Fierce Patriots

Conservative Political News

  • Subscribe

<![CDATA[Washington Post]]>

Finally: The WaPo Discovers the Dangerous Link Between Elon Musk and Donald Trump

by Leave a Comment

There are few things reporters love to do more than write self-serving stories about any rich, powerful, prominent public figure who has either been a roadblock to or who is poised to stand in the way of the woke agendas that privileged, well-to-do leftists in elitist circles desire to unleash on the common man whether they like it or not.

In Donald Trump and Elon Musk, the Usual Suspects in the press have found their sweet spots, with Trump of course being the former POTUS and a constant thorn in the side of what he calls the “fake news media.” With Musk, the agenda-driven leftist media are enraged at how he’s so good at figuring out new ways to trigger them each day, most notably by way of his stated commitment to free speech and open dialogue, which drives pro-censorship types on the left nuts.

Though Trump and Musk appear to be on somewhat friendly terms despite past public political disagreements, there has never been a real link/common tie established between the two outside of them both being wealthy individuals, nothing that would show they were united even in a general way in their diabolical thinking about how to approach societal problems… until now.

And who do we have to thank in part for discovering the dangerous link between the two of them? The Washington Post, which actually wrote an entire article on the fact that Diet Coke had so much “power” that it had reeled in the likes of Musk, Trump, disgraced Hollywood mogul and serial predator Harvey Weinstein, and numerous Hollywood actors:

Nope, not kidding:

In 2018, the New Yorker stuck a fork in the Diet Coke phenomenon, citing as evidence its unsavory acolytes, including former president Donald Trump and Harvey Weinstein. It is, the magazine declared, “the elixir of soft-bodied plutocrats desperate to shed their shady pasts and, possibly, a few pounds.”

[…]

Musk has previously proclaimed his love for the beverage. “Diet Coke is amazing, especially the soda fountain version at movie theaters with salt & butter popcorn,” he tweeted in June, following up by saying he doesn’t care “if it lowers my life expectancy.” And in April, he tweeted his plan to restore the drink’s original formula:

[…]

In a 2007 interview with Inc. magazine, Musk said that at one point he was downing eight cans of Diet Coke a day along with several large coffees, a regimen he ultimately had to cut back.

[…]

Trump reportedly drank as many as 12 cans a day, and he was said to have used a call button on the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office primarily as a means of summoning a fresh glass.

Well, I mean it must be true that Diet Coke is the preferred drink of autocrats or something, especially if you consider this:

The Washington Post: Where democracy dies in dark diet colas or something.

Related: Elon Musk Signals Major Shift in Handling ‘Very Online’ Critics Going Forward

Trending on Redstate Video

WaPo Drops Hit Piece on Cowboys Owner Jerry Jones Over 65-Year Old Photo, Says He’s Part of a ‘Confederacy’

by Leave a Comment

The opinions expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of RedState.com.

The Washington Post thought it would be a good idea to celebrate the holiday weekend with a hit piece on Cowboys owner Jerry Jones featuring a photo of him aged 14 years old standing in the crowd at a 1957 racial confrontation in North Little Rock, AK. There is no indication that Jones did anything wrong or actively participated in the event, where white people were trying to stop black students from attending the local high school.

A few weeks after the above photo was taken, the higher profile “Little Rock Nine” integration effort took place at Little Rock Central High, resulting in President Dwight D. Eisenhower dispatching federal troops to escort the black students past the protesters in what is regarded as a pivotal moment in the civil rights movement. The Post seems to imply that the fact that Jones lived in the area and appeared at a less-famous event means that he’s guilty by association with the racist agitators who harassed black students and used the N-word:

In a photograph taken at the scene, Jones could be seen standing a few yards from where the six Black students were being jostled and repelled with snarling racial slurs by ringleaders of the mob. At one point, a Black student named Richard Lindsey recalled, someone in the crowd put a hand on the back of his neck. A voice behind him said, “I want to see how a… [N-word] feels.” The ruffian hostility succeeded in turning away the would-be new enrollees.

Was it Jones who grabbed the black student? No. Did he jostle the black students or yell racial slurs? No. But in the Post’s world, a 14-year-old boy should have shut down the mob and put those racists in their places.

The bias and insinuation in the piece become apparent with the authors’ use of one word: Jones is part of a “confederacy of pro football plutocrats…” Confederacy? Really? I have never heard that word used in a column about sports before. Their choice is no accident and is meant to evoke images of slave-owning zealots and white-robed racists.

