Warner Todd Huston


Latest from Warner Todd Huston

Looks like it is just starting to dawn on some lefties that Obama is ushering in an era of oppression of free speech. So it seems for Laura Varon Brown of the Detroit Free Press, at least. Oh, she isn't saying that Obama himself is trampling on free speech, but she is starting to understand that the left's penchant for political correctness is serving the function as a sort of self-imposed oppression no matter what Obama says. It's getting so bad, according to Brown, that any criticism of Obama is treated as akin to treason... at least it is in the "circles" she runs in, anyway.

Brown can count herself in the same boat as the late-night comedy shows that are finding that any criticism of The One is verboten to their left-wing audiences. Even the supposedly unshakable Bill Maher, who congratulates himself on his bravery for taking on the establishment, has found that he's had to shy from criticizing Obama. These people are seeing that attacking "The Man" is not so funny when it is their man in the crosshairs. Suddenly such folks have a new-found respect for the office and a more circumspect behavior toward the president is now du jour.



Oprah.com and CNN have decided that there is a growing "new" trend in American sexual relations. The two Internet giants have teamed up and have decided that increasingly "women are leaving men for other women." Shocking news, I know. Only one little problem. Oprah.com has no proof for any such proclamation.

After the shocking headline and the first three paragraphs proclaiming a new lesbian revolution in America today, though, the piece admits that there are no real statistics to prove the thesis. The whole claim is merely based on the anecdotal stories of the "experts" that Oprah.com dug up to substantiate the tale.



As expected, Joe Biden is fast becoming the clown prince of Washington D.C. His never ending case of athlete's mouth resulting from his penchant for sticking his foot between his chompers is something that should be no surprise to any long-time Biden watcher. But, amusingly, UPI tries to re-center the Biden story, rescuing him from ridicule, to discuss the supposedly important things that President Obama has entrusted to the vice president.

In "Biden soldiers on amid comedic jabs," we find UPI trying to tell us of all the important, important stuff our gabby VP is in charge of. But even the UPI can't hide the fact that these things that Obama put Biden "in charge" of are nothing more than meaningless make-work programs.



There is a charge starting to make the rounds of the science and medical blogs that the Huffington Post is allowing its bloggers to claim they are "doctors" when some really aren't qualified to claim the title. Still others ply their legitimately earned title to discuss as authorities issues in fields other than those in which they trained. Some of these same "doctors" are offering health advice and assessment of scientific news when they really aren't qualified to discuss them in any way other than as opinionists. So, the questions become these: is the Huffington Post misrepresenting its posters as trained, accredited experts when they aren't? Is there any attempt by the HuffyPost staff to substantiate the claims made by its posters?

Case in point is the Huffington Post's wellness editor, "Dr." Patricia Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald claims to have a doctorate in "Homeopathic Medicine," as well as a Master's Degree in "Traditional Chinese Medicine." But what, exactly, is a Doctorate in Homeopathic Medicine? And why does Fitzgerald not say on her bio page from where these degrees were earned? Why is she so intentionally vague?



Amy Davidson of the New Yorker should take up bowling or gardening because history doesn't seem to be her thang, if you will.

In the aftermath of Barack Obama's own false historical reference of famed WWII era English Prime Minister Winston Churchill made during Wednesday's press conference, Davidson jumped to her keyboard to further garble history with an April 30 blog post on her Close Read blog at the New Yorker website.

On Wednesday, Obama made a reference to an "article" he was reading "the other day" wherein he discovered that during WWII Prime Minister Winston Churchill supposedly said "We don't torture." (Transcript of Obama's remarks) The following morning, Davidson praised Obama for his sentiment and waxed envious over the "very good" article from which Obama gleaned the tale.

There is only one little problem with the whole thing: Churchill NEVER said the line that Obama claimed he said. And further, the "very good article" that Davidson praised was erroneous to say so.

This means Obama was wrong, the article was wrong and so was Davidson's blog post.



In keeping with the Old Media's penchant to lionize The One, the Indianapolis Star is pouring on the saccharine to celebrate the Obammessiah once again in a piece that praises the fact the Obama has made community organizers "cool" at long last. But, a closer reading shows that this new craze for community organizing isn't all the IndyStar tries to make it out to be.

The Star starts out with the hearwarming tale of law student Zac Elliot who has assured the paper that he has changed his mind about what he wants to do with his life. Gone are his selfish, capitalist dreams of becoming a high paid lawyer and in is his newfound desire to be a "cool" community organizer like his idol Obama. He now wants to help the regular folks because "coincidentally, it's also become cool" to emulate The One.



