PBS Board Chairman Celebrates Trump's 80th Birthday By Wishing Him a Stroke, Public Broadcasting Calls It a Learning Opportunity

America's public institutions continue their inspiring commitment to civility, tolerance, and not wishing catastrophic medical events on political opponents, except when they don't. In fact, when they go low, they continue going lower.

For years, PBS and its affiliates have presented themselves as the wise adults in the room, faithfully serving the public with educational programming, thoughtful journalism, and enough tote-bag drives to fund a small nation. Their boards are supposedly filled with seasoned professionals dedicated to elevating public discourse.

Then President Donald Trump turned 80 on Flag Day [coincidence or celestial message?].

As Trump celebrated his birthday Sunday at the White House during the UFC Freedom 250 event, one prominent public broadcasting executive decided to mark the occasion with a heartfelt message of unity and compassion.

The X account Republicans Against Trump asked, "Donald Trump turns 80 today. Any birthday wishes?"

Bob Greene, identified in reports as chairman of the board for Rocky Mountain PBS [aka Public BS], reportedly responded, "A nice stroke that turns him into a drooling, pooping blob in a wheelchair unable to speak."

The soft, the kind, the sweeter side of scumcrumpets.

Nothing says "public broadcasting leadership" quite like fantasizing about the president becoming a vegetable. And these cretins claim to be the good guys, the compassionate ones.

Greene's post has since disappeared, just like the several decades of PBS viewership among Americans under 40.

Rocky Mountain Public Media quickly distanced itself from the remarks, explaining that the post violated internal guidelines requiring personal opinions to remain separate from station content. Translation: you're supposed to save those comments for private dinner parties and faculty lounges.

The White House responded less delicately. Spokeswoman Olivia Wales described Greene as "a deranged individual who should seek professional help," while noting that Trump had "rightfully defunded PBS last year."

To be fair, wishing debilitating neurological damage on political opponents is apparently considered a perfectly normal expression of democratic values in some circles these days. Perhaps this is due to their own former president and his obvious neurological impairment.

The remarkable part isn't that Greene posted it. Every election cycle seems to produce a fresh crop of people who believe political disagreement is grounds for personal destruction. No, the remarkable part is how little shock the comment generated.

Imagine for a moment that a public broadcasting executive had written something similar about Barack Obama. Cable news panels would still be discussing it. Universities would host symposiums. Journalists would produce twelve-part podcast series examining "the rhetoric of hate in America."

Instead, the post was deleted, a statement was issued, and everyone moved on.

What often gets overlooked is that Trump has already survived multiple assassination attempts. Yet many of the same people who lecture endlessly about dangerous rhetoric seem strangely comfortable when the target is someone they dislike.

Greene merely said out loud what too many people have quietly normalized. The most disturbing part of the story isn't what he wrote.

It's how many people read it and thought, "Seems reasonable."

At this point, PBS may want to consider adding a new pledge-drive slogan:

"Public Broadcasting: Where the compassion is educational."

Please, kind reader, pass this on and make a stink that would put the stink of Joe Biden's skivvies seem like a Lancôme ad.

Thank you for following Brain Flushings. Please take time to simply check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything to do so. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee if you want to support me directly. And finally, don't be afraid to subscribe if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and worth the cost.

Tweet

PBS and NPR losing their funding as Senate sides with Trump's rescissions package

Hey guys, the Senate just delivered a win for President Trump and taxpayers everywhere, passing his rescissions package on a nail-biting 51-48 vote. That’s $9 billion in cuts, including a long-overdue ax to every last federal dime propping up National Public Radio and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Finally, we’re one step closer to defunding biased outlets that sneer at us and the America we love. NPR and PBS are not vanishing, but they’ll have to hustle like the rest of us in the media game. Sink or swim,  it's welcome to the real world. The Senate, in its usual vote-a-rama circus, tweaked the bill, so it’s headed back to the House for another round. Politico’s got the scoop:

Senate Republicans early Thursday greenlit President Donald Trump’s proposal to claw back billions in global health and public media funding, pushing past frustrations within the GOP conference about the White House’s transparency during the process. The White House requested spending cuts narrowly made it through the Senate in a 51-48 vote after GOP Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine voted “no” alongside Democrats because they are RINOs and we all know it.

