30 thoughts on “News/Politics 8-29-18

  1. 2 studies, much the same results.

    https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/ashley-rae-goldenberg/2018/04/16/censored-how-online-media-companies-are-suppressing

    “Like it or not, social media is the communication form of the future — not just in the U.S., but worldwide. Just Facebook and Twitter combined reach 1.8 billion people. More than two-thirds of all Americans (68 percent) use Facebook. YouTube is pushing out TV as the most popular place to watch video. Google is the No. 1 search engine in both the U.S. and the world.

    War is being declared on the conservative movement in this space and conservatives are losing — badly. If the right is silenced, billions of people will be cut off from conservative ideas and conservative media.

    It’s the new battleground of media bias. But it’s worse. That bias is not a war of ideas. It’s a war against ideas. It’s a clear effort to censor the conservative worldview from the public conversation.

    The Media Research Center has undertaken an extensive study of the problem at major tech companies — Twitter, Facebook, Google and YouTube — and the results are far more troubling than most conservatives realize. Here are some of the key findings:

    Twitter Leads in Censorship: Project Veritas recently had caught Twitter staffers admitting on hidden camera that they had been censoring conservatives through a technique known as shadow banning, where users think their content is getting seen widely, but it’s not. The staffers had justified it by claiming the accounts had been automated if they had words such as “America” and “God.” In 2016, Twitter had attempted to manipulate election-related tweets using the hashtags “#PodestaEmails” and “#DNCLeak.” The site also restricts pro-life ads from Live Action and even Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), but allows Planned Parenthood advertisements.

    Facebook’s Trending Feed Has Been Hiding Conservative Topics: A 2016 Gizmodo story had warned of Facebook’s bias. It had detailed claims by former employees that Facebook’s news curators had been instructed to hide conservative content from the “trending” section, which supposedly only features news users find compelling. Topics that had been blacklisted included Mitt Romney, the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) and Rand Paul. On the other hand, the term “Black Lives Matter” had also been placed into the trending section even though it was not actually trending. Facebook had also banned at least one far right European organization but had not released information on any specific statements made by the group that warranted the ban.

    Google Search Aids Democrats: Google and YouTube’s corporate chairman Eric Schmidt had assisted Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. The company’s search engine had deployed a similar bias in favor of Democrats. One study had found 2016 campaign searches were biased in favor of Hillary Clinton. Even the liberal website Slate had revealed the search engine’s results had favored both Clinton and Democratic candidates. Google also had fired engineer James Damore for criticizing the company’s “Ideological Echo Chamber.” The company had claimed he had been fired for “advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.” Damore is suing Google, saying it mistreats whites, males and conservatives.”

    Like

  2. From “Pro -Life news”•
    “United Methodist Church Proposes New Position Statement Saying “We Support Abortion”

    I don’t know any more than this about it.

    Like

  3. And the second……

    http://www.canirank.com/blog/analysis-of-political-bias-in-internet-search-engine-results/

    “Although internet search engines like Google play an increasingly prominent role shaping voter opinions and perception of issues and candidates, their ranking algorithms aren’t designed to provide a fairly balanced or completely honest representation of controversial issues.

    In order to assess how fairly search engine results portray political candidates and controversial issues, we collected over 1,200 URLs ranking highly in Google.com for politically-charged keywords such as “gun control”, “abortion”, “TPP”, and “Black Lives Matter”. Each URL was then assessed for political slant by politically active individuals from both the left and right. Finally, we used CanIRank’s SEO software to analyze how each URL compared in dozens of different ranking factors to determine whether Google’s algorithm treated websites similarly regardless of their political slant.

    Among our key findings were that top search results were almost 40% more likely to contain pages with a “Left” or “Far Left” slant than they were pages from the right. Moreover, 16% of political keywords contained no right-leaning pages at all within the first page of results.

    Our analysis of the algorithmic metrics underpinning those rankings suggests that factors within the Google algorithm itself may make it easier for sites with a left-leaning or centrist viewpoint to rank higher in Google search results compared to sites with a politically conservative viewpoint.

    Why Web Search Matters to Democracy
    This fall, Gallup reported that Americans’ trust in mass media had hit an all time low, with fewer than a third of the population saying they have a great deal or a fair amount of trust in mass media — such as newspapers, TV, and radio.

