Report: Newsrooms Warn Journalists to Keep Abortion Views Private

Report: Newsrooms Warn Journalists to Keep Abortion Views Private

It appears that newsroom managers have warned reporters against voicing their personal views on abortion as the Supreme Court potentially stands on the cusp of overturning Roe v. Wade.

According to a recent Vanity Fair report, certain news outlets have taken a markedly different tone than the one they employed during the Black Lives Matter protests over the death of George Floyd. For instance, during the height of the protests/riots of 2020, Axios chief executive Jim VandeHei told employees in a company-wide memo that they were encouraged to exercise their “rights to free speech, press, and protest.” In recent days, however, the company has been singing a different tune to its employees. Earlier this week, a memo circulated among the Axios staff urged journalists to keep their opinions secret.

“Abortion is a human rights issue that has become a highly politicized topic, with very specific policies being debated in Washington and in most states,” wrote VandeHei. “So it seems impossible to march—or tweet opinions—and not be perceived as picking a political side in public.”

VandeHei warned that such activism “could undermine our trusted journalism.”

An Axios spokesperson told Vanity Fair said that the policy stands in line with the company’s mission statement.

“We have been consistent and clear since Axios’s inception: we want our company focused on reporting and fact-based news, not opinion. We know this is hard for staff when they feel their values or identity are under attack, but this is our shared mission,” said the spokesperson.

Reporters with the Associated Press and NPR were also issued a similar memo, according to Poynter.

Journalists have since taken to Twitter to voice their discontent.

“As we speak, journalists who expressed their anger and distress on Twitter over their bodily autonomy and rights being taken away are now getting reprimanded for it,” said Jess Joho of Mashable. “Please, explain to me: exactly whose version of ‘objectivitie truth’ are we supposed to stick to here?”

Though the New York Times has issued no memo on the matter, the outlet directed Vanity Fair to its ethical journalism guidelines, which says staff members “may not march or rally in support of public causes or movements” or do things such as “sign ads taking a position on public issues” that may “reasonably raise doubts about their ability or The Times’s ability to function as neutral observers in covering the news.”

Only Rolling Stone (not exactly a bastion of objectivity) told employees that they were welcome to share their beliefs on the issue.

“Unlike so many other newsrooms, you don’t have to stifle your beliefs around here. This is a place where we can champion our convictions, where we can be our fullest selves,” Rolling Stone top editor Noah Shachtman told staff in a Slack message last Tuesday.

 “Of course, we have to maintain the highest standards of accuracy and authenticity in our reporting; we can’t take shortcuts, or substitute opinions for facts. But this is a multi-pronged offensive against our rights and we need to be frank with our readers about what’s at stake—no euphemisms, no sugar-coating,” he added.


New Mayor Brings Old Anti-Crime Methods Back to Liberal City

New Mayor Brings Old Anti-Crime Methods Back to Liberal City

New York City has a new mayor and he doesn’t like “broken windows” any more than Rudy Giuliani did. Everybody knows the Big Apple “is in the midst of a staggering crime wave.” Concerned citizens are really happy to see Rudy’s anti-crime units back on the street. They were re-branded as “anti-gun units” to appease liberals but the job is the same.

Mayor Adams gets aggressive

Violent crime numbers for things like murder, rape, robbery and assault skyrocketed in New York City under Bill de Blasio’s liberal Democrat administration. The new mayor, Eric Adams, was elected in a clear referendum to clean up the crime.

He quickly reinstated special NYPD units to patrol city streets and subways, calling them Anti-gun units to make them more palatable to progressives. They’re after the gangsters holding and using illegal guns, not average Second Amendment supporting citizens.

Its come to the point where “New York is a city under siege,” Judicial Watch describes. “Every day brings a new horror story.

Criminals go in and out of the revolving door system with ease, while justice never seems to get done. Police are getting ambushed on a regular basis. Mayor Adams is doing something about it.

Back when Rudy Giuliani was mayor in charge of the city, he implemented a “Broken Windows” theory of policing. The phrase is meant as “a metaphor for urban decline.” When a building’s broken window isn’t repaired, it “soon leads to the other windows being broken and more disorderly conduct.