Why is it only certain people who face this kind of attack from the media? There are other things that have happened in the more recent past of other famous Americans:

Jones has an explanation for his presence at the high school 65 years ago: “I don’t know that I or anybody anticipated or had a background of knowing … what was involved. It was more a curious thing,” he said. He confessed that he wasn’t even supposed to be there, because his football coach had explicitly told his players to stay away from the school in case there was any trouble.

You may or not find his recollections convincing, but no one has alleged that Jones was active in the melee, and no one has claimed he attempted to stop any black students from entering the school.

When I was about 13 and living in New York City, there was a massive, 500,000-person-strong protest against nuclear weapons in Central Park and midtown Manhattan. My buddy and I were hardly the Greta Thunbergs of our time, but we knew we had to check out something that major. Maybe now there’s a photo out there somewhere proving I was a committed anti-nukes protester, but it wouldn’t tell the full story.

The endless, 8,000-word piece is a test of endurance to get through and is mostly filled with insinuation and snark. The reporters dig into every moment of Jones’ background, even probing the lives of his father and grandfather. This is important because… why? The best they could come up with is that they found an envelope with a list of members of the “Capital Citizens’ Council,” an apparently racist group, with Jerry’s grandparents’ names on it. Even if true, what does that say about Jerry Jones? Not a darn thing.

ESPN’s Stephen A Smith was p***ed off by the hit piece, saying it was “pretty low”:

The WaPo‘s character assassination of Jones is part of their “BLACK OUT” series, which is “examining the NFL’s decades-long failure to equitably promote Black coaches to top jobs despite the multibillion-dollar league being fueled by Black players.” The Post downplays the fact that half of the Cowboys’ coaching staff is black, and that the team sponsors programs to train minority coaches from high school on up. They also completely ignore the fact that Jones signed black quarterback Dak Prescott to a four-year $160 million contract with $126 million guaranteed, making him one of the highest-paid QB’s in the game.

The whole vibe of this article is that The Washington Post has a personal vendetta against Texas, Arkansas, and Jerry Jones, and their message about the employment prospects of black coaches is buried.

Why don’t people trust the media? Articles like this, which are little more than character assassination disguised as journalism.

Trending on Redstate Video

Taylor Lorenz Telegraphs the Lastest Liberal Effort to Take Down Twitter and Musk

by Leave a Comment

The liberal power structure can’t take the thought that they no longer control Twitter, so they are going to do everything they can to try to rein Elon Musk into line. We’ve reported how Democrats have been less concerned about FTX and more concerned with siccing the FTC on Musk. Then leftist organizations have been trying to pressure advertisers to pull out. Volkswagen announced their brands would stop running any paid content (advertising) on Twitter anymore. The irony of that is they were originally founded by the Nazis and now they’re going along with a fascist effort to shut down speech that liberals don’t like/can’t control.

Now, there’s another effort afoot to take down Musk and Twitter being pushed by Taylor Lorenz in a Washington Post article, attacking the Twitter offer of “general amnesty” to suspended accounts.

“It’s a slap in the face to LGBTQ people,” Caraballo said.

“Apple and Google need to seriously start exploring booting Twitter off the app store,” Caraballo told Lorenz. “What Musk is doing is existentially dangerous for various marginalized communities. It’s like opening the gates of hell in terms of the havoc it will cause. People who engaged in direct targeted harassment can come back and engage in doxing, targeted harassment, vicious bullying, calls for violence, celebration of violence. I can’t even begin to state how dangerous this will be.”

So they’re going to stop bullying by bullying Twitter out of existence? That seems to be their aim, but they don’t see the irony there. If there’s anything that is “marginalized” in the liberal media it’s any voice other than their own, including conservatives of all stripes, including conservatives who are minorities.

More irony? Caraballo called for harassing and “accosting” Supreme Court justices because she didn’t like their decision overturning Roe.

Caraballo is saying what Musk is doing is dangerous. Look in a mirror. But that’s “acceptable” since it’s pushing the liberal narrative against those evil justices.

Liberals are always accusing folks on the right of the things in which they have been engaging.

As we’ve reported, the “hate speech” seems to have gone down since Musk took over and the leftists started fleeing. Maybe there’s a correlation there? Plus Musk has also gone after the child exploitation on the platform that previously had not been addressed by Twitter.