    Perhaps a direct result of this distrust in traditional mass media, Americans are increasingly turning to online sources for their information.

    According to recent Google findings, online search is the resource that 87% of the population turns to first when a question arises.

    Online search plays a particularly prominent role in the democratic process during election season. During the 2012 election cycle, a survey of persuadable voters revealed that 49% get their news about campaigns and the election online, largely through search engines like Google, and that these voters generally trust the information they find online.

    Top search results are broadly perceived as being the most accurate and authoritative by members of the public with the first five search results accounting for an estimated 67% of all clicks and the first three results alone accounting for over 55% of all clicks.

    In their 2015 study, Robert Epstein and Ronald Robertson concluded that the order of search results can have a big impact on voter behavior — and in the event of a close election, this effect could even be profound enough to determine the outcome of the election.

    The extent to which a single private company now controls the flow of information is unprecedented in a country historically characterized by pluralistic and ideologically diverse media. This trend is particularly troubling when one considers that the employees of this private company do not reflect the ideological diversity of the country at large, and have consistently been amongst the largest donors to Democratic party candidates.”

    Like

  4. It rings hollow, which is more or less what I was thinking. They only loved him at the end because he was anti-Trump. But before then?

    Not so much.

    https://spectator.us/2018/08/the-new-york-timess-slathering-praise-for-john-mccain-rings-false/

    “I am not going to comment directly on the passing of Senator John McCain. Although I voted for him in 2008, I thought him a deeply flawed candidate. His behaviour subsequently, especially after Donald Trump became the Republican nominee and then President, was in my judgment petty, self-aggrandising, and harmful to the country.

    What interests me now, however, are the hallelujahs of praise and commendation that surrounded his passing. He has always been a hero to the neo-conservative faithful. But here we have The New York Times running a fawning obituary with the title ‘War Hero, Senator, Presidential Contender.’ It was the full lion-of-the-Senate treatment: ‘proud naval aviator . . . climbed from depths of despair as a prisoner of war in Vietnam to pinnacles of power . . . two-time contender for the presidency,’ yada, believe me, yada.

    Just how great was John McCain, according to the Times? This great: Despite his grave condition, he soon made a dramatic appearance in the Senate to cast a thumbs-down vote against his party’s drive to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

    Give the parrot another cracker!

    It is instructive, then, to compare The New York Times’s coverage of McCain circa 2018 with what it had to say in 2008, when it actually mattered in more than a rhetorical sense. The Times was happy to support McCain during the primary season, doubtless understanding that he was the weaker candidate. But when it came down to it, the Times wrote that McCain was ‘aggressive,’ ‘erratic,’ possibly a bit touched in the head, to mention, old, old. In a piece titled ‘The Real John McCain,’ published in September 2008, as the campaign was approaching its white-hot finale, the Times wondered whether, as McCain took the stage, ‘there would be any sign of the senator we long respected.’

    There were a few sops of the old McCain, the Times admitted. But no one will be surprised that the Times came down firmly on the other side. The evening, they said, was full of ‘chilling glimpses of the new John McCain, who questioned the patriotism of his opponents as the ‘me first, country second’ crowd.’

    The Times continued in a musing mood: ‘In the end, we couldn’t explain the huge difference between the John McCain of Thursday night and the one who ran such an angry and derisive campaign and convention.’ Angry!

    Like Oswald the boy scout in P. G. Wodehouse, I am behind in my good deeds for the day. So let me help with an explanation. The Times was perfectly willing to slather praise on John McCain so long as he was in his ‘Maverick’ mode, i.e., just so long as he was making trouble for Republicans. Just as soon as he might be a threat to Democratic hegemony, however, the Times is there to swat him down.”

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Here’s the story Chas mentioned above.

    ——————

    https://www.lifenews.com/2018/08/28/united-methodist-church-proposes-new-position-statement-saying-we-support-abortion/

    “In 2018, while The United Methodist Church’s Social Principle on abortion (Paragraph 161K in the 2016 Book of Discipline) “support[s] the legal option of abortion,” it also contains many phrases and statements that are protective of the unborn and mother. That Social Principle has now been rewritten—thoroughly.”