Because Senate Republicans made changes to the legislation it will need to bounce back to the House, which is expected to vote on it later Thursday. Trump will need to sign the rescissions bill by the end of Friday, otherwise he will be forced to spend the money Congress previously approved.

Meanwhile, Sen. Tina Smith (D-MN) missed the vote, laid up in the hospital after feeling under the weather Wednesday night. Speedy recovery, Senator, but your absence didn’t stop the train.

The House has until Friday to get this done and send it to Trump’s desk for his John Hancock. That’s tomorrow, folks.  If they miss the deadline, the money Congress already approved gets spent, and we’re back to square one. Let’s hope the House doesn’t fumble this one as is their wont. Time to keep the pressure on.

Hey amazing readers! If you enjoy my content, please consider supporting Brain Flushings. A quick coffee donation via Buy Me a Coffee fuels late-night writing sessions and fresh ideas. Every sip—er, dollar—helps me create more of the posts you enjoy. Join the crew, toss in a coffee, and let’s keep the good vibes brewing! 

Tweet

NPR, PBS on hotseat--their leaders defend the indefensible

Imagine this: Wednesday rolls around, and the House DOGE subcommittee decides it’s time to drag "public" broadcasting into the hot seat. Why? Because NPR and PBS have been happily cashing taxpayer checks while pretending half the country doesn’t exist. 

Under a relentless GOP grilling, NPR CEO Katherine Maher—who’s clearly been practicing for the “oops, my bad” Olympics—admits it was a "mistake" to shrug off the Hunter Biden laptop story like it was a bad TikTok trend. She also wrings her hands over some pre-NPR tweets where she called Trump a "deranged racist sociopath" and mused that looting’s no biggie (it’s just "counterproductive," you see). 

Oh, and if reports are true, NPR’s newsroom has zero Republicans? She says that’d be "disturbing." Uh-huh. Sure, Kathy, as if you didn't know.

Now, how much airtime did this spicy little showdown get on ABC, CBS, and NBC? Zilch point pooh. Nada. Crickets. Not a peep on the evening news, not a whisper on the morning gabfests the next day. You’d think a hearing with this much red meat would at least get a nod, right? You would be wrong.

But don’t worry—the Big Three weren’t too busy to obsess over "Signalgate." 

Yep, Trump’s crew chatting up a Houthi strike on the encrypted Signal app—while letting Trump-hating leftist journo Jeffrey Goldberg, editor of The Atlantic and PBS’s "Washington Week" host, eavesdrop—was apparently the story of the century. If he gave a fig about the country, he would have immediately told the host on the Signal meeting that somehow they screwed up by having him on. Instead, he quietly took notes and later reported on it. As it turned out, the Houthi strike went without a hitch in spite of it all.

ABC’s "World News Tonight" and "NBC Nightly News" trotted out footage of CIA boss John Ratcliffe and DNI Tulsi Gabbard sweating under Democrat questions about the breach. NBC’s Lester Holt hyped it as a "bombshell text" to kick off his broadcast—because of course he did. Over on "CBS Evening News," Ed O’Keefe was practically salivating for scalps, asking if heads would roll. He even roped in Goldberg and Obama’s old Defense Sec Chuck Hagel to fan the flames. 

By the end, O’Keefe noted the Senate Armed Services Committee’s bipartisan call for a probe, with GOP chair Roger Wicker grumbling that it’s "a shame this security question is distracting the public from the success of that mission." A shame? You don’t say.

The networks’ playbook is predictable as a sitcom rerun: bury Trump wins, amplify Trump stumbles. 

So let’s dig into the PBS-NPR hearing they conveniently ignored: NPR’s Maher finally copped to the Hunter Biden laptop fumble. Back in 2020, they dismissed it as a "pure distraction"—now, with GOP heat on and taxpayer bucks at stake, she’s all, "Our current editorial leadership thinks that was a mistake, as do I." Breaking news, folks: NPR admits a screw-up! Mark your calendars.