As Giuliani’s police commissioner William Bratton and George Kelling, the father of Broken Windows theory write, “a neighborhood where minor offenses go unchallenged soon becomes a breeding ground for more serious criminal activity and, ultimately, violence.

Decriminalizing crime

For years, liberal progressives have been decriminalizing crimes one by one. Then they defunded the police out of existence. Citizens not yet ready to try do it yourself justice elected Mayor Adams, begging him to put a stop to “public urination, public drinking, littering, and subway turnstile jumping.” De Blasio had legalized all those things.

Now shoplifting is being decriminalized in liberal jurisdictions, too. Along with incidents of harassment, menacing and petty theft. Not to mention the looting and actual breaking of windows as fallout from those justice for George Floyd peaceful protests.

Mayor Adams had a solution. A “refreshed version of the successful but controversial NYPD anti-crime unit, which was disbanded in 2020.” Each six-member team “will aggressively tackle gun crime in New York.

Around 170 are on the street already, “focusing on high crime areas.” Adams wants to get bail laws back on track and “crackdown on transit crime with an increased police presence in the subways.

The first of Mayor Adams’ new units made “a first arrest just two hours into the first patrol — an alleged member of the Bloods crime gang with a loaded 9mm handgun.

By the end of the very first week, the units “had arrested thirty more suspects and taken ten illegal guns off the streets.” Someone needs to mail them some donuts.


Faced With The Horrific Results Of Their Ideas, Leftists Are Backpedaling With All Their Might

Faced With The Horrific Results Of Their Ideas, Leftists Are Backpedaling With All Their Might

It would appear that leftists don’t actually like a lot of the radical policies they have been advocating for since the beginning of the lockdowns and the death of George Floyd in spring 2020. From homelessness to crime to Covid policies, the left is backtracking on much of its platform in the face of disastrous results and frustration from rank-and-file liberals. Recent developments in our nation’s capital provide some of the most dramatic examples. 

Cities across the country are taking a more aggressive stance on homeless encampments in response to residents’ complaints, including Washington, D.C. An early February poll conducted by The Washington Post found that three-fourths of Washingtonians support the district’s plan to clear the camps of homeless persons that now proliferate across the city.

That the American Civil Liberties Union and even some D.C. council members oppose Mayor Muriel E. Bowser’s cleanups have not stopped their enforcement. Bowser has quite a mandate for this: the number of city residents who want these camps cleared does not substantially change based on respondents’ race, and is above 70 percent for white, black, Hispanic, and Asian residents.

That the district is pursuing this policy with substantial local support is a bit ironic, given that so many prominent leftist organizations, local leftist leaders, and Democratic politicians have been trying for more than a year to protect these encampments. This included Ann Marie Staudenmaier, wife of Maryland gubernatorial candidate Tom Perez, who last year advocated for homeless camps in the district to be permitted and protected. “Don’t evict them from the only place that they have to call home,” she urged.

Perhaps it has something to do with how large numbers of homeless persons affect the cleanliness, security, and attraction of neighborhoods. A separate recent WaPo article cited residents who noted homeless persons in the camp have harassed them. One D.C. resident said downtown is “not pleasant” and that the ubiquity of the encampments threatens the security of local residents.

Although many on the left would likely grimace to say it, national trends on curbing these camps indicate a significant percentage of the rest of America feels the same way.

Refunding the Police

Mayors of America’s largest cities, once responsive to calls to defund the police, have done a dramatic reversal in response to local frustration with higher crime rates. Now “refund the police” has become the cry of many liberal residents.

In D.C., residents’ opinions on crime and police have experienced this shift, given increased crime and murder rates in the city since 2020. According to a recent WaPo poll, a sizable majority (59 percent) now agree that increasing the number of police officers patrolling communities would reduce the amount of violent crime in D.C.

“The share of Washingtonians who say they are not safe from crime has risen to 30 percent this year from 22 percent in November 2019 and is the highest in more than two decades of Post polls,” reports the WaPo.

This is quite a change from the “defund the police” initiatives city residents — and various activist groups — so loudly endorsed after the death of George Floyd. The D.C. government in 2020 supported measures in June 2022 to cut $15 million from the police department budget. At the time, the police chief warned this could lead to the loss of hundreds of officers and that underfunding training and equipment might result in officers using more excessive force.

Thankfully, D.C. is not alone in wanting to refund the police. As NBC reported in February, Democratic politicians are calling the “defund the police” movement “dead” and mayors in San Francisco, New York, and Chicago are “moving to increase police budgets and end ‘the reign of criminals.’”

Surrendering to Pandemic Fatigue

Democratic states are also ending many Covid restrictions in the face of rising complaints from their constituents. Consider D.C. Mayor Bowser’s mid-February announcement that she would lift the city’s vaccine requirement for businesses and “dial back” the city’s indoor mask rules. This announcement followed a number of states — including many governed by Democrats — that have also eased their restrictions as polls come back showing their rising unpopularity. Now D.C.’s party scene is “returning to normal,” reports the WaPo, even though coronavirus case counts in and around Washington remain “high.”

This is a remarkable and speedy shift, especially considering D.C. had some of the most strict Covid restrictions in the country. Perhaps the District’s dramatic about-face has something to do with widespread annoyance with pandemic restrictions, even among liberal voters. Perhaps it results from the rising tide of Democratic politicians listening to their constituencies despite “public health guidance” claiming the country is moving too fast in loosening the rules. 

Perhaps all of these changes also relate to the fact that the District of Columbia is no longer experiencing the population boom and gentrification that have defined the last couple of decades. The capital’s population declined by 2.9 percent from 2020 to 2021, according to the Census Bureau. Living in an increasingly dangerous, filthy nanny-city is apparently not that appealing, even to the District’s majority leftist population. This has been part of a broader national trend as people across the nation in 2021 left Democratic-run states.

Mugged by Reality

To borrow a phrase from the late Irving Kristol, D.C. residents (and liberals across the country) have been mugged by reality — and in some cases actually mugged. Perhaps living in a lefty utopia where the homeless camp wherever they like, undisturbed by a defunded police force, with fickle and irrational health-related restrictions isn’t all that it’s cracked up to be.

Democrat D.C. residents, like the rest of Americans, don’t actually like their public spaces overrun by homeless persons, their neighborhoods suffering increased violent crime rates, or their cities stuck in a cycle of never-ending draconian public safety regulations.

What this all means is that, thankfully, certain activist narratives that threatened all Americans have lost considerable steam. It also means these policies are likely political liabilities in upcoming elections. Perhaps it also shows there are certain things that all Americans can still agree on.

Casey Chalk is a senior contributor at The Federalist and an editor and columnist at The New Oxford Review. He has a bachelor’s in history and master’s in teaching from the University of Virginia and a master’s in theology from Christendom College. He is the author of The Persecuted: True Stories of Courageous Christians Living Their Faith in Muslim Lands.


Let’s Talk About Mekhi Speed, Amir Locke’s ‘Violent’ Cousin Who Is Directly Related To Locke’s Death

Let’s Talk About Mekhi Speed, Amir Locke’s ‘Violent’ Cousin Who Is Directly Related To Locke’s Death

The Washington Post has so far run three pieces in its opinion pages this month on the “wrongful” death of “innocent” Amir Locke, a 22-year-old black man. But not a single one of them references the name Mekhi Speed, Locke’s 17-year-old cousin.

That’s strange. Given that Speed is directly related to Locke’s fatal run-in with police, you’d think the people at the Post might find him worth mentioning, at least in passing.

A Hennepin County, Minn., judge last week unsealed search warrants related to the pre-dawn home raid that resulted in the shooting death of Locke. As authorities had stated, Locke isn’t named in the warrants that authorized the “no-knock” entry of three separate units in one apartment building.

Locked happened to be in one of those units, which building security said was accessible to Speed after he had asked for a key fob. Speed’s brother, Marlon, lived in that unit with his girlfriend and Mekhi had recently been inside, though he lived in one of the other apartments with his mother.

The police raid was conducted for the purpose of collecting evidence and potentially apprehending Speed, who was wanted for allegedly robbing, shooting, and killing 38-year-old Otis Elder in nearby St. Paul, Minn. A witness on the phone with Elder said he believed that Elder was in the process of a drug deal when he was shot.