    “The revision of this Social Principle is boldly announced in its title change: from “Abortion” to “Reproductive Health.” Why? “Abortion,” as a title, might be considered too controversial, harsh, specific. In contrast, “Reproductive Health” might be understood as more medical-clinical, gentle, and general.”
    ———
    “According to the three needed improvements reported by the listening sessions, how does the revision measure up?

    Is the revision “more theologically grounded?” For starters, the revision mentions God once. But not Jesus Christ. And not the Holy Spirit. The Bible is cited twice, but not quoted. Church tradition is not referenced. The revision seems trapped in the modern worldview of individualism, public health, and social science. It seems anthropocentric (centered on humanity), and neglectful of God and God’s creation, commands, and redemption.

    Unlike the standing paragraph, the revision opens up very little to the presence and power of God. So the revision is not “more theologically grounded” than what was revised. Its theological grounding is reduced.

    Is the revision “more globally relevant?” To be globally relevant, the revision would need to use terms that are universally understandable and applicable. The Church speaks the most universal language of all. Its words—for example, God and humanity, birth and death, good and evil, joy and suffering, love and loyalty, and so on—appeal to most people worldwide.

    While occasionally using such words, the revision reverts to a Westernized, individualized, medicalized mindset. This mindset results in the revision’s inability to affirm the humanity of the unborn. Such thinking is better suited for an international political agency than for a global Christian church. While the standing Social Principle on abortion is imperfect on the matter of global relevance, it lacks the revision’s predetermined Westernized agenda. So, on its global reach, the revision fails.”

    Like

  6. The original mission of the church was to change the world.
    But it seems the world is changing the church.
    Soon: Why have a church?
    to give a passing salute to God, I suppose.

    Liked by 3 people

  7. If you know someone who thinks socialism is a good idea. Slap them, and then show them this.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/peru-declares-emergency-border-venezuelans-flee-crisis-home-182233823.html

    “Brazil said it was sending armed forces to keep order near the Venezuelan border area, while Peru declared a health emergency, as a regional crisis sparked by thousands of Venezuelans fleeing economic collapse escalated on Tuesday.

    In Brazil, where residents rioted and attacked Venezuelan immigrants in a border town earlier this month, President Michel Temer signed a decree to deploy the armed forces to the border state of Roraima. He said the move was aimed at keeping order and ensuring the safety of immigrants.

    Peru, meanwhile, declared a 60-day health emergency in two provinces on its northern border, citing “imminent danger” to health and sanitation. The decree, published in the government’s official gazette, did not give more details on the risks, but health authorities have previously expressed concerns about the spread of diseases such as measles and malaria from migrants.

    The exodus of Venezuelans to other South American countries is building toward a “crisis moment” comparable to events involving refugees in the Mediterranean, the United Nations said this week.

    Temer blamed the socialist Venezuelan government of President Nicolas Maduro for the migration crisis.

    “The problem of Venezuela is no longer one of internal politics. It is a threat to the harmony of the whole continent,” Temer said in a televised address.

    Top immigration officials from Peru, Colombia and Brazil met in Colombian capital Bogota for a summit to discuss how to cope with the influx.”

    Like

  8. Facebook claims it isn’t biased.

    Facebook’s employees say otherwise.

    https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/08/facebook-employees-come-together-to-take-on-its-intolerant-political-culture/#more-258689

    “We claim to welcome all perspectives, but are quick to attack—often in mobs—anyone who presents a view that appears to be in opposition to left-leaning ideology.”

    “Over 100 Facebook employees have spoken out against the social media giant’s “intolerant” political culture after one of them posted about the problem on the company’s internal message board.

    Senior Facebook engineer Brian Amerige posted a two-page memo titled “We Have a Problem With Political Diversity,” which claims that employees “are quick to attack—often in mobs—anyone who presents a view that appears to be in opposition to left-leaning ideology.”

    The New York Times reported that memo led to the formation of an online group:

    Since the post went up, more than 100 Facebook employees have joined Mr. Amerige to form an online group called FB’ers for Political Diversity, according to two people who viewed the group’s page and who were not authorized to speak publicly. The aim of the initiative, according to Mr. Amerige’s memo, is to create a space for ideological diversity within the company.

    The new group has upset other Facebook employees, who said its online posts were offensive to minorities. One engineer, who declined to be identified for fear of retaliation, said several people had lodged complaints with their managers about FB’ers for Political Diversity and were told that it had not broken any company rules.