Maher also did a mea culpa on her unhinged tweets—like calling Trump a "deranged racist sociopath" and saying America’s "addicted to white supremacy." She’s "evolved," she claims in the style of Barack Obama on gays in the military, but those hot takes fit NPR’s woke vibe like a glove. Bet they were on her résumé under "qualifications."

PBS prez Paula Kerger and Maher swore up and down their news is "nonpartisan and unbiased." Then Texas Rep. Pat Fallon dropped some NewsBusters truth bombs: "News Hour" slapped "far-right" labels 162 times but only used "far-left" six times. PBS’s 2024 convention coverage was 72% negative for the GOP, 88% positive for Dems. Kerger’s response? "Never heard of those studies." Great prep work, Paula, if you're being honest.

Remember NPR editor Uri Berliner’s exposé? He found 87 Democrats and zero Republicans in NPR’s D.C. newsroom. Another zero.

 Maher called it "disturbing" if true, but after a year on the job, has she hired a single non-lefty? Nope. Berliner wasn’t even GOP, and they still canned him.

GOP reps pointed out NPR interviewed Dem Rep. Adam Schiff 25 times during the Russia hoax—some say 32, but who’s counting? Meanwhile, Rep. James Comer, the Republican Oversight chair, got zero chats about his Biden probe. Fallon asked Maher about it; she drew a blank. Zero’s the answer, Kathy. The Sunday shows pull the same stunt.

This isn’t new. For 50 years, broadcast news has hyped Democrat hearings—Watergate, Iran-Contra, Anita Hill, January 6—like they’re Super Bowls, while GOP-led ones get tossed in the shredder. PBS and NPR had to cover this DOGE hearing, but they weren’t happy about it. NPR’s David Folkenflik whined it was more about "scoring points than finding facts." Pot, meet kettle.

The networks? They’ll skip any fact that messes with their narrative. It’s not about truth—it’s about winning. And they wonder why we don’t trust ‘em.

And this has been where our tax money has been going without our permission.

"Thanks for reading! If you’d like to toss a coffee my way, check out my Buy Me A Coffee—means a lot!"

Tweet

PBS White House correspondent accused of illegally voting: charges filed

White House correspondent for PBS Yamiche Alcindor who hosts "PBS NewsHour" has been accused of illegally voting in Florida and the chances are good that she did not vote for Ron DeSantis and that she doesn't even live in the Sunshine State--she lives in Washington, D.C.

The complaint was filed by the American Accountability Foundation (AAF), a research group whose mission is to “shine light on waste, corruption, and malfeasance in the federal government.” Somehow they've overlooked Joe Biden, but that's a story for another time.

The complaint was filed last week and called for the Florida Department of State to investigate Alcindor, according to the Washington Examiner.

“Public information indicates that Mrs. Alcindor is a resident of the District of Columbia, and therefore ineligible to vote in the State of Florida. Despite this, Mrs. Alcindor is registered to vote and has voted in the State of Florida,” the complaint states.

AAF posted on Twitter that Alcindor voted by mail in a Florida election on Monday.

.@Yamiche voted on Monday in Florida.

That’s the audit log from Broward county where she sent her mail in ballot. https://t.co/HhvKZ2u6Mr pic.twitter.com/s8JmAxEqxZ

— American Accountability Foundation (@ExposingBiden)

The group noted that her husband, Nathaniel Cline, is registered to vote in D.C.

Alcindor had tweeted in the past:

Some news: I moved to DC this week to cover social safety net issues and how Trump’s administration impacts everyday people’s lives.

— Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) January 13, 2017

“This raises the obvious question of why Mrs. Alcindor does not vote at the [D.C.] address like her husband. There is no evidence that Mrs. Alcindor and Mr. Cline do not intend to spend the remainder of their lives together as a married couple,” the complaint said.

