Mid-Day Digest

Oct. 10, 2017


  • YouTube goes after Mike Rowe, who fights back and wins.
  • ESPN is more concerned with its own bottom line than consistency on free speech rights.
  • Another massive Obama regulation is headed for the ash heap of history.
  • Gun control will never work to deter evil men from doing evil things. Even Feinstein knows.
  • Plus our Daily Features: Top Headlines, Memes, Cartoons, Columnists and Short Cuts.


“Without freedom of thought there can be no such thing as wisdom; and no such thing as public liberty, without freedom of speech.” —Benjamin Franklin (1722)


YouTube Restricts… Mike Rowe?

Last Thursday, Mike Rowe, the immensely likable host of “Dirty Jobs,” announced via a Facebook post that his YouTube channel had been restricted. Now anyone who has ever watched a Mike Rowe video would be shocked to hear this news, as his videos are often some of the most carefully worded, timely and poignant thoughts on a great variety of issues — hence his overall popularity. And one thing Rowe trumpets is respect for the value of hard work, no matter the job.

In this vein, a few months back conservative commentator Dennis Prager invited Rowe to give the commencement speech for his virtual university, Prager University. Rowe gladly obliged with a video entitled “Don’t Follow Your Passion,” which has been viewed over six million times. Suddenly, without prior warning, Rowe received a message from YouTube notifying him that his video for Prager U was “determined” to be “inappropriate.” Rowe explains that he was shocked at the news as he had not run afoul of YouTube’s appropriate content policies, or so he thought. Rowe said that he then reread YouTube’s policy fine print and found the following sentence: “Some videos don’t violate our policies, but may not be appropriate for all audiences. In these cases, our review team may place an age restriction when we’re notified of the content.” In other words, YouTube’s censors are essentially saying they will restrict you if they don’t like your message.

After Rowe posted his message to Facebook it didn’t take long for YouTube to reverse course and lift the restriction imposed upon his content. Fortunately for Rowe he has a big enough audience that he was able to effectively call out YouTube for hypocrisy, but what about the lesser-known user who finds himself victim of a similar prejudice?

Comment | Share

ESPN Suspension — Gotta Protect the Revenue

In a capitalist economic system, the cold hard truth is that every business is dependent upon consumers buying its product. Even that leftist mega sports network known as ESPN will put aside its leftist street cred when serious money is on the line. On Monday, ESPN announced that it had suspended Jemele Hill for two weeks following another inflammatory tweet from the anchor. In response to the news that Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones had instructed his players to stand for the National Anthem or be benched, Hill tweeted, “This play always work [sic]. Change happens when advertisers are impacted. If you feel strongly about JJ’s [Jerry Jones] statement, boycott his advertisers.”

Upon announcing Hill’s suspension ESPN released the following statement:

Jemele Hill has been suspended for two weeks for a second violation of our social media guidelines. She previously acknowledged letting her colleagues and company down with an impulsive tweet. In the aftermath, all employees were reminded of how individual tweets may reflect negatively on ESPN and that such actions would have consequences. Hence this decision.

Recall that Hill recently insultingly tweeted that Donald Trump was a “white supremacist” and “the most ignorant, offensive president” of her lifetime. At the time, ESPN only spoke with Hill but chose to take no further action. But an employee calling for a boycott of companies whose ad revenue not only supports the Dallas Cowboys but also ESPN hits just a little too close to home.

ESPN has no problem supporting NFL players’ right to protest, as if their First Amendment rights were at stake (which they are not), but when its own business is endangered by the free speech of an employee (and not even on company time) it sees no problem in administering discipline. Should NFL owners not be entitled to the same right?

So long as ESPN continues its leftist social “justice” crusade of infusing politically correct virtue signaling into all its sports coverage, it can only expect to see the further hemorrhaging of viewers and sports fans.

Comment | Share

Top Headlines

  • Democrats promise to derail Congress until Dream Act passes (The Washington Times)

  • At least 10 dead in Northern California fires and blocks of homes destroyed in Santa Rosa (The Sacramento Bee)

  • Majority of households paying ObamaCare penalty are low and middle-income (The Washington Free Beacon)

  • Trump says he will act on health care — with or without Congress (The Washington Times)

  • Obama’s presidential library will have everything but a library of his records — Most Transparent Library in History (Chicago Tribune)

  • Puerto Rico’s hurricane recovery just got even more expensive — DHS ends waiver of protectionist shipping law that drives up costs. (Reason)

  • Twitter blocks Marsha Blackburn’s pro-life campaign ad (National Review)

  • Google sponsors event honoring president of nation’s largest abortion provider (CNS News)

  • FBI cites black extremists as new domestic terrorist threat (Fox News)

  • Humor: American Heart Association sued for discrimination against trans fats (The Babylon Bee)

  • Policy: When it comes to cost of living, red states win (The Daily Signal)

  • Policy: A blow for ecofascists: Trump gets rid of Obama’s “Clean Power Plan” (Investor’s Business Daily)

For more of today’s news, visit Patriot Headline Report.

Comment | Share

Don’t Miss Patriot Humor

Check out Guns and Drugs.

If you’d like to receive Patriot Humor by email, update your subscription here.


Obama’s (Un)Clean Power Plan Up in Smoke

By Paul Albaugh

Donald Trump’s administration is poised to take down another regulation that was hailed by leftists as part of Barack Obama’s legacy. Obama’s Clean Power Plan (CPP) is the target this time, and when it is repealed in its entirety — and not replaced — it will be another huge win for America.

This isn’t just any regulation, either. Recall that the Clean Power Plan was Obama’s signature edict — a far-reaching effort to allegedly curb greenhouse gas emissions as part of his war against climate change. This plan directed every state to develop detailed plans to reduce CO2 emissions, primarily from coal-fired plants, with the intended outcome of cutting carbon pollution by one-third from 2005 levels by 2030.

Fortunately, the CPP never made it very far after 27 states vowed to go fight it, which ultimately led to the Supreme Court blocking its implementation. Unfortunately, with Trump’s EPA announcing repeal of the CPP, there will likely be more legal challenges ahead — this time from the Left.

Climate alarmists are of course outraged that Trump’s EPA would repeal Obama’s plan. David Doniger, a senior attorney for climate and clear air at the Natural Resources Defense Council, whined, “We had a Clean Power Plan. What we’re getting is a Dirty Power Plan.” And former EPA chief Gina McCarthy insisted that the CPP would have brought “major health benefits to families” and that premature deaths would have been reduced by 3,600 per year. It’s quite the double standard for leftists to worry about saving lives in the name of climate control when they simultaneously push for the unhampered premature deaths of preborn babies, isn’t it?

Aside from the CPP being a very bad deal for American consumers and the energy industry as a whole, Trump’s EPA in a statement had this to say: “The EPA proposes to determine that the CPP is not within Congress’s grant of authority to the agency under the governing statute. It is not in the interests of the EPA, or in accord with its mission of environmental protection consistent with the rule of law, to expend its resources along the path of implementing a rule, receiving and passing judgment on state plans, or promulgating federal plans in furtherance of a policy that is not within the bounds of our statutory authority.”

In other words, Scott Pruitt’s EPA determined that the CPP was unconstitutional. The CPP, if implemented, would have enabled the EPA to act outside of its legal limits. What a refreshing statement coming from one of the most burdensome agencies in the country.

The Clean Power Plan was nothing more than a massive power grab by the federal government over the energy industry, primarily coal. It would have imposed rules on all 50 states in violation of the separation of powers.

Aside from being an unconstitutional abuse of power, Obama’s Clean Power Play would also impose heavy economic burdens on consumers and would have resulted in many more job losses from the coal industry. The estimated cost of the plan was between $41 billion and $73 billion a year, and all it would have done was purportedly reduce the temperature by an estimated 0.02 degrees. Thus it’s certain that the cost of the CPP far outweighed the tenuous benefits. But again, the plan was always about power and control, not saving the planet.

Sure, Trump will be blasted by climate alarmists and their media cohorts. But remember, Trump was a businessman, and he, like most Americans, saw that the Clean Power Plan was not going to be good for America’s economy. Further, as Reason’s Ronald Bailey notes, “It [CPP] sounds like a big deal but it probably isn’t. With or without the CPP, a different force may be pushing the power sector to reduce emissions by nearly that much: low natural gas prices.”

Several energy studies have shown that even without the CPP, power sector emissions would drop as much as 26% below 2005 levels. That’s if renewable energy subsidies remain in place. Even better, the subsidies should be eliminated because the cost of renewable energy continues to fall, therefore out-competing conventional power production. Low natural gas prices combined with lower renewable energy costs mean less emissions in the future. So, what do leftists have to complain about?

They will of course go on the attack against Trump and accuse him of wanting to destroy the planet. But they will ignore the fact that Obama’s plan would have done far more harm than good. Trump’s EPA will allow more of the free market to dictate the outcome of energy use and emissions output instead of a top down, government-controlled approach. In the end, with Trump’s plan to repeal the CPP, America wins.

Comment | Share


For more of today’s memes, visit the Memesters Union.


  • The Fantasy of Gun Control — We don’t need yet another ineffective law. We need vigilant citizens and a vigorous defense of Liberty.


For more of today’s top cartoons, visit the Cartoons archive.


For more of today’s columns, visit Right Opinion.


Rich Lowry: “One by one, the artifacts of President Barack Obama’s rule by administrative fiat are tumbling. The latest is his signature Clean Power Plan that Environmental Protection Agency administrator Scott Pruitt says he will begin the arduous process of unwinding. … If Congress had authorized the EPA to remake the nation’s energy economy, we would presumably be aware of it and recall an impassioned congressional debate over this radical and costly change. In fact, the opposite is true. Congress has declined to enact laws limiting carbon emissions, including when Democrats held both houses of Congress under President Obama. If the future of the planet is at stake and it requires a generational effort to save it, surely it is not too much to ask that a statute or two be enacted by Congress explicitly committing the country to the task. Yes, this requires winning elections and gaining democratic assent, but such are the challenges of living in a republic and a nation of laws.”


Insight: “Those in power need checks and restraints lest they come to identify the common good for their own tastes and desires, and their continuation in office as essential to the preservation of the nation.” —Justice William O. Douglas (1898-1980)

Dezinformatsiya: “If you can’t convince [Rep. Steve Scalise], who has fresh gunshot wounds, to change his stance on [the Second Amendment], how hard is it to convince the rest of Congress?” —CNN’s Bill Weir

Alpha Jackass: “Scalise, the congressman that [sic] was shot, still says it enforced his belief in guns even more. It’s like, ‘F—k you, a—hole.’” —Chelsea Handler

Village Academic Curriculum: “When [Trump] got elected, I told my classes … some of us won’t be affected by this presidency, but others are going to die. Other people will die because of this. And we’ve seen this happen, right?” — University of Nevada, Las Vegas history professor Tessa Winkelmann

Non Compos Mentis: “These aren’t intelligence documents. It’s historical data. There’s nothing sensitive in there. There’s no troop movements. It was a historical record of everything that had happened in Iraq and Afghanistan.” —Bradley Manning

Friendly fire: “Silence from @HillaryClinton on @HarveyWeinstein is unacceptable. Clinton received hundreds of thousands from Weinstein in campaign & foundation $. If she stays silent she makes us all look like hypocrites.” —former MSNBC pundit Krystal Ball on Twitter

Braying Jenny: “You look at everything all over the world today and how women are dressing and what they are asking by just presenting themselves the way they do. What are they asking for? Trouble.” —Harvey Weinstein ally Donna Karan

Race bait: “White people do not get to tell black folks or anybody else what is acceptable form of protest.” —CNN’s Symone Sanders

Village Idiots: “ESPN’s suspension of Jemele Hill is an outrage and should NOT go unanswered. ESPN and advertisers will hear from us!” —Al Sharpton

And last… “Sharpton’s boycotting ESPN for suspending Jemele Hill who is boycotting ESPN ads because Jerry Jones is boycotting players who are boycotting the national anthem.” —Jon Gabriel

Comment | Share

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.