    Another employee said the group appeared to be constructive and inclusive of different political viewpoints. Mr. Amerige did not respond to requests for comment.

    Amerige in his post said that the attacks happen so often that people have grown afraid to voice disagreements when it comes to politics. They know that there’s a strong possibility that they’ll be attacked personally instead of their ideas. He provides examples:

    These are not fears without cause. Because we tear down posters welcoming Trump supporters. We regularly propose removing Thiel from our board because he supported Trump. We’re quick to suggest firing people who turn out to be misunderstood, and even quicker to conclude our colleagues are bigots. We have made “All Lives Matter” a fireable offense. We put Palmer Luckey through a witch hunt because he paid for anti-Hillary ads. We write each other ad-hoc feedback in the PSC tool for having “offensive” ideas. We ask HR to investigate those who dare to criticize Islam’s human rights record for creating a “non inclusive environment.” And they called me a transphobe when I called out our corporate art for being politically radical.

    Thiel is Peter Thiel, the co-founder of PayPal and founder of Clarium Capital, a supporter of Trump. He sued Gawker after the publication outed him as a gay man back in 2007. Palmer Luckey founded Oculus, which makes the “virtual reality goggles that Facebook acquired.”

    Amerige also noted that the company deserves the criticism it has received from Congress and President Donald Trump because Facebook is “blind to and dismissive of what people beyond our walls (let alone even within our walls) think about complex issues that matter. Facebook has employed Amerige for 6.5 years, but he says the situation has become worse in the last two years.

    The New York Times backed up Amerige’s claim about the last two years:”

    Like

  9. THIS is The NY Times.

    Covering for child molesters to get a shot in at conservatives and protect the liberal Pope.

    “For the “can’t make this up if we tried” file, the New York Times turned the ongoing sex-abuse crisis in the Catholic church into “Conservatives pounce” because Pope Francis has been vocal on climate change, poverty and such:”

    https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2018/08/29/covering-for-child-molesters-to-own-the-cons-the-new-york-times-did-a-conservatives-pounce-headline-on-pope-francis/

    —————————-

    ———————-

    Like

  10. And since the mainstream media always parrot each other’s talking points, Reuters goes there too.

    ‘Polly wanna cracker?

    https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2018/08/28/unreal-now-reuters-is-serving-up-its-conservatives-pounce-take-on-catholic-sex-abuse-scandal/

    ““The battle now is fueled by … conservative anger” … over child sexual abuse and the subsequent coverup? Yes, guilty as charged; conservatives are angry.

    Not to be outdone, Reuters served up its own steaming hot “conservatives pounce” take:”
    —————-

    Like

  11. In case you were wondering, yes, this is the part where you point and laugh.

    ——————————-

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/donors-to-lanny-davis-truth-fund-want-refunds-after-he-admits-lying

    “Some donors to a “truth fund” promoted by attorney Lanny Davis believe he should issue refunds after he admitted lying about what his client Michael Cohen knows about President Trump.

    Davis unveiled the “Michael Cohen Truth Fund” last week, and netted about $165,000 since the former Trump “fixer” pleaded guilty to tax and bank fraud, and to campaign finance crimes he said were at Trump’s direction.

    Davis promoted the fundraiser with interviews saying Cohen would be an open book for special counsel Robert Mueller, before saying he gave false information to news outlets about what Cohen knows.

    Two donors told the Washington Examiner they have regrets after Davis admitted lying to news outlets in late July, when he claimed Cohen could testify that he witnessed Donald Trump Jr. notify his father in advance of a Trump Tower meeting with Russians offering dirt on Hillary Clinton.

    Davis now says he doesn’t know if that’s true, despite anonymously providing the information to CNN and then confirming the CNN report anonymously for the New York Post and the Washington Post. “I made a mistake,” the former Bill Clinton aide told BuzzFeed on Monday.”

    Like

  12. Seems the news fails to mention that Ecuador is also suffering from influx of Venezuelans and are involved in the plans as suffering neighbors. Small countries must not count. I know it has huge consequences there that touch my family.

