nChrist
|
 |
« on: April 27, 2017, 05:44:52 PM » |
|
________________________________________ The Patriot Post Digest 4-20-2017 From The Federalist Patriot Free Email Subscription ________________________________________
Mid-Day Digest
Apr. 20, 2017
IN TODAY’S EDITION
Predictions of increased crime after DC’s handgun ban was shot down haven’t come true. Bill O'Reilly’s firing provides a glimpse at why we elected to be advertising free. The Supreme Court heard arguments in a critical religious liberty case yesterday. Daily Features: Top Headlines, Cartoons, Columnists and Short Cuts.
THE FOUNDATION
“A good moral character is the first essential in a man, and that the habits contracted at your age are generally indelible, and your conduct here may stamp your character through life. It is therefore highly important that you should endeavor not only to be learned but virtuous.” —George Washington (1790)
TOP RIGHT HOOKS
No Spin: Killing Bill O'Reilly1
By Mark Alexander
After 21 years at Fox News, Bill O'Reilly, who entered the national media market as an infotainer with CBS’s tabloid-gossip nightly, “Inside Edition,” is out. According to Fox, “After a thorough and careful review of the [sexual harassment] allegations, the company and Bill O'Reilly have agreed that Bill O'Reilly will not be returning to the Fox News Channel.” In other words, after paying more than $13 million2 to hush sexual harassment suits in recent years, once the complaints became public, advertisers pressured Fox to can O'Reilly.
Though we have criticized O'Reilly in the past, particularly over his libelous “biography3” of Ronald Reagan4, he was an effective promoter of some conservative ideas, mostly by over-talking his guest victims. That effectiveness is precisely why The New York Times exposed his alleged transgressions5.
Regardless of what you think about O'Reilly, the real story here is the calculation by the Times that exposing O'Reilly would result in advertisers boycotting the show — and the network. Thus, Fox News, which is first and foremost devoted to maintaining market share (a.k.a. advertising revenues), had to fold its hand. Fox already has to blast now-ubiquitous “Fox News Alert” banners, ad nauseum, in order to keep its viewers interested through their 24/7 news cycle. As that tactic wears thin, so will ad revenue, and the network could not afford to keep O'Reilly on.
While this episode publicly exposes the power and influence that advertisers have in regard to who is delivering the news, the question every consumer of news from any commercial outlet should ask is this: How often do editors make decisions about what news to cover, and how, based on their concern for how advertisers will respond? The answer: Every day, all day.
At The Patriot Post, we made a commitment from day one6 to decline advertising. You will note that our website and email publications are free from annoying ads, pop-up screens, or any other sponsored content. When asked on occasion by our supporters why we do not supplement our revenues with advertising, I refer them to our mission and operations statement7, which notes plainly: “We are not sustained by any political, special interest or parent organization, and we do not accept advertising to ensure our advocacy is not restrained by commercial influence.”
It is for that reason that The Patriot Post is funded entirely by the generous support of fellow Patriots8. We’re accountable only to you — not the plethora of advertisers who shape the editorial content of commercial print and television outlets.
Dems' Dire Warnings After Heller Prove False9
A recent analysis has determined that since the 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller10 Supreme Court decision overturning DC’s handgun ban, there has been no increase in violent crime. If anything, there has been a slight decrease in the number of murders committed with a firearm — from nearly 80% of all homicide victims between 2000 and 2007 to 74% in 2008, the year following the court’s decision. That number has continued to decline since the decision.
The pre- and post-Heller numbers also show that the worst year for gun-related homicides in the District was 2002 with 262, while, after the ban’s removal, the worst year was 2015 with a total of 162 such homicides. John Lott, president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, said, “I expect murders to fall. How they fall is a different question. The people who generally obeyed the ban were law-abiding citizens and not criminals.”
This sentiment certainly wasn’t shared by many anti-gun groups or Democrats at the time of the Heller ruling. Then-DC Mayor Adrian Fenty warned, “More handguns in the District of Columbia will only lead to more handgun violence.” And the queen of anti-gun hyperbole herself, Dianne Feinstein, falsely predicted, “The people of this great country will be less safe because of it.”
While DC still has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation, Lott noted the Heller decision has “legalized people being able to use guns in self-defense.” In reality this analysis of the numbers comes as no surprise to those of us who have ardently defended the wisdom of our Founding Fathers in crafting the Second Amendment, which was specifically intended for the right of citizens to protect themselves — not just from crime but from tyrannical government.
Speaking of tyranny, recent news out of Venezuela serves as yet another reminder of the aforementioned truth. Having outlawed private gun ownership in the recent past in the name of combatting crime, dictator Nicolas Maduro’s increasingly oppressive government is now arming his own thugs11 in order to enforce control over the growing dissident movement of citizens who are fed up with his authoritarian rule and literally starving. Feinstein and Co. must be looking on with envy.
Top Headlines12
Report: Trump rolls back $60 billion more in regulatory savings. (The Washington Free Beacon13)
War on cops? U.S. murder rate expected to rise 8% in 2016. (Washington Examiner14)
Iowa becomes the 35th state to adopt “stand your ground” legislation. (National Review15)
AG Sessions: MS-13 gang could be designated as terrorist organization. (The Hill16)
How did New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo make $783,000 on memoir that sold 3,200 copies? (The Buffalo News17)
UC Berkeley rewards liberal violence by not allowing Ann Coulter speech. (The Daily Signal18.)
Modern college yields results: Census says more Americans 18-to-34 now live with parents than with spouse. (CNS News19)
Trump signs bill giving vets more choices for health care. (CNS News20)
U.S. considers re-imposing all sanctions on Iran, dismantling nuke deal. (The Washington Free Beacon21)
Assad repositions Syrian planes near Russian base, expecting Trump won’t dare to bomb there. (Hot Air22)
Policy: The economy is rushing toward a fiscal reckoning. (American Enterprise Institute23)
Policy: Renewable energy myths abound. (Heartland Institute24)
For more, visit Patriot Headline Report25. Don’t Miss Alexander’s Column
Read The Shot (Still) Heard ‘Round the World!26. The fight for American Liberty originated in defiance of government confiscation of income and firearms.
If you’d like to receive Alexander’s Column by email, update your subscription here27.
FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS What Does a Playground Have to Do With Religious Liberty?28
By Allyne Caan
What could pro-LGBT advocacy group Lambda Legal possibly have against a state-funded grant to fix a pre-school playground? When the playground sits on the property of a church that is at the center of a potentially landmark Supreme Court ruling, the answer is: a lot.
On Wednesday, the High Court heard oral argument in Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer. At issue is whether Missouri can discriminate against religious institutions in public aid programs. In 2012, the Missouri church, which also runs a daycare center and preschool program, applied for a grant through a state program that helps non-profits install rubber playground surfaces. The church’s application ranked fifth out of 44 submissions, yet Trinity was disqualified from receiving one of the 14 grants. The reason? The state claimed giving the church funds would violate the state constitutional provision against providing public funding for religious organizations.
Trinity Lutheran sued, and after losing in federal district court and on appeal in the Eighth Circuit, the church now faces SCOTUS’ judgment.
|