Elon Musk mocks Alyssa Milano and other celebrities melting down over new verification rules



Tech billionaire Elon Musk mocked celebrities like Alyssa Milano who issued dire warnings about the changes in identity verification on Twitter.

Milano asked on Thursday if she had any legal recourse to sue Musk over the policy change.

"So by revoking my blue check mark because I wouldn’t pay some arbitrary fee, someone can just be me and say a bunch of bulls***. Does that mean Twitter and @elonmusk are liable for defamation or identity theft or fraud?" asked Milano.

Many pointed out that Milano has more than 3 million followers on Twitter, and it is unlikely that anyone will be fooled by a fake account pretending to be her with far fewer followers.

Milano's plight was taken up by left-wing activist Ed Krassenstein on Friday.

"The attacks on Alyssa Milano are out of line. She brought up a concern I think a lot of celebrities have," Krassenstein tweeted.

"While you may not agree with Milano's take on this, she brings up choices that virtually every celebrity has to make," he added.

He went on to say that celebrities didn't want to pay the $8.00 a month charge to keep verification in order to take a principled stand against Elon Musk.

Musk responded with a joke.

We’ve started a “save-a-celebrity fund” to pay their $8. We take this matter very seriously.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 21, 2023

"We’ve started a 'save-a-celebrity fund' to pay their $8. We take this matter very seriously," he replied.

Krassenstein thought it was a good idea to have the public pay for celebrities' blue check marks in order to preserve their liberal principles.

"LOL! Actually I think this could be a solution, even though I'm not sure if you are serious." he responded.

\u201c@EdKrassen \ud83e\udd23\ud83e\udd23 It\u2019s a real thing\u201d
— Ed Krassenstein (@Ed Krassenstein) 1682077413

"It’s a real thing," Musk tweeted with two laughing emojis.

Other celebrities and online personalities have said they will leave Twitter completely because of the policy change.

Many on the the left have excoriated Musk and his defenders after he purchased the popular social media platform for $44 billion and promised to make the service more accountable to free speech principles.

Here's more about the verification meltdown:

A-list celebs, news orgs and White House say they won't pay for Twitter verification www.youtube.com

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Democrats don 'ABORTION' pins with heart-shaped cutouts



Democratic lawmakers are openly touting their pro-choice position by donning "ABORTION" pins.

Leftist Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts announced that he wore an "ABORTION" pin to President Joe Biden's State of the Union address on Tuesday — the lawmaker posted a photo of the pin, which spells out the word "ABORTION" and features a heart-shaped cut out in one of the letters.

"I'm wearing my abortion pin from @PPFA to tonight's State of the Union address. Abortion is essential healthcare and we need to codify this right," the Democrat tweeted.

\u201cI\u2019m wearing my abortion pin from @PPFA to tonight\u2019s State of the Union address. Abortion is essential healthcare and we need to codify this right.\u201d
— Ed Markey (@Ed Markey) 1675817800

The stunt elicited reactions of revulsion from many on social media, with Ben Shapiro calling the move "vile" and the House Judiciary GOP account labeling it "disgusting."

"What's disgusting is the GOP's obsession with controlling people’s bodies," Markey responded.

Others also commented on the senator's pro-abortion post.

"Democrat man wears pin showing his love of abortion, which violently ends human life in the mother's womb," Mollie Hemingway tweeted.

Circling the heart-shaped cutout in the pin, LifeNews.com noted, "Actually, abortion stops a beating heart."

"Love the cute little heart! WHOOPS! Next year why not just rebrand it as KILLKIDZ? And add a fun rainbow GROOMER pin!" Eric Metaxas sarcastically wrote.

"Nobody wears an American flag pin because they want patriotism to be safe, legal & rare," Dan McLaughlin tweeted.

In addition to wearing the pin, Markey said that he brought an "abortion rights activist" to the speech as his guest.

\u201c.@_KateDineen and I are ready to hear @POTUS give his SOTU address. With attacks on abortion rights in our courts and our states, it\u2019s never been more urgent to guarantee abortion access and codify this essential right. Thank you Kate for joining me and for sharing your story.\u201d
— Ed Markey (@Ed Markey) 1675819838

Democratic Rep. Madeleine Dean of Pennsylvania also posted a photo of herself sporting one of the pins. "I say the word, I wear the word. Abortion care is health care. Abortion care saves lives," Dean tweeted on Tuesday. She chose an "abortion patient advocate" as her State of the Union guest.