    Liked by 3 people

  13. https://www.getreligion.org/getreligion/2018/8/29/presence-of-international-press-raises-the-stakes-in-vigan-affair

    Coverage by the conservative and global press raises the stakes in Viganò affair

    _________________________________

    It’s now Day 5 after Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò dropped his nuclear bomb on the Catholic world. Although the best coverage seems to be resting mainly on media that have the good fortune to have Rome correspondents, there is some good work being done Stateside as well.

    As one Washington Post columnist said, Viganò effectively nailed his 95 theses to the door of St. Peter’s.

    So this is a big deal. But in the secular press, it’s mainly two newspapers: The Post and the New York Times doing the heavy lifting.

    But Viganò is not talking with them. He’s using conservative media as his outlets. I’m sure LifeSite News, a Canadian site primarily devoted to fighting abortion, never dreamed it’d be in the midst of a Vatican fist fight. But Vaganò trusts them; their articles must be bringing in tons of page views, so what’s not to like?

    Ditto for the National Catholic Register, which in the past has been overshadowed by the liberal National Catholic Reporter. These days, the Register is publishing exclusives and the Reporter is reduced to running snide analyses by Michael Sean Winters or stories like this one that only quote one side of the story. …

    … As someone from one of the hometown newspapers who covered McCarrick for several years, I knew the former cardinal was no shrinking violet. He’d only been cardinal for six years before being made to retire and he wasn’t about to fade away.

    Even this spring, when he knew accusations against him would be made public by mid-June, he still appeared at church events almost until the end. He wanted to milk every last drop from his public position.

    I’ve a funny feeling we’re not going to see a church trial happen anytime soon with McCarrick. The Vatican moves slowly when it wants to; McCarrick, 88, is already said to be quite frail and he’s already saying he doesn’t remember abusing anyone. So why not let him die in peace? That will be the plan in Rome. No need to get out any definitive documents or ask tough questions to any men in red hats

    So the answer is out there. The question is whether reporters will do the work to find it.
    ________________________________________

    Liked by 1 person

  14. YapaMom is correct.

    The entire region is suffering, thanks to socialism.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/10/more-than-half-a-million-venezuelans-fled-to-ecuador-this-year-un-says

    “More than half a million Venezuelans have crossed into Ecuador this year as part of one of the largest mass migrations in Latin American history, the United Nations said on Friday.

    About 547,000 citizens of the crisis-stricken South American country have entered Ecuador since January – mostly through its northern border with Colombia – to escape rampant crime and political violence, a collapsing economy and severe shortages of food and medicines.

    That is nearly 10 times the number of migrants and refugees who attempted to cross the Mediterranean into Europe over the same period. The International Organization for Migration this week announced that 59,271 migrants and refugees tried to reach Europe by sea between January and August, with most coming to Spain, Italy or Greece.

    The UN’s refugee agency, UNHCR, said a daily average of up to 3,000 Venezuelan men, women and children had entered Ecuador this year but that the already “massive influx” was now accelerating further. “

    Liked by 2 people

  15. Thank Barry. He built this.

    https://freebeacon.com/national-security/arrest-iranian-spies-u-s-just-tip-iceberg-lawmaker-warns/

    “The recent arrest of two Iranian agents alleged to have been running spy operations on U.S. soil is just “the tip of the iceberg” in terms of the Islamic Republic’s efforts to conduct intelligence operations in America that could result in a terrorist attack, according to a leading lawmaker and U.S. officials who spoke to the Washington Free Beacon about the matter.

    Following the arrest of two Iranian individuals charged with spying on Jewish and Israeli facilities in the California area, Rep. Peter Roskam (R., Ill.) told the Free Beacon it is likely Iran has stationed multiple regime-tied agents in the United States to conduct intelligence operations.

    While the arrest of the two Iranians was met with shock in the press, Roskam said he was not surprised by the arrests, which have unearthed concrete evidence of the Islamic Republic’s efforts to foment discord across the globe, including on American soil.

    “This is the tip of the iceberg,” Roskam said in an interview. “This is not a surprise and this is a result of the Iran regime getting financial support from the Obama administration in the Iran deal.”

    Iran has been emboldened by the lack of international repercussions on its malevolent behavior and may have increased its intelligence operations in America in the years since the landmark nuclear deal, he said.

    Iran is “acting with impunity, that deal emboldened them,” Roskam said. “This is an unmasking of that. Unfortunately it’s all too predictable. Give a malevolent regime huge amounts of cash with no restraining influence and this is what happens.”