Speed, who was already on probation for a separate shooting incident, was only one suspect wanted in relation to the killing of Elder. Another suspect wanted by authorities lived in the same apartment complex. According to police, both parties “have been actively involved in numerous crimes throughout the metro since at least November 2021, to include robberies, firearm incidents, and fleeing the police in a motor vehicle. A criminal history review of the known suspects in this homicide revealed that they have a history of violent crimes.”

In short order, everyone on scene the day of that deadly police raid seems to have been closely associated with a violent thief suspected of murder, as well as his accomplices. That doesn’t make them guilty, but it certainly raises questions about the circumstances that some writers at The Washington Post aren’t interested in exploring.

Police body camera footage from the raid shows cops using a key to unlock the entrance door of the unit where Locke was sleeping on a couch in the living area. Within 10 seconds, police descended on Locke, who emerges from underneath a blanket with a gun, before fatally shooting him three times.

Contrary to the padlock-shut media narrative that Amir Locke was a completely innocent casualty of a racially tinged police raid gone wrong, we actually have no idea yet if he was implicated in the homicide or any other one of Speed’s wrongdoings. It’s true that Locke wasn’t named in the search warrants, but that only relates to the Minneapolis police department’s search of the apartment complex.

The investigation is actually being conducted by Saint Paul. A spokesman for the city’s police confirmed with me Tuesday that that probe is ongoing and that all of its findings haven’t yet been made public, including in what capacity, if any, Locke was involved.

Will it turn out that Locke had nothing to do with Speed and was ultimately the innocent victim of a cosmic screw-up by law enforcement? Maybe! Is it possible, instead, that Locke knew exactly what he was getting into when he chose to stay at the home of his cousin, whose brother was wanted for murder? We don’t know.

The problem is that some people at The Washington Post, married to a fake narrative about police hunting down black people, are pretending they already do.


Press Calls Trump A Fascist For Opposing Violent Riots, But Trudeau’s A Hero For Treating Peaceful Protesters Like Terrorists

Press Calls Trump A Fascist For Opposing Violent Riots, But Trudeau’s A Hero For Treating Peaceful Protesters Like Terrorists

When President Donald Trump pressed for military deployment to quell the violent riots overwhelming cities in 2020, the commander in chief was vilified by the corporate press as a fascist dictator who weaponized his office for political gain. When Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau demanded his government invoke similar measures over a block party this week bringing the capital of Ottawa to a halt by those who demand medical freedom, it’s merely a government exercise to restore order.

In early June 2020, Arkansas Republican Sen. Tom Cotton sparked an uproar at The New York Times when the paper published an op-ed calling on Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act at the height of the George Floyd riots. By the end of the two-week period following Floyd’s death, the political upheaval would leave behind the most expensive chapter of domestic carnage in modern American history with upwards of $2 billion in damage.

“The pace of looting and disorder may fluctuate from night to night, but it’s past time to support local law enforcement with federal authority,” Cotton wrote, warning some of the worst devastation would occur in poor communities, which it did. The editor responsible for publishing Cotton’s op-ed promptly resigned and the paper pinned a lengthy “editor’s note” to the piece.

Trump never invoked the 1807 law which was last requested and approved in 1992 amid L.A. riots over Rodney King. The president’s call on governors to deploy the National Guard, however, while mobilizing the military to ensure resources were available, was met with the hysterical routine coverage expected from the legacy press corps.

Below is how the Washington Post opened a story on Trump pledging military resources to states which need them, regurgitating the lie he tear-gassed protesters in the process (emphasis ours):

President Trump militarized the federal response to protests of racial inequality that have erupted in cities across America late Monday, as authorities fired tear gas at people protesting peacefully near the White House to disperse crowds moments before Trump staged a photo opportunity there.

Trump forced a brazen inflammation of the crisis convulsing the country by calling the nationwide demonstrations ‘acts of domestic terror,’ declaring himself the ‘president of law and order’ and taking the rare step of mobilizing the military to use force to quell the unrest.

In a move denounced by critics as authoritarian, the commander in chief threatened to deploy troops to ‘quickly solve the problem’ if state and local authorities did not immediately regain control of their streets, which he said had been overtaken by ‘professional anarchists’ and ‘violent mobs.’