Not to mention that this seemed to contradict what Lorenz previously said to the BBC, trying to gaslight and say that Musk was “super anti-free speech.”

So which is it? Letting people back on is anti-free speech? They can’t even keep their lies straight.

But journalist Glenn Greenwald notes that this threat about the app store helped to do in Parler just as it was exploding in growth.

Greenwald also fell back on the common thing liberals have said in the past when they controlled Twitter: it’s a private company, if you don’t like it, go start your own or flee to Mastodon.

But liberals simply refuse to give up their hold on the ability to push propaganda to Americans. They’re that afraid of free speech and truth, because they know it will loosen their hold on power, and that they can’t abide. They will stop at nothing.

Trending on Redstate Video

The Grinch Who Wants to Steal Thanksgiving: WaPo Details the Climate Impact of Your Holiday Dinner

by Leave a Comment

It reads like a parody, but sadly it’s not. A Washington Post column titled, “the climate impact of the Thanksgiving meal might surprise you” was actually printed (on paper, mind you—have they no decency?) and tries to ruin your holiday by reminding you that you’re killing the planet by not serving kale-only dishes.

That cookie or pie or whatever it is looks like its carbon imprint must be off the charts. Just sayin’.

“I know, I know, nobody wants to put ‘climate’ and ‘Thanksgiving’ in the same sentence,” food columnist Tamar Haspel writes. If she knew that, why did she keep writing? She’s absolutely correct—nobody does want to hear those two words together. What we actually want to do is enjoy a good meal and give our thanks to God for all our blessings.

But no, let’s count our carbon output instead. On a planet that now has a population of 8 billion people, surely our food choices will have a larger impact on the climate than say, China, where half the globe’s new coal plants are being built. If I pass on that burger for lunch, might the world last an extra year?

This tweeter has an estimate for his climate emissions this Turkey Day:

Haspel at least brings some cheer; our turkeyfest won’t be quite so terrible as that dreaded Independence Day grilling:

I’m here to tell you that the news is good. The mainstays of the meal are poultry and plants, which make Thanksgiving a much more climate-friendly holiday than, say, the burgerfest that is the Fourth of July.

Oh thank heavens. But it gets even better:

On the beef-pork-poultry axis of meat, poultry has the lowest greenhouse gas emission levels…

Poultry, in general, has about one-seventh the impact of beef (on a per-calorie basis). A turkey’s footprint is going to be somewhat higher than a chicken’s because it’s slower-growing, which means a turkey needs more feed and more time to get to table weight, but it’s still a good choice.

Ok, to sum up, chicken is better than turkey, which is better than beef. There’s an even better choice though:

I am duty-bound to mention that venison is an even better one; that’s what goes on my Thanksgiving table in years when I’ve gotten a deer.

Wait, what?! “Gotten a deer?” That almost sounds like she’s a….hunter? Not going to lie— I was not expecting that. She links to another of her articles which describes the climate benefits of eating venison. “The catch, of course,” she points out, “is that you have to kill a deer.”

I admit to assuming she must be an anti-gun progressive holed up in her closet counting her carbon emissions, but boy was I wrong:  “So think about getting your hunting license,” she writes. “Our world could be the better for it.”

The article goes on to explain that oysters, used in stuffing, have a low climate impact. That’s good to know, but to be honest, I never associated oysters with Thanksgiving. On the subject of cranberries, she’s less sure but likens their impact to that of blueberries. She’s thumbs up on cornbread, but seems concerned about green beans because they’re not “quite as environmentally friendly as root vegetables.”

Pecan, pumpkin, and apple pies all fall into the “good” category because the trees the fruits grow on don’t have to be replanted every year. They might not be great for your health, but they’re climate-friendly, so have at ’em.

My not-so-secret is, I don’t like a lot of vegetables; my wife calls me a “meatatarian.” If you want to see me turn green, hand me the brussels sprouts.

Thanksgiving is a time to revere our families, say our prayers, and celebrate life. It is not a time to count our climate emissions output and be lectured to about our deadly diet. It seems I’m not alone in my opinion; according to Breitbart, the author claims she’s received more hate mail for this article than any she’s written in her career.

I certainly don’t hate her—she seems like a nice albeit quirky lady, to be honest—but I will unashamedly enjoy my family’s big fat turkey, and maybe some pork, and I will quietly avoid the kale and the squash, and I will enjoy it.

Maybe I’ll even throw a burger on the grill.