After the massacre by radical Islamists who killed 14 and wounded 21 more in San Bernardino, Calif., the New York Times took its tasteless grandstanding on gun control literally to the front, in a rare front-page editorial, "The Gun Epidemic" calling for bans on civilian ownership for certain types of rifles and ammunition. After joining the New York Daily News' anti-prayer brigade, the publicity stunt of an editorial briefly bowed to reality to admit that yes, there have been mass murders in countries with stringent gun control laws. Their rebuttal is a perfect encapsulation of liberal wishful thinking: "But at least those countries are trying."

Biofuels should serve as an instructive lesson for negotiators in Paris, because they are proof that not all energy sources work as well as anticipated. But journalists are unlikely to remind them or the public.

The early 2000s were the heyday of good press for biofuels. Major newspapers like The New York Times ran stories about Willie Nelson’s biodiesel startup and individuals converting their vehicles into “veggie” cars to run on french fry grease and other forms of biodiesels. The Washington Post even editorialized about people “dreaming big” plans like replacing hydrocarbon fuels (gasoline) with biodiesels.

The Washington Post “Fact Checker” column is crying “pants on fire” or something like it against Ted Cruz. The unsubtle headline is “Ted Cruz’s Four-Pinocchio claim that ‘the overwhelming majority of violent criminals are Democrats’.”

Cruz told radio host Hugh Hewitt there was a “simple and undeniable fact” that “the overwhelming majority of violent criminals are Democrats.” Claiming this was a fact animated Kessler’s “fact” hunt, as he reported. So what are the “facts” at hand? Cruz’s staffers sent over the backup:

Students and faculty members at Smith College in Northampson, Mass., apparently tried to avoid a repeat of an “ugly episode” at the University of Missouri, where a communications professor was caught in a video calling for the removal of an instructor from an on-campus demonstration earlier this month.

According to an article written by Callum Borchers for the Washington Post, the pupils and teachers from the liberal-arts school held a sit-in on Wednesday to protest racial discrimination but didn't allow people from the media into the event – unless those journalists pledged allegiance to the cause.

In a bid to pump up his anemic African-American support, Bernie Sanders very publicly chowed down yesterday with rapper Killer Mike, who at a subsequent rally endorsed Sanders. Reporting on the meeting of the unlikely duo, the Washington Post wrote that among other things they discussed "their mutual appreciation for the work of the philosopher Noam Chomsky."

So Bernie digs Noam Chomsky. You remember Noam: condemned the killing of Bin Laden and said that George W.'s crimes "vastly exceed bin Laden's;" self-described anarchist-socialist; member of Marxist Industrial Workers of the World; agnostic on the Holocaust, doesn't think Holocaust denial is anti-Semitic; banned from visiting Israel because of anti-Israel positions; defender of the genocidal Khmer Rouge. So what has been the MSM's reaction to Sanders fondness for Chomsky? Crickets, of course. Try to imagine the MSM reaction if a leading GOP presidential candidate expressed appreciation for a similarly-controversial figure on the far right.