And here is how the paper dedicated to chronicling democracy’s death in darkness opened a story Monday night of Prime Minister Trudeau actually invoking his government’s Emergencies Act:

OTTAWA — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, under pressure to quell the chaos caused by demonstrations against public health measures that have eroded trust in public institutions and tarnished Canada’s reputation abroad, on Monday became the first Canadian leader to invoke the country’s Emergencies Act.

The law, which was passed in 1988 but never before used, will give police ‘more tools’ to bring order to areas where public assemblies ‘constitute illegal and dangerous activities,’ Trudeau said. Financial institutions, meanwhile, will get sweeping powers to halt the flow of funding to the self-styled ‘Freedom Convoy.’

The demonstrations began in Ottawa on Jan. 28 but soon rippled across the country, choking off several U.S.-Canada border crossings. Trudeau said it had become clear that, despite their best efforts, “there are serious challenges to law enforcement’s ability to effectively enforce the law.”

The coverage of Trudeau’s decision to invoke the Emergencies Act to crack down on demonstrators protesting the regime’s Covid mandates is far more mundane than the press’s focus on Trump’s comparable inaction two years ago.

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) chastised “Trump’s bellicose rhetoric” in 2020 while Trudeau’s authoritarian suspension of civil liberties and charity theft is covered as trying to solve a crisis.

In 2020, Vox headlined, “The president is a danger to the US military.” Last week, however, the publication titled another piece, “The Canadian trucker convoy is an unpopular uprising.”

“The ‘freedom convoy’ that has besieged Ottawa isn’t a people’s revolt. It’s a fringe movement protesting its defeat,” the paper wrote as a news article while highlighting the occasional confederate flag present to smear the entire demonstration as one steeped in white supremacy.

There is no shortage of double standards when it comes to corporate media and Democrats’ conduct related to 2020’s summer of rage dubbed the “Summer of Love” by Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan. As Trudeau waves the fist of a true fascist, however, banning support for peaceful demonstrations with threats of fines and jail time, legacy press is certain to continue its shift in support for federal intervention to quell protests contradictory to the ideological interests of newsrooms.

Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at


Brian Flores’ Lawsuit Exposes The Absurdity Of NFL Racial Quotas Like The ‘Rooney Rule’

Brian Flores’ Lawsuit Exposes The Absurdity Of NFL Racial Quotas Like The ‘Rooney Rule’

The efforts of leftists to destroy the world of sports took another Great Leap Forward last week with the news that former Miami Dolphins head coach Brian Flores filed a class-action suit against the NFL and all 32 NFL teams for racial discrimination. Flores was fired in January after three seasons with the Dolphins, and he recently interviewed for the New York Giants head coaching job that instead went to Brian Daboll.

Flores’ lawsuit is an unhinged, 58-page rant that focuses more on topics like professional football history and George Floyd rather than Flores’ specific allegations because his allegations are preposterous. Flores says the NFL “remains rife with racism” when it comes to hiring and retaining black coaches, and that the league “is managed much like a plantation,” yet he has been employed as an NFL coach for the past 14 years, and made upwards of $3 million per season as the Dolphins head coach.

The thrust of Flores’ suit is that since 70 percent of NFL players are black, and anywhere between 3 percent and 34 percent of coaches and executive personnel are black, that is prima facie evidence that the league is “racially segregated.” But Flores himself was an enthusiastic participant in this supposed “injustice,” since nearly 75 percent of his own coaching staff during his tenure with the Dolphins were white. And nowhere in Flores’ lawsuit does it mention that he was fired in Miami by a black general manager, Chris Grier.

Also unmentioned in the lawsuit is precisely how Flores would remedy the situation. If we want an NFL that proportionally “looks like America,” as Joe Biden is so fond of saying, then 3 or 4 of the 32 head coaches, general managers, and team owners would be black, but 75 percent of the players would be white or Hispanic. It’s doubtful that Flores is advocating for two-thirds of black players to be fired and replaced with whites. Is there any reason, other than “discrimination,” why NFL rosters are still 100 percent male? Why is neither team in the upcoming Super Bowl starting a transgender female at left tackle?   

What the social justice warriors in sports want, of course, is to have it both ways: force the NFL to have fewer white male coaches, executives, and owners while still signing NFL players based on their performance and the best interests of the team.