"Every abortion stops a beating heart. Pretty ghoulish to support violence in the womb," Hemingway pointed out in response to Dean's post.

\u201cI say the word, I wear the word.\n\nAbortion care is health care.\n\nAbortion care saves lives.\u201d
— Congresswoman Madeleine Dean (@Congresswoman Madeleine Dean) 1675802099

"Because the Republican agenda is to keep our union divided, then it must be through the pursuit of justice that we will heal and strengthen it—economic justice, climate justice, health justice, and racial justice. That is the commitment President Biden is delivering on, and the future that Democrats in Congress must continue to build," Markey said in a statement on Tuesday.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Angry Dem senator threatens Elon Musk after Musk savagely mocks him: 'Why does your pp have a mask!?'



Sen. Ed Markey threatened Elon Musk on Sunday after the world's richest man mocked the Massachusetts Democrat for complaining about Twitter impersonations.

After Musk took control of Twitter, he allowed users to get a blue verified checkmark if they subscribed to "Twitter Blue" for $8 per month. The service, however, was quickly abused, resulting in a wave of impersonations. Twitter has since suspended giving out the blue checkmarks.

What did Markey say?

Markey demanded answers from Musk about Twitter's verification process after the Democratic lawmaker colluded with a Washington Post writer to create a Twitter account impersonating him.

Considering all you needed was a credit card to purchase the blue checkmark, it worked. And Markey was upset.

In a letter, Markey demanded answers from Musk for the "haphazard imposition" of changes to Twitter because "[a]llowing an imposter to impersonate a U.S. Senator on Twitter is a serious matter that you need to address promptly." Of course, Markey failed to disclose in the letter that he gave the Washington Post writer permission to impersonate him.

Markey then drew attention to his complaint by going on Twitter to accuse Musk of "putting profits over people and his debt over stopping disinformation."

\u201cA @washingtonpost reporter was able to create a verified account impersonating me\u2014I\u2019m asking for answers from @elonmusk who is putting profits over people and his debt over stopping disinformation. Twitter must explain how this happened and how to prevent it from happening again.\u201d
— Ed Markey (@Ed Markey) 1668198109

How did Musk respond?

Musk responded to Markey on Sunday by accusing his official Twitter account of being a "parody" and mocked him for wearing a face mask in his profile picture.

"Perhaps it is because your real account sounds like a parody?" Musk mocked.

"And why does your pp have a mask!?" he said.

\u201c@SenMarkey @washingtonpost And why does your pp have a mask!?\u201d
— Ed Markey (@Ed Markey) 1668198109

What was Markey's response?

Markey threatened Musk, suggesting that Congress will "fix" his companies.

"One of your companies is under an FTC consent decree. Auto safety watchdog NHTSA is investigating another for killing people," Markey responded. "And you’re spending your time picking fights online.

"Fix your companies. Or Congress will," he threatened.

\u201cOne of your companies is under an FTC consent decree. Auto safety watchdog NHTSA is investigating another for killing people. And you\u2019re spending your time picking fights online. Fix your companies. Or Congress will.\u201d
— Ed Markey (@Ed Markey) 1668356216

Markey was referring to the possibility that Musk may have violated the consent agreement with the Federal Trade Commission. The FTC has not yet commented on the matter.

Meanwhile, the National Highway Safety Administration has been investigating Tesla over fatal crashes in which drivers used the car's automated driving capabilities.

Facing party mutiny, British Prime Minister Liz Truss calls it quits just 44 days in — will likely be shortest-serving leader in UK history



Liz Truss has announced her intention to resign as British prime minister after 44 days in office, setting a record for the shortest-serving prime minister in the history of the United Kingdom. The previous record-holder was George Canning, the Tory prime minister who died of tuberculosis after 119 days in office.

In recent weeks, Truss faced immense opposition from her own Conservative party, largely over her botched economic plan, which agitated the markets and resulted in the replacement of her treasury chief.

The internal tensions came to a head Wednesday night when a parliamentary vote concerning the future of fracking in the U.K. descended into chaos, exacerbated by claims that some Conservative members of Parliament had been forced to vote against the ban.