    The Trump Justice Department announced last week it had arrested two Iranians and charged them with spying on behalf of the hardline regime, a discovery that has refocused attention on the Islamic Republic’s global spy operations.

    Lawmakers and experts have been warning for some time that Iran has stationed what some described as “sleeper cell” agents across the United States. These agents are believed to operate with impunity and could lay the groundwork for a large-scale terror attack on American soil.

    The two Iranian individuals—identified as Ahmadreza Mohammadi-Doostdar, a dual U.S.-Iranian citizen, and Majid Ghorbani, an Iranian citizen and resident of California—were formally charged by the Trump administration “with allegedly acting on behalf of the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran by conducting covert surveillance of Israeli and Jewish facilities in the United States, and collecting identifying information about American citizens and U.S. nationals who are members of the group Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK),” an Iranian opposition group that promotes regime change in the Islamic Republic, the DOJ announced.

    One U.S. official, agreeing with Roskam’s assessment, told the Free Beacon Iran has been running “vast espionage and information operations in the United States” with virtual impunity. The arrest of the two recently charged Iranians denotes a significant shift in policy that could result in the capture of more agents.

    “If there’s anything that’s become obvious in the last few months, it’s that the Iranians are running vast espionage and information operations in the United States,” said the source, who could only discuss the situation on background. “The Trump administration has been warning since day one that some of the windfall Iran got from the nuclear deal has been going into malign cyber operations.”

    “The propaganda network that Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube uncovered was doubling as a hacking network that had been ramping up in the last couple of years,” the source said, referring the recent uncovering of a massive social media influence campaign believed to be organized by Iran.

    Like

  16. https://www.getreligion.org/getreligion/2018/8/28/vigano-vs-mainstream-press-trying-to-find-bright-line-between-news-and-commentary

    Vigano vs. mainstream press? Trying to find bright line between ‘news’ and ‘commentary’

    ________________________________

    ……

    What about this language, drawn from a crucial summary of “facts” in another New York Times story: “Letter Accusing Pope Leaves U.S. Catholics in Conflict.”

    “Conservative American Catholics have been among the most vocal opponents of Francis’ agenda since he came into power in 2013. They have resisted his efforts to bring back into the fold those Catholics who have fallen away from the church because they are divorced and remarried, or are gay or lesbian, or are secular nonbelievers. They have also been opposed to Francis’ political priorities of protecting immigrants and refugees, questioning corporate capitalism and stemming climate change. After several years of a progressive alliance between Pope Francis and the Obama White House on issues including the détente with Cuba, climate change, and the Iran nuclear deal, conservative Catholics have praised a new agenda in President Trump’s Washington, which has returned largely to culture war issues like abortion and same-sex marriage.”

    Whoa, whoa, whoa.

    … Who are these “conservative Catholics”? I know some who may differ with Francis on one or two of these items, but hardly anyone who fits this spectacular pound-the-straw-man description. I know many who are pleased with one or two things that Donald Trump has done, but remain appalled that a man of his character occupies the White House.

    Oh, back to the main question: Is this Times passage news or analysis?

    Once again, there is no “analysis,” “commentary” or “spew-coffee editorializing” flag on this story.

    What is going on here?

    Well, what is NOT going on here is an attempt to find out if Vigano has stashed away copies of documents that back many of his highly specific claims. Also, as his letter notes, the original documents are in the Vatican’s main U.S. office and locked away in key locations in Rome. Will the defenders of Francis (and McCarrick?) produce original copies of documents that refute Vigano?

    For journalists, these questions must be asked again and again.

    However, will the editors who signed off on the editorial language cited in the previous stories act like professionals and seek these documents? …
    __________________________________

    Liked by 1 person

  17. And he pulls no punches….

    ” At the Angelus on Sunday, August 12, 2018 Pope Francis said these words: “Everyone
    is guilty for the good he could have done and did not do … If we do not oppose evil, we tacitly feed it. We need to intervene where evil is spreading; for evil spreads where daring Christians who oppose evil with good are lacking.” If this is rightly to be considered a serious moral responsibility for every believer, how much graver is it for the Church’s supreme pastor, who in the case of McCarrick not only did not oppose evil but associated himself in doing evil with someone he knew to be deeply corrupt. He followed the advice of someone he knew well to be a pervert, thus multiplying exponentially with his supreme authority the evil done by McCarrick. And how many other evil pastors is Francis still continuing to prop up in their active destruction of the Church!