In all my years of playing football, from high school to the NFL, I never heard any teammate of any race complain about a team’s racial composition. Players understand that sports are the ultimate meritocracy, where the currency of the realm is performance, not skin color or political correctness. If a player doesn’t think he’s getting enough playing time, it doesn’t do much good to cry “racism!” The only rational thing to do is to work harder and play better.

Part of the reason this wisdom hasn’t been applied to the coaching world is due to absurd racial quota systems like the “Rooney Rule” in the NFL, which forces teams to interview at least one black candidate for any major coaching or executive vacancy.

The absurdity of this practice can be illustrated by simply applying it to NFL roster vacancies. Imagine if every NFL team were forced to invite a white cornerback into training camp every season. No NFL team has started a white cornerback since Jason Sehorn in 2002. A white cornerback who fulfilled a team’s obligation under a “Sehorn Rule” would feel insecure and teammates would feel resentful, even if the player was qualified for the position and seriously considered for the job.

This is not a defense of the NFL. The league brought this upon themselves when they jumped in bed with the social justice radicals after the Kaepernick saga and doubled down after the George Floyd/BLM riots. They deserve this lawsuit and everything that’s coming to them.

The rest of America would do well to abandon the obsession with racial optics and skin-deep assessments of our fellow countrymen, or we’re heading toward the all-out racial conflict that the radical left seems obsessed with fomenting.

After 4 seasons with the New England Patriots, Jake Bequette joined the military where after graduating Army Ranger school he deployed to Iraq with the 101st Airborne. He’s currently running for US Senate in Arkansas.


Jennie Nguyen Dust-Up Is Bravo’s Latest Battle In The War Over Its Soul

Jennie Nguyen Dust-Up Is Bravo’s Latest Battle In The War Over Its Soul

Jennie Nguyen fled war-torn Vietnam on a boat. She was captured by Thai pirates, Nguyen says, and saved from a refugee camp three years later by Christians who sponsored her journey to America. Bravo just fired Nguyen, the network’s first Vietnamese Real Housewife, over anti-woke memes she posted in 2020.

Some of Nguyen’s posts have been described as “racist” in the media since a Reddit user dug them up earlier this month. After each of her cast members took her turn denouncing Nguyen, she apologized, describing the memes as “offensive” and “hurtful.” It wasn’t enough. By Tuesday, Nguyen had been axed from the “Real Housewives of Salt Lake City.”

Here’s a representative sampling of the memes, which would have been hard for Bravo to miss when they vetted Nguyen as a member of the cast.

Racist Memes?

The posts are not gentle criticisms of the social justice movement, that much is clear. They’re biting, politically incorrect, and openly unsympathetic. They’re also pretty standard fare in the universe of political memes and the universe of parents’ Facebook feeds. That’s not because the country is teeming with racists, it’s because a movement considered mainstream by the political establishment is actually very polarizing.

Nguyen, for instance, posted the “Community” meme that said, “If you follow the officers [sic] orders, you won’t get shot,” on Aug. 27, 2020, in the aftermath of Black Lives Matter riots that torched Kenosha, Wis. over the shooting of Jacob Blake. It turned out Blake, who is now paralyzed, was armed with a knife, resisting arrest, trying to enter an SUV with his children in it, and hadn’t responded to stun-gun shocks. State and federal prosecutors ultimately declined to charge the officer who fired.

Again, Nguyen’s post is sharp and unsympathetic, but hardly racist or inaccurate in the context of that particular incident. The Blaze article she posted about George Floyd’s death is also accurate, and there’s nothing racial in Nguyen’s Sept. 23 post about crime, especially in the context of 2020 where Antifa rioters from all racial backgrounds were vandalizing cities around the country.

The graphic Nguyen posted on Sept. 2 makes a pretty popular argument in crude terms: the country’s problems have more to do with culture than cops. If you use the false, expansionist definition of racism that thinkers like Ibram X. Kendi successfully mainstreamed, then yes, Jennie Nguyen and many other Americans are virulently racist.

Redefining Bigotry

But this is not a problem with them, it’s a problem with the definition, which has been weaponized by ideologues and partisans to make our cities less safe for people of all races while elite leftists move to the suburbs. Remember when the ultra-left mayor of Minneapolis was booed out of a rally for saying he wasn’t fully on board with abolishing the entire police department? Under the Kendi definition, support for systems of oppression (like capitalism or policing) is not anti-racism, thus it is racism.

That word used to be commonly understood as a label for people who discriminate against others based on the idea their race is inferior. The far left intentionally changed this.

I have no idea whether Nguyen is racist, but deciding these memes mark an unacceptable level of racism sends a message that reasonable opinions are bigotry. It reinforces dangerous new norms of what constitutes racism and what constitutes a fixable offense.

Of course, it’s also a double standard on more levels than one. Nguyen’s castmate Mary Cosby told her she “love[s] slanted eyes” earlier this season. She also said something about “Mexican thugs” who make drugs. Cosby seems to have quit the show amid mounting allegations the Pentecostal church she runs is exploitive at best and a “cult” at worst.

Nguyen herself said on this week’s episode of the show that she broke her husband’s ribs during an argument once. That seems worse than holding conservative views about policing, but the outrage is disproportionate.

Bravo has been happy to follow the legal drama of RHOSLC’s Jen Shah, who’s pleading not guilty to charges of fraud in a telemarketing scheme. Teresa Giudice went to prison. It’s great television, and that’s okay.

The Business of Bravo’s Entertainment

Bravo does not cast “Real Housewives” as protagonists. They’re not supposed to function as role models and they’re not supposed to normalize bad behavior. When we laugh or gasp at their bad behavior, we reinforce the boundaries of what’s right and wrong. Firing Nguyen instead of forcing her to talk through the issue with her cast is silly because it’s falsely predicated on the notion her posts were racist, but also because it’s less constructive.

Above all, Bravo is a business. Like many businesses around the country, the network’s culturally progressive leaders see backlash from hyper-political leftists on social media and the entertainment press as a threat to their bottom line. It’s not, even for a niche subculture like the Bravo universe. Nguyen’s diversity mattered to them until she turned out to be ideologically diverse by the standards of their bubbles.

As woke culture built momentum in recent years, Bravo proactively started adding layers of leftist messaging to its shows, casting “finger-waggers” who intentionally steered the plots toward politics in order to lecture their castmates about good and evil. It’s sucking the life out of the network, saddling shows that used to chronicle the decadence of the nouveau riche with protagonists who don’t deserve that framing.

Indeed, amid the news of Nguyen’s firing, commentators and fans suddenly turned their attention to Ramona Singer. Whether you think she’s racist (I have no idea), Singer is one of the greatest housewives of all time, and she’s almost certainly one of the least likable. How? Because that’s what the franchise is about.

It’s entirely reasonable to take exception with the idea of shows being predicated on that kind of model. But if you’re a fan of the network, it makes absolutely no sense to suddenly demand ideological and moral purity from the women who aren’t fully left.

If Bravo got rid of Singer, they’d basically be conceding the entire franchise is built on an immoral foundation. Again, that’s a reasonable argument. But it’s one that would turn Bravo into a much less interesting network, even by the standards of people cheering for Singer’s departure.

These women are not meant to be protagonists. They are not meant to behave virtuously. They are antiheroes who sell access to their materialistic lives for brand visibility. They aren’t running for president, they’re running for a job that shows us what fame and money does to families.

Emily Jashinsky is culture editor at The Federalist. She previously covered politics as a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner. Prior to joining the Examiner, Emily was the spokeswoman for Young America’s Foundation. She’s interviewed leading politicians and entertainers and appeared regularly as a guest on major television news programs, including “Fox News Sunday,” “Media Buzz,” and “The McLaughlin Group.” Her work has been featured in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, Real Clear Politics, and more. Emily also serves as director of the National Journalism Center and a visiting fellow at Independent Women’s Forum. Originally from Wisconsin, she is a graduate of George Washington University.


Why All the Incivility Towards Biden?

Why All the Incivility Towards Biden?

Those who decry the derision towards Biden are just a tad hypocritical. Let us examine his track record so far as President of the United States.

A spectre stalks the land — rampant incivility toward the President of the United States. People are using colourful language to express their disgust with Joe Biden’s efforts to destroy America as we know it.

Oh, the horror of it all.

