Tag Archives: journalism

Great news! I was honored by Young Americans for Liberty as their Best Blogger of the Year (2011-2012)!

Great news! I was honored by Young Americans for Liberty as their Best Blogger of the Year (2011-2012)!

If you are a liberty-loving student, please read our posts and find out more about our mission at www.yaliberty.org.

About Young Americans for Liberty

Young Americans for Liberty (YAL) is the largest, most active, and fastest-growing pro-liberty organization on America’s college campuses. With more than 300 chapters and 26,000 student activists nationwide, YAL seeks to recruit, train, educate, and mobilize students on the ideals of liberty and the Constitution.

This is not a new beginning but a continuation of a youth movement already brewing in this country. Our objective is to facilitate its success.

CNN reporter who ambushed Ron Paul over newsletters is married to war profiteer Lance Morgan

Objective and neutral journalist Gloria Borger, the infamous CNN reporter who attempted to tarnish Ron Paul over his controversial newsletters, is married to chief war profiteer Lance Morgan of Powell Tate.

Is it a conflict of interest when you politically smear a presidential candidate who will directly impact and threaten your husband’s line of murderous work?

I have no idea, but it sure smells like it.

I ask again, “What ‘post-war’ period?”

When it was announced that the United States will be withdrawing from Iraq by the end of Dec. 31, commentators began propagating the disgusting meme that this is the beginning of a “post-war” period for both Americans and Iraqis.

In response, I asked “What ‘post-war’ period?”

This “post-war period” is a disgusting meme that will gain traction after Dec. 31 when the United States will withdraw its combat troops from Iraq (and leave behind thousands of private military thugs to continue the violence there). It must be noted that these departing American troops will not enjoy a “post-war period.” They will be redeployed into new theaters of combat to die in any one of our dozens of senseless wars in Afghanistan, Uganda, or the Philippines.

Not to mention Iraq itself, which will experience years of violence regardless of American presence. The bombings, the checkpoints, the sectarian strife, all of these will continue after “withdrawal.” There will be no “post-war period” for Iraqis.

That the end of Iraq War will bring about a “post-war period” is a nice fantasy, but it is an outright lie.

And about it gaining traction? A quick scan of headlines after the withdrawal announcement reveal that this meme is now the standard corporate media narrative.

From Politico:

Then last week at Huffington Post:

Then as recently as today from the Washington Post:

This is all part of a broader campaign strategy on the part of Obama reelection campaign to spread the lie that his wars are ending. And it is working.

Forgotten in the inevitable media corporate media circlejerk are the Iraqis who will continue to die while war profiteers continue to profit. How about American military personnel? The troops are not coming home anytime soon.

That our involvement in Iraq is drastically being reduced (involuntarily, by the way) is a great thing. However, it is not enough to pull combat troops out; Americans must press its government to also eliminate the State Department’s growing private army.

And there are these words of wisdom from the president himself in the Associated Press:

Speaking after a morning of meetings with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, Obama said other nations must not interfere with Iraq’s sovereignty. While he stopped short of mentioning any countries by name, U.S. officials are closely watching how neighboring Iran may seek to influence Baghdad after U.S. troops withdraw.

President Obama will do well do heed his own advice.

Newt Gingrich recently received an endorsement from the Manchester Union-Leader

Newt Gingrich will fit perfectly right in, according to Charles Burris:

Endorsing the arrogant warmongering neocon Newt Gingrich is perfectly consistent for the Manchester Union-Leader, the biggest embarrassment of the Granite State… No one will forget his scurrilous front page editorials, “Kissinger the Kike,” attacking Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, or “Jerry the Jerk,” slandering President Gerald Ford. The paper hasn’t changed its tabloid attack journalism under publisher Joseph McQuaid. Newt will fit in perfectly with this crew of Muslim-hating, un-American fascists.


Though, honestly, this just further proves that partisan Republicans fear Muslims more than they fear the country-collapsing debt spurred by this country’s obsession with freedom-destroying, death-spreading “War on Everything.”

In which case, you could argue that partisan Republicans hate Muslims more than they love America.

Glik v. Boston: Court affirms right to record police actions

In a huge victory for free speech, transparency, and the public at large, the First Circuit Panel affirms the right of vigilant citizens to videotape police actions carrying out their duties in public:

The First Amendment issue here is, as the parties frame it, fairly narrow: is there a constitutionally protected right to videotape police carrying out their duties in public? Basic First Amendment principles, along with case law from this and other circuits, answer that question unambiguously in the affirmative.


As the Supreme Court has observed, “the First Amendment goes beyond protection of the press and the self-expression of individuals to prohibit government from limiting the stock of information from which members of the public may draw.”


The First Amendment right to gather news is, as the Court has often noted, not one that inures solely to the benefit of the news media; rather, the public’s right of access to information is coextensive with that of the press.

Not only does Simon Glik v. City of Boston (PDF) establish that police officers are violating Americans’ First Amendment rights when they prevent, prohibit, or confiscate cameras of vigilant citizens recording the police actions, but as Cato’s David Rittgers have noted, might also strike at the heart of Massachusetts’ police use of felony wiretapping laws to punish citizens. The only issue that Rittgers neglected to point out is that Glik v. Boston seems to only apply to police actions in public.

Regardless, this sets a powerful precedent that will stymie the police state and hinder its attempts to cover up their public crimes against the unarmed citizenry they purport to serve and defend. The next step then is to extend First Amendment protections to all recording of police crimes: whether it be committed in the full sight of the public or away from its prying eyes.

Iowa a Test of Ron Paul as Mainstream Candidate

Mr. Paul’s libertarian views have moved from the fringe toward the mainstream of conservative thinking in the past several years, with his warnings about fiscal meltdown gaining new resonance and the 2008 financial crisis allowing him to press his longstanding critiques of the Federal Reserve.

Now, as he again seeks the Republican presidential nomination, he is hoping to show that he can translate the new attention into votes. And his first test is the straw poll next month, where he is hoping he can organize his band of followers into a political machine capable of beating some or all of his brand-name rivals.

It has been very interesting (and illuminating) to watch how corporate media treats the Ames Straw Poll in their reporting. It is at once both: a “political bell-weather” or a “test” that would make or break a presidential run, and utterly inconsequential with the corporate media-sanctioned front-runners (i.e., Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, and inexplicably Gov. Rick Perry of Texas) not participating in the straw poll.

Regardless of the outcome of the straw poll in Iowa, one thing is for sure: Ron Paul would never be mainstream enough for corporate media. His consistent antiwar views has all but precluded him from that.