“How can Mr. Cline believe that their permanent residence is [the D.C. address] while Mrs. Alcindor supposedly believes it is [the Florida address]?”

Looks like the couple didn't do their due diligence.

The complaint continued, “If individuals are allowed to pick and choose where they vote, based on personal preference and not on their residency, then residency requirements become hollow. More importantly, when out of state residents vote in Florida, the votes of actual residents of the State of Florida are diluted and their constitutional right to vote is undermined.”

Alcindor had  commented on the then-ongoing trial of Derek Chauvin, who was facing charges of murder in the death of George Floyd.

As the prosecution and defense were making their closing arguments, Alcindor tweeted: 

Chauvin’s lawyer said it flies in the face of common sense to say Floyd’s death was not caused at least in part by his underlying conditions or drug use.

This argument is in direct contradiction to the prosecution’s case which says believe your eyes, Chauvin’s knee killed Floyd.

— Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) April 19, 2021

Her comments were criticized by many observers who explaned that she was ignorant of due process.

So prosecutors and defense attorneys have different interpretations of events in a criminal case.

Interesting. That’s some solid analysis there. https://t.co/Lqpmm9pGnq

— Mike Glenn (@mrglenn) April 19, 2021

In which Yamiche Alcindor is shocked and appalled to discover the adversarial justice system https://t.co/SDVzbEw5Ef

— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) April 19, 2021

The following month, the PBS correspondent told then-White House press secretary Jen Psaki that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reversing its decision to require vaccinated people to wear masks would put “people of color at risk.” Her comments drew laughter and rebuke since she was not wearing a mask at the time.

* * *

Hey folks, consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and please check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every time you click on an ad, you help in the fight against Critical Race Theory, ignorance, The New York Times, and bovine flatulence. You also help me and the orphans. Thanks.

* * *

So however this turns out, you can see how the media, including taxpayer-supported media, is in the pocket of the Democratic Party.

Tweet

PBS' Yamiche Alcindor's total lack of legal understanding should not be a barrier to her reporting

The "PBS NewsHour" so-called correspondent Yamiche Alcindor's legal analysis of the closing arguments of the Derek Chauvin trial has the same credibility as Iran's claim that their weapons grade uranium enrichment will only be used for energy supply.

Chauvin's attorney, Eric Nelson, focused heavily in his closing arguments on George Floyd's heavy drug use and levels at the time of his death, along with his poor health. Nelson said that these factors, rather than Chauvin's knee on Floyd's upper shoulder, were the cause of his death.

But Alcindor did her fact-checking by relying on the prosecution's case which exclusively relied on Chauvin's use of force and not on any mitigating factors.

"Chauvin's lawyer said it flies in the face of common sense to say Floyd's death was not caused at least in part by his underlying conditions or drug use," Alcindor tweeted. "This argument is in direct contradiction to the prosecution's case which says believe your eyes, Chauvin's knee killed Floyd." So according to this idiot "correspondent," we should #BelieveAllProsecutors.

Critics mocked the taxpayer-funded reporter for her poorly informed analysis.

"Yes, typically the defense and the prosecution do present contradictory arguments," Daily Caller reporter Dylan Housman told Alcindor.

"Does not seem odd or surprising that the defense case would be in 'direct contradiction' to the prosecution case. That's the way it works," Washington Examiner senior political correspondent Byron York chimed in.

"Yeah wow so weird that the defense is contradicting the prosecution," conservative commentator Matt Walsh reacted.

CNN senior legal analyst Laura Coates, who somehow was able to get a law degree, ignorantly tweeted: "Defense begins the closing by defining reasonable doubt, not with why #DerekChauvin is innocent. Think about that," an apparent dismissal of the bedrock principles of the American justice system.

Think about this, Laura: the defense does not need to prove innocence. The prosecution needs to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. 

Please consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every ad you click on, you help in the fight against the China virus.

Tweet

VT gubernatorial candidate promises Saturday night 'governor's pardon TV show'

A silly candidate running for governor of liberal Vermont and a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives has proposed a new way to rake in the big bucks for the state, have some fun, and maybe let a few criminals go free in the process.