A story in the Washington Post warns that “Biden’s critics hurl increasingly vulgar taunts.” This includes handmade signs displayed on parade routes with F**K Joe Biden” and chants of “Let’s Go Brandon” — a euphemism for … you know.


While admitting that US politics has rarely resembled a garden party, the Post assures us, “The current eruption of anti-Biden signs and chants, however, is on another level, far more vulgar and widespread” than anything seen in the past.

The authors claim to be mystified that a gentle soul could provoke such vitriol.

“During the 2020 presidential campaign, one of Biden’s political superpowers was his sheer inoffensiveness, the way he managed to embody — even to those who didn’t like him — the innocuous grandfather, the bumbling uncle, the leader who could make America calm, steady, even boring again after four years of Donald Trump” — truly cringeworthy prose.

I must admit, this is a side of Mr C’mon Man that I somehow managed to miss.

Rude Candidate

Campaigning in Michigan in March of last year, the innocuous grandfatherly type was challenged by a construction worker, who asked if he was “actively trying to end our Second Amendment right and take away our guns.” (The answer to that rhetorical question is a resounding yes.)

The man with the ability to bring us all together shot back “You’re full of sh*t” and “don’t be such a horse’s ass.” (I believe this is called punching down.) He then asked, “Do you want to step outside” — presumably so Biden’s Secret Service agents could hold him while he was pummeled by the feisty senior.

Acceptable for Trump

For four years, it was F-Trump this and F-Trump that. Trump was a white supremacist. Trump was Hitler. Trump was worse than Hitler. At the 2018 Tony Awards, Robert De Niro (who confuses playing tough guys with being a tough guy) strode on stage and growled to thunderous applause, “I’m gonna say one thing, F*** Trump!”

Madonna said she thought about blowing up the White House. (She later claimed her comment was taken out of context.) Comedian Kathy Griffin posted what appeared to be her holding up a bloody, severed head of Donald Trump.

Mad Maxine Waters took civility to new heights when she urged the mob to get in the faces of members of the Trump administration, harass them mercilessly, and drive them from restaurants and other public places.

Mob Madness

Recently, on more than one occasion, Senator Kyrsten Sinema (D. AZ) was followed into the ladies’ room by protestors who bullied and filmed her.

The Left rarely stops at verbal violence.

An Antifa mob descended on Tucker Carlson’s D.C. home, while his wife was alone, tried to smash in the front door, spray-painted anarchist slogans in the driveway and left signs warning the FOX News host, “Tucker Carlson, we will fight! We know where you sleep at night!” The police treated it as a hate crime.

Senator Rand Paul and his wife were surrounded by a mob shouting threats as they left the 2020 Republican Convention. Without a police escort, there would have been blood in the streets. (These are just a few examples of the way the Post’s favourite activists conduct a civilised debate.)

Blood there was aplenty in the George Floyd riots which rocked over 100 cities, left dozens of business districts in cinders, resulted in $1-billion in property damage, as well as scores of dead and injured. During the campaign, it took the innocuous grandfather months to condemn this anarchist orgy, and then only in the most general terms, after polls showed him losing on the issue.

Falling to Pieces

Following the Post’s alleged news story, Jeff Jacoby (the Boston Globe’s pseudo-conservative columnist), while admitting the Left had been naughty, sniffed: “Yes, it is appalling that so many Americans can’t seem to express their opposition to the president without resorting to the filthiest, most uncivil words they know.” Tsk, tsk.

The rude response to Biden should be weighed against what he’s done to the republic in his short time in office.

In less than nine months, he has opened our southern border to an alien invasion (almost two million to date), made us energy-dependent once again, orchestrated a withdrawal from Afghanistan that made The Little Big Horn seem a successful deployment, pushed unconstitutional mandates, set the dogs of Department of Justice on concerned parents, appointed officials who resemble members of the old Soviet Politburo, and saddled us with trillions in new debt.

How should Americans respond to this unprecedented attack on republican government, like the fraternity pledge in Animal House who, while he’s on his hands and knees being paddled, exclaims, “Thank you, sir, may I have another?”

The Left’s civility for-thee-but-not-for-me ploy is intended to indict conservatives as savages and somehow intimidate us into pulling our punches.

Ain’t gonna happen.

Thank the Source


Please help truthPeep spread the word :)