Yesterday's vote was reportedly originally regarded as a confidence motion. Some activists and MPs explicitly said it was an effort by some to "prop up a zombie prime minister."

Although Conservatives prevailed, defeating the ban (326 votes to 230), the session's poor handling proved a black eye for the party and its leader. One Conservative lawmaker, Charles Walker, denounced it as a "shambles and a disgrace."

Walker suggested that the people who put Liz Truss in office had done "extraordinary" damage to the Conservative Party.

Prior to making her Thursday announcement outside the prime minister's Downing Street residence, Truss notified King Charles of her intention to step down and spoke to Sir Graham Brady, chair of the 1922 Committee, about holding a leadership election "within the next week."

Brady has since stated that he spoke to the Conservative Party chairman and determined Tory members will be consulted by Friday next week on a possible new leader.

In her speech, Truss reflected upon the past two months, noting her government "delivered on energy bills and on cutting national insurance" and set "out a vision for a low tax high growth economy that would take advantage of the freedoms of Brexit."

Truss, who yesterday claimed to be "a fighter and not a quitter," noted that she had entered the role "at a time of great economic and international instability" and admitted she "cannot deliver the mandate on which I was elected by the Conservative party."

The outgoing prime minister also indicated she would "remain as Prime Minister until a successor has been chosen."

\u201cBREAKING: Liz Truss resigns after 44 days, making her the shortest PM in history, amid the collapse of her government due to gross economic mismanagement\u201d
— Jack Posobiec \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8 (@Jack Posobiec \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8) 1666270207

If a leadership election is held next week as she has indicated, Britain will have its second new leader since Boris Johnson resigned after a similar party mutiny in July.

The leftist opposition in Parliament seized upon the opportunity to demand a general election.

Sir Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrat Party, tweeted, "We don't need another Conservative Prime Minister lurching from crisis to crisis. We need a General Election now and the Conservatives out of power."

\u201cWe don't need another Conservative Prime Minister lurching from crisis to crisis.\n\nWe need a General Election now and the Conservatives out of power.\u201d
— Ed Davey (@Ed Davey) 1666269375

Keir Starmer, leader of the Labour Party, similarly called for a general election, only prior to Truss' announcement.

\u201cBritain can\u2019t afford the Tories\u2019 chaos. \n\nMy Labour government will provide the stability and leadership needed. \n\nFor our economy. For growth. For working people. \n\nGeneral Election, now.\u201d
— Keir Starmer (@Keir Starmer) 1666258857

After the announcement, Starmer issued a statement, saying, "The Tories cannot respond to their latest shambles by yet again simply clicking their fingers and shuffling the people at the top without the consent of the British people. They do not have a mandate to put the country through yet another experiment; Britain is not their personal fiefdom to run how they wish."

Nicola Sturgeon, the first minister of Scotland, joined in on the call for an election.

\u201cThere are no words to describe this utter shambles adequately. It\u2019s beyond hyperbole - & parody. \nReality tho is that ordinary people are paying the price. \nThe interests of the Tory party should concern no-one right now. \nA General Election is now a democratic imperative.\u201d
— Nicola Sturgeon (@Nicola Sturgeon) 1666269910

On October 14, the Daily Star started a YouTube livestream pitting a head of lettuce against Truss' tenure.

\u201cA British newspaper has started a live stream on YouTube of Liz Truss\u2019s photo next to a lettuce to see which one lasts longer. I do love this country\u2019s sense of humo(u)r.\u201d
— Brian Klaas (@Brian Klaas) 1665754297

The channel is now in celebration mode.

LIVE: Can Liz Truss outlast a lettuce? youtu.be

Texas dad shoots two teens as they try to enter his family's car — which is carrying two infants in rear seat



A Texas dad shot two teenagers who tried to enter his family's car in northwest Harris County while two infants were in the rear seat, KTRK-TV reported.

What are the details?

Investigators said the family had just pulled up to their home in the 6800 block of Feather Creek Drive when a pair of 16-year-old males tried to enter the car through the rear doors, deputies told the station.

Sheriff Ed Gonzalez tweeted that the suspects opened one of the vehicle's rear doors.

But the dad fired multiple times at the suspects from inside the car while his wife drove away, KTRK said.