    Francis is abdicating the mandate which Christ gave to Peter to confirm the brethren. Indeed, by his action he has divided them, led them into error, and encouraged the wolves to continue to tear apart the sheep of Christ’s flock.

    In this extremely dramatic moment for the universal Church, he must acknowledge his mistakes and, in keeping with the proclaimed principle of zero tolerance, Pope Francis must be the first to set a good example for cardinals and bishops who covered up McCarrick’s abuses and resign along with all of them.”

    Like

  18. Like

  19. After three years of responding in English, Never Trumpers have now begun to translate their posts using Trumpian spelling:

    Like

  20. https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/08/conservative-facebook-engineers-dissent-from-companys-left-leaning-ideas/

    ____________________________________

    An internal revolt provides hope for real change.

    By David French

    In my many years of traveling the country, speaking at universities, litigating against universities, and interacting with conservatives who live and work in the most seemingly uniform progressive enclaves, I’ve come to understand three key truths:

    First, there are more conservatives in virtually every major progressive institution than people realize.

    Second, they tend to be scattered across the company or university and theregore perhaps feel more alone and isolated than their true numbers would suggest.

    Third, they’re afraid of reprisals if they attempt to organize in any manner similar to their progressive colleagues.

    The resulting sense of isolation and lack of collective action renders them increasingly vulnerable, reinforces the sense that one has to keep his head down to survive, and builds in the Left a false sense of unanimity that only reinforces their view that all sensible people share their views. Progressive activists interpret silence as agreement, and the lack of dissent only spurs more activism.

    It takes real moral courage to break the isolation, declare your beliefs, and seek to organize like-minded conservatives (and sympathetic liberals). It also happens to be the single most effective way of breaking groupthink and initiating internal reform. As I’ve written before, it’s the internal mob that matters — especially when dealing with immense progressive institutions that hold commanding market positions. Harvard and Google care far more about their employees’ positions than they do about the political beliefs of customers who largely either have nowhere else to go or desperately seek the credential that only that institution can provide.

    And that’s why the internal conservative revolt at Facebook may — just may — represent one of the most consequential news developments of the year. A senior engineer named Brian Amerige posted a short statement on Facebook’s internal message board. …

    … Reform from the inside is typically more consequential and durable than reform imposed from the outside. And now we have evidence — from the heart of a social-media giant — that the monoculture may see a challenge. The monoculture is facing a threat, and that is good news indeed for America’s embattled culture of free speech.
    _______________________________________

    Like

  21. “I don’t believe there is another leader in modern history that has done more damage to faith in America than President Trump”

    Says the cultist whose cult is responsible for selling a false gospel to millions.

    Does the name Joseph Smith ring a bell?

    But yeah, you’ll still take him over Trump. We know. 🙄

    Like

  22. You weren’t sitting at my house biting your tongue this morning as old friends discussed how wrong I am to point out none of my pastors would have attended the Trump and evangelical dinner.

    I, of course, am the only evangelical they know–but they know more than I do about evangelicals. Sigh.

    I’ve been away all day as a result. Too much damage–done and potential to do. 😦

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Mormonism is a false religion like Hinduism or Buddhism.

    Classic cults tend to involve blind and total commitment to a dishonest yet charismatic and deranged leader. We have seen many in our lifetimes: Jim Jones and the People’s Temple, David Koresh and the Branch Davidians, the various Kims and the North Koreans and Trump and his loyal Trumpkins.

    Joseph Smith had his golden tablets.

    Trump has his “tapps”, his special “councels” and his “witch hunts” and his cult believes it all.
    The one and only time the cult claimed he was lying was when he confessed to multiple sexual assaults.

    Like

  24. With conservatism, the Republican Party and much of Christianity discredited because of their connection to the dishonesty and idiocy of The Trump Cult, the socialists and organized perverts who control the Democrat Party are going to run wild over the next twenty years. On the Right, you are scolded if you tell the truth about Trump. On the Left, you are scolded if you tell the truth about anything other than Trump.

    Like

  25. Now he has gone too far. Any Southerners who remain in The Cult are nothing but scalawags.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.