Waking up to Joe’s gaffes, YouTube erred in silencing Meloni and other commentary

Media watch: Waking Up to Joe’s Gaffes

“The cumulative weight of [President] Biden’s malapropisms” seems to have “broken the backs of even the stoutest water carriers,” quips Commentary’s Noah Rothman, noting the “spontaneous uprising” of the press Wednesday after Biden asked the late Rep. Jackie Walorski to make herself known. “What happened?” one White House reporter asked press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre. Was Biden “confused?” asked another. When she defended the prez, saying Walorski was “top-of-mind” for him, yet another noted that he has John Lennon top-of-mind every day, “but I’m not looking around” for him. Papering over the left’s concerns about Biden’s age simply didn’t work this time. In a recent interview, CBS’s Scott Pelly told Biden that people wonder if he’s fit for the job, prompting the president to reply, “Watch me.” Yes, says Rothman, quoting a colleague, “We are.”

Libertarian: YouTube Erred in Silencing Meloni

YouTube’s decision to remove a 2019 video of incoming Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni discussing her conservative vision “attracted widespread scorn from conservative media outlets,” and the social-media site ultimately “reversed course and restored it,” reports Reason’s Robby Soave. Yet it’s not clear why YouTube flagged the video in the first place. Meloni’s party, the Brothers of Italy, has been described as far-right and nationalist and accused of having fascist ties, yet her remarks “were well in keeping with new right political views on subjects like gender, immigration, and abortion.” Big Tech companies shouldn’t make it harder to learn about Meloni’s views. “Silencing an argument is not the same thing as winning one.”

Schools beat: A Woke AP Black-Studies Course?

The College Board says it’ll soon offer an Advanced Placement course on African-American studies, but if its description is any guide, expect progressive “ideology” to dominate, sighs The Wall Street Journal’s Jason Riley. “The course is likely to punctuate white mistreatment of blacks” and “uncritically cite it as the only plausible explanation” for inequality today. “Jews and Asians also faced ‘hardships,’ ” yet “today both groups outperform white Americans academically and economically.” What are the chances the new course will provide such “context”? In 1969, civil-rights activist Bayard Rustin questioned whether black-studies programs were “a form of ideological indoctrination” and a “regression to racial separatism.” Such questions “apply equally to the latest effort to turn students who haven’t even learned to read and write into social-justice warriors.”

Elex desk: Mitt’s Dashing GOP Senate Hopes

“Republican senators are growing concerned by colleague Mitt Romney’s refusal to help fellow Utah Republican Mike Lee decisively win his re-election campaign,” grumbles The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway. A new poll claims independent candidate Evan McMullin is only two percentage points behind Lee. “Polls show Republicans on track to do well in November, but with several incredibly tight contests. If Democrats . . . pull off an upset in Utah, it would have profound consequences for the control of the Senate:” Bernie Sanders, not Rand Paul, “would chair the United States Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions,” while “the powerful Judiciary Committee would be helmed by Dick Durbin, not Lindsey Graham.” “All of this has Romney’s Republican colleagues concerned, and not just for Lee, but for themselves.”

From the left: Two Superstars Fading Away

“Just a few short years ago, Beto O’Rourke and Stacey Abrams were among the Democratic Party’s shiniest stars,” notes Politico’s Calder McHugh. “They’re back on the ballot again this year,” but “the vibe” is different. “Both have consistently trailed their opponents in the polls.” What changed? Well, “2022 isn’t as nearly favorable for Democrats as 2018 was. But that’s not the whole story.” Turns out all those “glossy magazine profiles” (O’Rourke got a Vanity Fair cover) and “soft press coverage” that kicked off their ascent “did little to advance their prospects among voters who weren’t already inclined to support them.” The two also took stances — on guns and election fraud — “that weren’t necessarily helpful in red-tinted states.”

— Compiled by The Post Editorial Board

Source link

Comments are closed.