Baltimore Sun TV critic David Zurawik should check into a clinic somewhere to have his delicate mental balance checked. Maybe they might have some nice medication he can take to temper his Palin Derangement Syndrome (PDS)? He has PDS so bad he can't even write about a little reality TV show without indulging unnecessary vitriol and hate.

It's interesting that critic Zurawik gets so filled with hate in such a short space. In fact, the tiny four paragraph "review" spends more time name calling and attacking Governor Palin than it does in discussing the TV show on which she is about to appear; TLC's American Chopper.



Jessica Valenti, founder of the vaguely pornographic sounding Feministing.com, has decided that there is no such thing as virginity in America's young girls and the Today Show is entirely pleased with itself to give her a national TV venue from which to say so. Never mind how silly it all sounds.

On April 23 Valenti and Today pushed the idea that sexually active girls should not be thought of as a problem, that an expectation of virginity is harmful, and that religion is a baneful influence on young women today. Valenti says that if young men can have their sexual exploits given a wink and a nod, then so should the sexual activity of young girls.

Naturally, being a good left-wing, feminist, Valenti draws all the wrong conclusions and advocates all the worst solutions to address the real problems in American society. Just as naturally, NBC gives a legitimate stage for her absurd proclamations and ill-thought-out prescriptions.



One would think that The New York Times is purposefully putting American's in harm's way with its latest travel section vacation suggestion. If it isn't doing it on purpose, it certainly is acting almost criminally negligent over its reader's safety abroad. Back on March 22, the Times suggested that Americans vacation in Deptford, one of England's most dangerous, crime infested areas. And why would the Times want to send Americans into such a seedy and dangerous place? Because it's "hip," man. What else?

The suggestion by the NYTimes for American tourists to visit Deptford brought all manners of jaw-dropping, guffaws from the British press this week. The disbelief is thick over there because Deptford has some of the highest crimes stats in the country -- the tenth most violent according to Britain's Home Office -- and Britons simply cannot fathom why The New York Times would willingly send Americans unawares into the heart of such violence and crime.



Looks like Washington Post Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt sort of put his foot in his mouth -- or his pen as the case may be -- in an April 27 editorial where he as much as called America's older workers "lumbering" and less talented than "younger, nimbler" employees. In a nation that has one of its largest blocks of citizens in the "older" category, those over 40, it seems like Hiatt just insulted the largest number of Americans. Not the best way to sell newspapers, eh?

In his headlined "600,000 Bad Hires? Making Federal Jobs Cool Once Again," Hiatt seems to be urging The One to come to the rescue of the jobs market. Well, not real jobs, but government jobs, anyway.



The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz has let the cat out of the bag in the Post's April 27 issue about a regularly scheduled secret media dinner attended by some of the top left-wing journalists in the country. But it isn't just the lefty scribblers that have attended these secret, off-the-record dinners for these gatherings have each featured a guest. Rahm Emanuel, Sec. of the Treasury Tim Geithner, and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke have all recently had their chance to schmooze the press and guide them with the spin desired by the White House.

So, not only does Obama's Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel have secret daily phone calls with which to program the media's coverage of the White House, now it is revealed that Emanuel and other Obama staffers have been attending secret dinners to help the press understand what the White House wants reported? As Kurtz says, it all sounds "rather cozy," doesn't it?



Someone needs to sue Santa Monica High School for education malpractice on behalf of the ill-educated Sean Penn. I mean, the man is nearly illiterate and he certainly has no grasp on history, philosophy, or statecraft. But his wacko left-wing inanities aside, it is his illiteracy that seems the most lamentable. Oh, it isn't Rosie O'Donnell illiterate. Hers is a special class of insensibility all by itself, but Penn's brand is proof of the lowest quality of education. I mean the man can barely put two words together sensibly much less exhibit a grasp of grammar and syntax. It really is a crime how badly he's been educated.

Take for instance his latest Huffington Post blathering where he seems to be saying that all we need to win the day in international relations is to give a "smile." Aside from being childishly simplistic in concept, it has some of the worst word usage and syntax I've seen for a long time in what is supposed to be a leader of opinion (again, Rosie aside).



I am not a doctor, but I play one on the Internet. So, take the following as a prescription for what ails you. Now, if for some unexplainable reason you have been feeling queasy since November of last year, if you have felt like you want to throw up but just can't seem to get that bile to overflow, well I have a little something here that will surely cause that gag reflex to result in a healthy expulsion of bubbling acids. The Associated Press would call it a "news story," but it serves a far better purpose as syrup of ipecac than anything else.

Anyway, if you need a ready emetic, try giving a read to our pal Liz Sidoti's doting portrayal of President Obama as a "no jitters" expert that is "extraordinarily at ease" sitting in the big chair. He's a fellow that has mastered the office even though he has "youth and inexperience," and he's confident "almost to a fault." Obama is the greatest story ever told as far as Liz is concerned... and after only four short months in office to boot.