Security video from a nearby home recorded the incident, the station said, adding that one teen suspect was seen running away while the other was on the ground.

Everything unfolded just after midnight Monday, KHOU-TV reported.

Deputies said the suspects sustained gunshot wounds and were taken to a hospital in private vehicles, KTRK reported.

Gonzalez told the station that both teen suspects are stable and in fair condition.

KTRK said it spoke with the family, who said they were doing OK but didn't want to go on camera.

Video from the scene shows a bullet hole in the car's side, stemming from the shot the father took through his car's back window.

\u201cLast night, just after midnight, @HCSOTexas units responded to the 6800 blk of Feather Creek Dr in reference to a shooting. Preliminary: an adult male, his wife, and two infants arrived home. Two males, walked up to their SUV, and opened a rear door where their 1-yr-old was 1/3\u201d
— Ed Gonzalez (@Ed Gonzalez) 1657545423

Investigators spent time looking for video and additional evidence, KTRK said.

</iframe</div><p><br></p>

Multiple media outlets and fact-checkers falsely claim that Clarence Thomas repeated a 'debunked' COVID-19 vaccine claim



Headlines at multiple news outlets misled readers on Thursday by claiming that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas repeated a "debunked" claim about COVID-19 vaccines in a dissenting opinion.

At least three mainstream news organizations falsely stated that Thomas claimed COVID-19 vaccines contain the cells of aborted babies in an opinion dissenting from the Supreme Court's refusal to take up a religious liberty case challenging New York's COVID-19 vaccine mandate launched by 16 health care workers.

"Clarence Thomas claimed in a dissenting opinion that Covid vaccines are derived from the cells of 'aborted children,'" Politico tweeted Thursday, sharing an article with the headline, "Clarence Thomas suggests Covid vaccines are developed using cells of ‘aborted children.’"

\u201cClarence Thomas claimed in a dissenting opinion that Covid vaccines are derived from the cells of \u201caborted children.\u201d\n\nNo Covid vaccines in the U.S. contain the cells of aborted fetuses. \nhttps://t.co/13YartfO5Z\u201d
— POLITICO (@POLITICO) 1656612160

Similar headlines appeared at Axios and at NBC News, and the misleading claim was spread by Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler and others.

\u201cClarence Thomas suggests COVID vaccines are made with "aborted children" https://t.co/hHHG33qtQb\u201d
— Axios (@Axios) 1656623997
\u201cJustice Thomas cites debunked claim that Covid vaccines are made with cells from 'aborted children' https://t.co/o4lB6oRioa via @nbcnews\u201d
— Adam Edelman (@Adam Edelman) 1656608422
\u201cIt's good the fact checkers are on top of this... oh\u201d
— Stephen L. Miller (@Stephen L. Miller) 1656678922

These headlines are wrong. Thomas was not making a claim about the COVID-19 vaccines. He was quoting the petitioners' stated beliefs about how taking the vaccine would violate their religious conscience.

In 2021, a group of anonymous health care workers sued New York, arguing that the state's vaccine mandate violated their religious conscience rights. The state requires that all health care workers show proof of vaccination to continue in their employment.

“They object on religious grounds to all available COVID–19 vaccines because they were developed using cell lines derived from aborted children,” Thomas wrote in a dissenting opinion after the Supreme Court declined to hear the case.

Although Thomas was clearly citing the argument of the petitioners, reporters asserted he was himself claiming that COVID-19 vaccines contain cells from aborted children.

\u201cThomas dissenting opinion on the left. \u201cThey object\u201d\u2026\n\nAnd on the right is from the petition of cert he is citing. \n\nHe is literally quoting the argument of the petitioners, not making one himself or even agreeing with it.\u201d
— AG (@AG) 1656625852

Paradoxically, the facts in some of these reports support what Thomas wrote even though the sensational headlines suggest he was wrong.

In Politico's article, for example, breaking news reporter Kelly Hooper writes, "None of the Covid-19 vaccines in the United States contain the cells of aborted fetuses. Cells obtained from elective abortions decades ago were used in testing during the Covid vaccine development process, a practice that is common in vaccine testing — including for the rubella and chickenpox vaccinations." (Emphasis added.)