Cris Ericson, an Independent said in a Vermont PBS commentary that if she's elected she "will host a governor's pardon TV show every Saturday night."

Ericson said that she would "pardon a few of the people who violate the new, unconstitutional anti-gun laws and some of those who are non-violent offenders of other laws. She believes this will save Vermonters money, but like Bernie Sanders, she is talking like someone who speed-read Karl Marx and took an economics class at Yaheppits College and Beauty School.

Ericson's website claims that she has the "sharpest, clearest, boldest 2018 political platform of any candidate in the U.S.A.!!!" She explains that the show would consist of a "full audience in the auditorium in the governor's office building in Montpelier and invite 100 Vermonters each week to boo or cheer."

Then friends and family of the prisoners considered for pardon by her will be invited to speak on their behalf. "Then the audience will vote on whether I should grant a pardon as governor, with the legal authority to grant pardons," Ericson said.

But the real hook for the public is that she plans to sell the show "worldwide on cable TV," and would "make a fortune" for Vermont's general fund, which may or may not be stolen by those she frees.

Ericson isn't new to the bizarre. In September, a local TV station posted a 20-minute video in which Ericson has a conversation with a stuffed rat--the show's host--named "Squeaky."

I am not making this up. Check out the video.

Ericson is going up against six other candidates for governor. According to a Vermont Public Radio-Vermont PBS Poll taken earlier this month, she had a one percent chance of being elected and a 92 percent chance of being propositioned by half the men in the state who voted for Bernie Sanders.

Republican Phil Scott led in the pole with 42 percent of the vote whit Democrat Christine Hallquist second with 28 percent.

Will Ericson ever consider running for president?

You make the call.


Please click the "Follow" button in the margin and be sure to get the latest Brain Flushings at a computer near you. Also, please visit the ads on this page because it helps the economy and me.



Tweet

Tavis Smiley not smiling now

His signature smile

PBS has indefinitely suspended late-night talk show "Tavis Smiley" after misconduct allegations were made against Smiley. 

PBS stated: "Effective today, PBS has indefinitely suspended distribution of 'Tavis Smiley,' produced by TS Media, an independent production company. PBS engaged an outside law firm to conduct an investigation immediately after learning of troubling allegations regarding Mr. Smiley. This investigation included interviews with witnesses as well as Mr. Smiley. The inquiry uncovered multiple, credible allegations of conduct that is inconsistent with the values and standards of PBS, and the totality of this information led to today's decision."

The law firm hired by PBS, MSK, took reports from ten witnesses, including a mix of men and women of different races and levels of employment in Smiley's organization, most being former staffers.

The investigation found credible allegations in which Smiley engaged in sexual relationships with a significant number of subordinates. Some of the interviewees expressed concern that their employment status was linked to the status of a sexual relationship with Smiley.

Overall, Smiley was depicted as a verbally abusive and threatening boss in a workplace that went well beyond what is expected in a typical high-pressure workplace. Several witnesses also expressed worry about possible retaliation.

Smiley hosted "Tavis Smiley," a half-hour interview program that aired weeknights on PBS member stations since 2004. The show was filmed in Los Angeles and was shown in major U.S. cities. While PBS distribued the series, it did not employ Smiley or any of his staff.

The show was underwritten by such sponsors as Wal-Mart and has received four NAACP Image Awards.

In a February article in the Observer, Jacques Hyzagi, a former TV producer for Smiley's show, wrote that Smiley's "misogyny is always creeping around, barely camouflaged by Midwestern good manners."

Hyzagi wrote about how Smiley would pick up a woman at the Orlando airport and bring her along on a reporting trip as a "f**k buddy." He also alleged that Smiley had a romantic relationship with another producer.

So another one bites the dust.


Tweet

Sorry Charlie, no more good times

CBS, Bloomberg and PBS have now fired talk show host and leftist journalist Charlie Rose on Tuesday after eight women accused him of sexual harassment and unwanted advances in a report in The Washington Post.  