But, wait. There's more puke-inspiring sycophancies yet to come...read on if you dare.



The newest false meme invented by the Old Media is this claim that ex-presidents and ex-vice presidents have some sort of "tradition of silence" where it concerns commenting on those that take residence in the White House after they leave. The reason the Old Media is pushing this false claim is because Dick Cheney has been commenting on Obama's security mistakes and the Old Media wants to scold Cheney for his efforts to get the truth to the people.

Certainly it is true that some ex-chief executives have maintained silence after they left office. Still, it isn't really true that there has been any long tradition of staying silent out of some sort of respect for the new president. But, no matter how many past presidents/vice presidents have remained quiet, the one glaring exception to that so-called tradition is the vp just before Cheney: Al Gore. And this man has been absent in the Media's attack on Cheney.

Think about it. Can you remember any report by any Old Media outlet that excoriated Al Gore for his constant, wild-eyed, screaming fits against the Bush administration for the last 8 years? Where was the Old Media tsk tsking Gore for, say, his 2004 appearance where he screamed at the top of his lungs that Bush "betrayed this country," and the "he played on our fears"? (Audio here) Why is Cheney a big meanie as far as the media is concerned for commenting on Obama, yet Al Gore was never reproached even once for attacking Bush and Cheney?



A few days ago Noel Sheppard brought to us the story of yet another example of how the star struck media is fawning over President Obama.



Back in 2007, lefty comedian Jon Stewart mercilessly mocked lefty talk show host Chris Matthews over the title of his book when Matthews appeared to flog the tome on Stewart's The Daily Show. The ribbing was so unexpected and so mean spirited that Matthews later said it was a "book interview from hell."

Now Matthews is releasing the book in paperback but amazingly there is a tiny difference between this version of the book and the original. The pulper was originally titled, "Life’s a Campaign: What Politics Has Taught Me About Friendship, Rivalry, Reputation, and Success." But now, all of a sudden the paperback version of this thing is heading to stores as, "The Hardball Handbook: How to Win at Life."

So, what gives? Is Matthews afraid of Stewart's renewed attack on his book? Did Matthews change the book's title for fear of a comedian?



Apparently viewers are getting tired of the cutsey, smugness that is Rachel Maddow, and not just a few of them either. Ratings for the already low rated Rachel Maddow show on MSNBC have shown a steep decline recently, falling from a high of 1.9 million viewers to "slightly over 1.1 million."

Naturally, MSNBC President Phil Grifin is putting on the brave face calling Maddow a "rock star" and that Maddow is a "great success." He told the L. A. Times, "We've never had success anywhere near that in our 12-year history at 9 p.m. right out of the gate."



I will begin this right at the top by saying that I don't care a whit if the appointment of any American official brings hope to Egyptians. After all, an American official should be concerned with America's interests not Egypt's. Not that I am saying that American officials or appointments should necessarily have as a chief criteria for appointment an interest in the denigration of any foreign land, but that what's good for America should be any new official's chief concern.

However, apparently the L.A. Times thinks that it is germane to U.S. interests that Egyptians are "rejoicing" that President Obama has appointed a female American Muslim to his administration. In, "Muslim woman's appointment as Obama advisor draws cautious optimism" from April 22, Noha El-Hennawy is reporting from Cairo that Egyptians are happy with Obama's purported outreach to Muslims.



Yael T. Abouhalkah is all excited to let the readers of the Kansas City Star know that he's found another Republican politician that has had to grovel at the feet of Rush Limbaugh, apologizing to the radio giant for a slight cast his way. And to "prove" it Abouhalkah used a press release from the Democratic National Campaign Committee that said so. Yeah, nice unbiased source there, Abouhalkah.

Seriously, does Abouhalkah imagine that a Democrat Party press release is an unbiased source about what is happening between a Republican lawmaker and Rush Limbaugh? No wonder newspapers are falling on such tough times. If Abouhalkah is any indication, the definition of common words aren't even any longer understood in the Star's newsroom. Words like "source," "unbiased," "legitimate," and "veracity" seem to be foreign to the folks at the Star. With such a failure to understand the very basics of journalism, its no wonder readers are abandoning newspapers in droves.



The folks at The Hill alerted me to the fact that the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) has decided to oppose any reinstitution of the inaptly named Fairness Doctrine.

I know, imagine that... as lefty a group as the SPJ actually agreeing with conservatives that the Fairness Doctrine is an abomination of our Constitutional right to free political speech! You can knock me over with a feather, and all.

The Hill is right to quip that this makes for strange bedfellows, but it would seem like a no-brainer for anyone interested in Constitutional rights and a jealous protection of free speech no matter whose it is: