deep fakes” — that is, videos so subtly manipulated that people do not realize that the video has been altered.
In this case, it's clear even to the meanest intelligence that the video has been altered to make a point (a good point):
Kevin Jackson made a similar, equally good video:
Please – please- please take a minute and look at this video produced by Kevin Jackson – my dear friend. This is an awesome recap of the STOU. If you think like I do – this should be seen – make it happen. God Bless Kevin! GREAT WORK https://t.co/jN0LUdUXCT — Bo Snerdley (@BoSnerdley) February 6, 2020
Sooner or later (with sooner being better), Trump is going to have to address the way in which the social media giants systematically suppress conservative speech. In an ideal world, competition would create competitive sites. However, it's been years now, and none of the competitive attempts have taken off.
The unique status of the tech giants makes them very difficult to challenge in the free market. In many ways, they have become the internet equivalent of the restaurants and hotels that the Civil Rights Act addressed when it passed legislation overriding private property rights and holding that people who own places of “public accommodation” cannot discriminate. Given social media's extraordinary reach and control over communications among members of the public, it's dangerous to allow these tech sites to hold such unlimited power over the content of speech in America.
Published with permission from the American Thinker.
Share