If it's the case that cell lines obtained from abortions decades ago were used in vaccine testing, then the petitioner's assertion that the vaccines "were developed using cell lines derived from aborted children," which Thomas quoted, is a factual statement.

Ed Whelan, a senior fellow with the Ethics and Public Policy Center, observed that NBC News twisted Thomas' words to make it look like he was repeating a debunked claim, then later appeared to agree with what the justice actually wrote.

\u201cQuite a weird article by @abedelman @ariabendix. Claims at top that Justice Thomas said covid vaccines "are made with *cells from* 'aborted children.'" But he said they were "developed using *cell lines derived* from aborted children." Not same--and authors agree with latter! 1/\u201d
— Ed Whelan (@Ed Whelan) 1656621698

"Perhaps authors are claiming that Thomas's phrasing somehow means that the cell lines used now must have been immediately, rather than ultimately, derived from aborted children. But that's a bad-faith reading of what he wrote," Whelan said.

Clarence Thomas' dissenting opinion quoted the arguments made by petitioners to the Supreme Court for a case concerning whether New York's vaccine mandate violated religious liberty rights. He did not advance a claim for himself that COVID-19 vaccines were made using cells from "aborted children."

Headlines suggesting that he did are false.

Democrat senator calls for new laws to 'promote algorithmic justice' over the 'dangerous' influence of Elon Musk and other billionaires



Democrat U.S. Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts called for new laws to "promote algorithmic justice" after Elon Musk bought Twitter and promised to support free speech on the social media platform.

"Elon Musk and a handful of billionaires now have dangerous influence over the most powerful online platforms. They can't be trusted, and self-regulation has failed," tweeted Markey.

Elon Musk and a handful of billionaires now have dangerous influence over the most powerful online platforms. They can't be trusted, and self-regulation has failed. We must pass laws to protect privacy and promote algorithmic justice for internet users, especially for kids.
— Ed Markey (@Ed Markey) 1650992433

"We must pass laws to protect privacy and promote algorithmic justice for internet users, especially for kids," he added.

The phrase "algorithmic justice" refers to bias that enters into digital platforms because of implicit assumptions in the creators that discriminate against minorities and women. Some lawmakers have already called for laws that would hold tech companies responsible for disparities from algorithmic bias.

Critics of the senator mocked the use of the phrase.

"Laws to 'promote algorithmic justice' for the sake of the children. It’s like a parody but from an actual senator," responded Justin Amash the former member of Congress.

"Washington currently has dangerous influence over the most powerful online platforms. And Washington most certainly can't be trusted. So we should be very worried when they promise to pass laws, especially in the name of 'algorithmic justice,'" replied Kimberley Strassel.

"Democrats take any topic, add a few buzzwords, and act like they’ve created a new civil rights movement," said another critic.

"What is algorithmic justice? This nonsensical term is right up there with tree equity. Also where was this vitriol when ever the opposing side was getting silenced through the algorithm?" read another popular response.

Others used the occasion to make fun of Markey.

"Algorithmic Justice, Tuesdays on CBS," joked Josh Barro.

"'Algorithmic justice' is a lesson to all you activists and matchstick men that politicians will say whatever ridiculous shit you come up with. Can't be too far out. Just go nuts. Really explore the space," read another popular response.

Here's more about the Musk Twitter takeover:

Left Can't Handle FREE SPEECH After Elon Musk Buys Twitter | The News & Why It Matters | 4/25/22www.youtube.com

States that locked down receive failing grades for COVID pandemic outcomes: Study



Two years ago, the arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States led governments at the federal, state, and local levels to adopt unprecedented restrictions and extraordinary economic interventions in the name of public health. Lock downs, social distancing requirements, and quarantine policies kept customers at home, shuttered businesses, interrupted schools, and put the economy on pause at great cost to mitigate the spread of the virus.

But was the cost worth it? A new comprehensive study seeks to answer that question by comparing health, economic, and educational outcomes in each state.

In the United States, there was never a top-down COVID-19 policy from Washington, D.C. Under the Constitution's federalist system, all 50 sovereign states were left to develop their own COVID-19 mitigation strategies. While most followed guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, others did not, with varying results.

The National Bureau of Economic Research published a working paper by three economists who wanted to examine how pandemic health, economy, and policy differed across all 50 states and the District of Columbia, and what the outcomes were for those states. The study considered health outcomes, economic performance throughout the pandemic, and the impact on education, assigning each state a letter grade based on these factors.