"A short time ago we terminated Charlie Rose's employment with CBS News, effective immediately," a CBS statement posted on Twitter by CBS News President David Rhodes read. "This followed the revelation yesterday of extremely disturbing and intolerable behavior said to have revolved around his PBS program."

PBS also issued a statement announcing its professional divorce with Rose whose self-titled show began airing in 1991.

"In light of yesterday's revelations, PBS has terminated its relationship with Charlie Rose and cancelled distribution of his programs. PBS expects all the producers we work with to provide a workplace where people feel safe and are treated with dignity and respect," PBS said.

Bloomberg TV also confirmed that it severed ties with Rose but had no comment as male staff sweated profusely even as the weather grows colder.

Rose, 75, allegedly groped women acquaintances and walked around in his birthday suit in their presence. The women were either employees at the "Charlie Rose" show or had hopes of working for the show.

Rose apologized, said he feels embarrassed, and he hopes everything will go away.

Tweet

"Mister America, tear down this madrassa"

The angry left is tearing down statues of Confederate soldiers and their leaders because they believe those men advocated for slavery. They even want to go further with the tearing down and include such historical figures as the founding fathers.

Yale is removing a stone carving depicting a Puritan settler aiming a musket at a Native American. The 88-year-old carving on Sterling Memorial Library will be moved to another location.

In fact, Yale earlier this year renamed Calhoun College because John C. Calhoun was not just a former Vice President, he was a slavery supporter.

The Charlottesville City Council voted unanimously on Tuesday morning to cover the city's statues of Confederate Generals Robert E. Lee and Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson in black fabric to represent the city's mourning of Heather Heyer, who was killed when a white supremacist intentionally mowed her down in his car.

In the confederate statues debate, libtard and political commentator Al Sharptongue is taking the whole thing personally--screw whatever the public thinks--it's not about them, it's about Sharptongue.

During a recent interview with PBS's Charlie Rose (see video) Sharptongue said that he doesn't want his tax dollars to support monuments honoring even men who owned slaves. He got specific with the Thomas Jefferson Memorial in Washington D.C. 

The irony is, Sharpton owes about a million dollars in taxes he refuses to pay. Obama protected him in the past. Let's hope Trump will end that protection in the present.

"This is personal to us. My great grandfather was a slave in South Carolina," the tax evading Sharpton said. "People need to understand that people were enslaved."

I don't know why Sharptongue thinks everyone skipped that class in school.

But nobody on the left seems to care about the one religion that through their practices and scripture continues to promote slavery, misogyny and attacks basic human rights.

Take a guess which religion I'm referring to . . . 

Yes, it's Islam. And we have to ask ourselves why are we looking the other way when a religion practices slavery and forced marriages of young girls to old men.

The prophet of Islam, Muhammad, made sex slaves from the wives of the men he killed. He also enslaved the children and promoted anti-Semitism. 

Why are we allowing American Muslim children and adults to be taught that this is okay? 

Who in America will stand up against modern slavery instead of going after men who were a product of their culture and times? 

Why aren't these same leftists tearing down of madrassas and mosques that advocate slavery, misogyny and hatred of the American way of life as opposed to Sharia which clearly goes against our values?

Let me be clear: I am not talking about individual Muslims who live as normal Americans. 

I'm talking about those who have no problem with some of the teachings of the Quran that has inspired slavery, anti-Semitism and yes, terrorism.

Where's Antifa when it comes to real fascism by religion? Where are the women's organizations in America when it comes to female genital mutilation and basic women's rights denied to them in Islam?

And why do only black lives matter to some, but not all lives, and certainly not Jewish lives to some on the alt left and alt right.



Tweet

NY Public Schools promote course justifying suicide bombing

Aftermath of Jerusalem bus bombing(Photo: Menahem Kahana/AFP/Getty Images)

The New York State "Education Department" has developed and promoted a lesson plan called "Dying to be a Martyr." There is a video in the course that explains why it's Kosher to kill Jews, taking the perspective of an Islamic jihadi. 