The study was authored by University of Chicago economist Casey Mulligan, the Heritage Foundation's Stephen Moore, and Committee to Unleash Prosperity President Phil Kerpen.

For economic performance, the researchers examined unemployment and GDP by state, adjusting for differences in the industry composition of each state. The impact on schooling was measured by how many students received in-person instruction for the 2020-2021 school year. And COVID-19 mortality was calculated by considering COVID-associated deaths reported to the CDC and all-cause excess mortality.

Though in the early months of the pandemic lockdowns were described as the best and most moral policy, the study found there was little correlation between health and economy scores, suggesting that "states that withdrew the most from economic activity did not significantly improve health by doing so."

The study also found "[p]andemic mortality was greater in states where obesity, diabetes, and old age were more prevalent before the pandemic." States' economies that had strong food and service industries were generally hit harder by social distancing and lock downs, but there were variations because of differences in policy.

New Jersey, New York, and California — which each imposed some of the toughest pandemic restrictions in the nation — had among the worst combined scores for mortality, economy, and schooling. Utah, Nebraska, and Vermont were among the best scoring states.

Utah had the fourth best score on the economy, the fifth best in education, and was eighth in COVID-19 mortality, a measure that was adjusted for each state population's age and rates of obesity and diabetes, which were the most common comorbidities for COVID-19 deaths.

From a working paper published by National Bureau of Economic Research discussed in story in WSJ. Notice on metrics of study (which included age adjusted mortality rate) Montana is 4th in nation for best outcomes dealing with Covid #mtpolpic.twitter.com/Ra3ynaV18g
— Jeff Essmann (@Jeff Essmann) 1649648540

The 10 best-scoring states were all smaller states by population, with the notable exception of Florida, which ranked sixth overall. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) famously refused to order his state to lock down and was among the first governors to reopen schools, leading to accusations that he was endangering public health by reopening too early.

But in terms of outcomes, Florida ranked 28th in COVID-19 mortality, just under California, a state with draconian COVID-19 policies, which ranked 27th. Since Florida strove to open schools it came in third for education while California came in 50th place, and Florida's open economy ranked 13th while California's lock downs guaranteed it 40th place.

The 10 worst-scoring states were uniformly states with severe COVID-19 mitigation policies. New York, where disgraced former Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) became a media celebrity for his purported pandemic success story, ranked 49th overall. New Jersey, where Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy claims to have led "a comprehensive, responsible, and public health-focused response," came in last place with failing scores across the board.

NBER study found NJ\u2019s Covid response ranks last with a mis\u00ader\u00adable per\u00adfor\u00admance across the board. @GovMurphy didn\u2019t save lives, but he did sav\u00adage the econ\u00adomy and pun\u00adish stu\u00addents as he fol\u00adlowed the teach\u00aders union de\u00admands on school clo\u00adsures to rank 41st on ed\u00adu\u00adca\u00adtion!pic.twitter.com/Z7OJLszk9Z
— Ed Miller\ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8 (@Ed Miller\ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8) 1649692939

In the final analysis, states that locked down their economies and kept children from going to school did not achieve significantly better health outcomes than the states that reopened and stayed open.

WaPost slides offensive remark against Clarence Thomas into 'news' report: 'Why don't they just call him an Uncle Tom?'



A Washington Post report on a top Democratic lawmaker's influence over President Joe Biden's next Supreme Court nominee denigrated Justice Clarence Thomas, the court's only black justice, with a racially charged reference.

The Post referred to Thomas as "the Black justice whose rulings often resemble the thinking of White conservatives," dismissing all of his personal convictions and legal philosophy as merely co-opted from white people.

The report, authored by White House reporter Cleve Wootson Jr. and congressional reporter Marianna Sotomayor, covers House Majority Whip Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) and his advocacy for U.S. District Judge J. Michelle Childs to be Biden's nominee to replace retiring Justice Stephen Breyer on the Supreme Court. Childs, a federal judge from South Carolina, is feared by some progressives to be one of the more moderate of Biden's possible nominees.

The derogatory reference to Thomas — the only reference in the lengthy article — comes after a quote from Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), a friend and ally of Clyburn's who assured the Washington Post that no one believes a judicial nominee supported by Clyburn would turn out to be a secret conservative on the court.