The plan has been offered to teachers over the last ten years and it's financed through taxpayer-funded Public Broadcasting Service's "LearningMedia" website. The website offers a "media-on-demand service offering educators access to the best of public media and delivers research-based, classroom-ready digital learning experiences."

The lesson plan is aimed at high school students and contain no instructions for teachers to criticize these views nor videos featuring Israeli response to the bogus claims.

One teacher instruction is thus: 

(Mohanned feels he would rather die and be a martyr than live his life, sees his life as hollow--in contrast he sees Israelis as happy, going out, having fun, traveling.) Ask your students why Mohanned may feel that way (Answers may include: Palestinians have less land, fewer privileges, cannot come and go as they please.)

 When the story was investigated by The Blaze, the lesson plan was promoted by the New York State Education Department (NYSED), a request was made for comment by state officials at which time NYSED's website dumped the lesson plan.

But the lesson plan was listed on a different NYSED website and it also promoted a video titled "Story of Islam: A History of the World's Most Misunderstood Faith."

It's true: many people still believe that Islam is a religion of peace--it obviously is not.

Of all the 40 lesson plans on the website, only "Dying to be a Martyr" was listed in complete form.

Please follow Brain Flushings by clicking the Follow tab.



Tweet

Hillary tries to block the first Jewish POTUS

If you were able to watch the Democratic "debate" on PBS on Thursday, you may have come to the conclusion that the Hillary fix is obviously in.

First of all, one of the moderators asked a question tied to the Vietnam war. According to Gawker, a live mic caught one of them sighing, "Oh God," as Sanders began his answer. The moderator may as well have done a "Candy Crowley" and helped the candidate of her choice with the debate. (You may recall how Crowley came to Obama's aid when Romney posed a tough question to him.)

Judy Woodruff, one of the moderators, has donated to the Clinton Foundation--that should have been either disqualified her as a moderator, or at the very least, made public at the outset of the debate as full disclosure.

But this was a Democratic debate, so who are we kidding?

Another interesting point that should dispel any doubts that the fix was in to support Clinton is the fact that on the very day of the debate, subpoenas were issued by the State Department to a family foundation bearing Hillary's name as part of the ongoing federal investigation. Nothing, not a word was asked about this to Clinton.

So it's okay to ask GOP candidates tough questions, like those asked of Trump and Cruz regarding bankruptcies of the former, and a loan from Goldman Sachs to the latter, but the media throws cotton balls at Clinton.

It isn't that the public isn't interested in what may turn out to be indictable chicanery by Clinton. Facebook and other social media pegged the meter over the news about the Clinton Foundation, and yet, nothing was asked about it in spite of the fact that subpoenas were issued by the State Department.

Even Bernie Sanders seems to be unwilling to effectively attack Hillary. When Woodruff asked him how he would feel if he blocked the election of the first woman president, his answer was as weak as his "enough about the damn emails." 

He should have said something like: "And why is it okay for Mrs. Clinton to block the election of the first Jew?"

But he didn't . . . and he won't.

The fix is in and journalism is dead.


Tweet

Liberals Defined by their Emails

Whether or not the Sony Pictures document dump obtained by WikiLeaks is, as Julian Assange claims, "public domain," the information Assanges' Web site revealed is incredibly illuminating and reveals the true hearts of liberals.

WikiLeaks unveiled the database of over 30 thousand documents and 172 thousand emails the hacker group Anonymous stole from the Sony film division back in last November.

Assanges' actual quote was: "This archive shows the inner workings of an influential multinational corporation. It is newsworthy and at the center of a geopolitical conflict. It belongs in the public domain. WikiLeaks will ensure it stays there."

Some of the information revealed in the WikiLeaks documents was that Sony has close ties to the Democratic party and the company also tried to gather "intelligence" on rival studios including Oliver Stone's soon to be released film on the scumcrumpet, Edward Snowden. (Yes, I know that some of you might see Snowden as a hero, but I see him as a traitor for allowing the information to get into the hands of Putin.)

Amy Pascal, a liberal, and the head of Sony movies left her position with the company after her hacked emails were revealed to the public. She had emailed a friend, Scott Rubin, asking him what questions she should ask President Obama at a breakfast they would be attending for Hollywood brass.

Pascal emailed: "What should I ask the president at this stupid Jeffrey breakfast?" referring to a breakfast hosted by DreamWorks Animation head and important Democratic donor Jeffrey Katzenberg.

Rudin replied: "Would he like to finance some movies."

Pascal, ever the racist, replied: "I doubt it. Should I ask him if he liked DJANGO?" to which Rubin responded: "12 YEARS."

Pascal continued trying to guess the movies a black president might prefer, perhaps those starring black actors: "Or the butler. Or think like a man? [sic]."

Rudin: "Ride-along. I bet he likes Kevin Hart."

Amy Pascal donated $5000 to the Obama re-election campaign and $30,800.00 to the DNC, according to OpenSecrets. So in spite of the fact that she seems focused on race, being a liberal trumps her racial feelings.

Of course, after they were "outed" Rudin wrote to Deadline.com: "Private emails between friends and colleagues written in haste and without much thought or sensitivity, even when the content of them is meant to be in jest, can result in offense where none was intended. I made a series of remarks that were meant to only be funny, but in the cold light of day, they are, in fact, thoughtless and insensitive--but not funny at all. To anybody I've offended, I'm profoundly and deeply sorry, and I regret and apologize for any injury they might have caused."

Scotty, words don't cause injury unless you're a liberal who wants to shut up people with opposing opinions (see American college professors, for more on this). 

Pascal sent her apology to Variety: "The content of my emails were insensitive and inappropriate but are not an accurate reflection of who I am," she lied. "Although this was a private communication that was stolen, I accept full responsibility for what I wrote and apologize to everyone who was offended."

If she was being genuine in her apology, she wouldn't have tried to soften it with mentioning that the emails were stolen. 

It's what people say to their friends when they believe nobody else is able to hear them, that is most revealing about what they really think. 

The same is true of corporations.

Sony Entertainment CEO, Michael Lynton, thought the email issues with WikiLeaks was old history but instead, they drew attention to Lynton's directorship at the Rand Corporation, a US military intelligence think tank. WIkiLeaks then went on to mention a dinner Lynton attended with our so-called president at Martha's Vineyard and that Sony tried to establish a fund-raising collective "to get around the $5,000 limit on corporate campaign donations," the site stated.

But the real FunFact was WikiLeaks revealing that actor, Ben Affleck, the guy who went off on Sam Harris's criticism of Islam on Bill Maher's show, was trying to hide the fact that his ancestors were slave owners and tried to hide the fact by censoring it from the PBS show "Finding Your Roots."

In a hacked email from July 22, 2014 now in the hands of WikiLeaks, the "Finding Your Roots" host, Henry Louis Gates Jr., wrote to Michael Lynton asking him how to go forward with this: "One of our guests has asked us to edit out something about one of his ancestors--the fact that he owned slaves. Now, four or five of our guests this season descend from slave owners, including Ken Burns. We've never had anyone ever try to censor or edit what we found. He's a megastar. What do we do?"

Guess what the sneaky liberal Lynton replied.

His advice was to leave out Affleck's family secret, as long as nobody would find out. He wrote: "On the doc the big question is who knows that the material is in the doc and is being taken out. I would take it out if no one knows, but if it gets out that you are editing the material based on this kind of sensitivity then it gets tricky."

Gates admitted to Lynton that he was aware that censoring the documentary goes against PBS rules. Lynton responded that "It is tricky because it may get out that you made the change and it comes down to editorial integrity," to which Gates then responded "It would embarrass him and compromise our integrity."

What integrity?

Lynton caved and liberal injustice was served.

I marvel at the lies liberals (and some conservatives) will tell in order to appear to be seen in the image they see themselves. I don't care one iota if Affleck's great-grand-whatevers owned slaves, but he is worried that people will see him as less a liberal. 

I do believe, however, that if his ancestors owned slaves, the chances are excellent that they were Dixiecrat/Democrats.


Tweet