“Nobody that I’m aware of feels that opposing Clyburn’s nomination would be the wise thing to do,” Thompson told the Post. "If you know that a person has been vetted by Jim Clyburn, you know that person won’t go to the court and end up being a Clarence Thomas."

The Post explained that Thompson was "referring to the Black justice whose rulings often resemble the thinking of White conservatives."

That offensive description of Thomas was wholly an invention of the reporters. Thompson said no such thing, nor did he even imply that by his remarks, although he has previously called Thomas an "Uncle Tom."

Some commentators accused the Washington Post of doing the same thing in spirit.

"Why don't they just call him an Uncle Tom?" commented Jeff Jacoby, an op-ed columnist with the Boston Globe who criticized the Post article on Twitter.

This is journalism? Reporters @CleveWootson and @MariannaReports snidely identify Clarence Thomas \u2014 in a news story \u2014 as "the Black justice whose rulings often resemble the thinking of White conservatives." Why don't they just call him an Uncle Tom?\nhttps://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/16/clyburn-supreme-court/\u00a0\u2026pic.twitter.com/8psN128xJk
— Jeff Jacoby (@Jeff Jacoby) 1645070945

Other conservatives piled on the Post, including Sen. Mike Lee (Utah).

Leftists at the Washington Post are trying to bully Justice Clarence Thomas again. When will they learn this doesn\u2019t work? He\u2019s his own man. His commitment to the Constitution and his judicial independence drive the left mad. He is a treasure to our nation.pic.twitter.com/HM8bM0BSLk
— Mike Lee (@Mike Lee) 1645118023

"This bon mot in a reported analysis about Rep. James Clyburn’s credibility doesn’t even qualify as a dog whistle. It’s as subtle as an air horn," said Ed Morrissey, senior editor for Hot Air.

This bon mot in a reported analysis about Rep. James Clyburn\u2019s credibility doesn\u2019t even qualify as a dog whistle. It\u2019s as subtle as an air horn. Via @Jeff_Jacoby. \n\nWaPo: Clarence Thomas' "rulings often resemble the thinking of White conservatives"https://hotair.com/ed-morrissey/2022/02/17/wapo-clarence-thomas-rulings-often-resemble-the-thinking-of-white-conservatives-n449188\u00a0\u2026
— Ed Morrissey (@Ed Morrissey) 1645104704

"What is it about Clarence Thomas that brings out liberals’ inner racist?" asked Tom Elliott, the founder of Grabien.

"Just a little casual racism in the news section of the Washington Post," said John Daniel Davidson, senior editor of the Federalist.

Oh nothing, just a little casual racism in the news section of the Washington Post.https://twitter.com/fedjudges/status/1494129276710375424\u00a0\u2026
— John Daniel Davidson (@John Daniel Davidson) 1645109667

‘The View’ co-hosts reportedly frustrated that they can’t find a permanent Republican to join the show and quietly take their abuse



The liberal co-hosts of ABC's "The View" — who have been accused of incessantly bullying past conservative co-hosts and guests — are reportedly frustrated over the fact that they can't find a permanent replacement for former Republican host Meghan McCain.

What are the details?

According to Politico, before heading off on holiday break, the show's three long-standing co-hosts — Joy Behar, Whoopi Goldberg, and Sunny Hostin — told executive producer Brian Teta that they're tired of the rotating cast of Republican guest hosts since McCain's exit.

McCain quit the daytime talk show in August, later slamming the show's "f***ed up" culture and recounting that she suffered constant abuse from her fellow co-hosts both on- and off-camera. Her departure after four years on the show left producers scrambling for a replacement.

Over the next several months, producers brought in a variety of conservative fill-ins, including Alyssa Farah, S.E. Cupp, Condoleezza Rice, and Carly Fiorina. But so far, none have remained, and now the liberal co-hosts are reportedly upset.

"Nearly six months in, the show has yet to settle on a permanent replacement. And now, the longtime co-hosts ... are upping the pressure to pick a successor, and voicing their displeasure at having to introduce new guest hosts week after week in a seemingly endless process that they find disruptive to the flow of the show," Politico reported.

It's not too outlandish a take to assume that McCain's accusations resonated as a warning sign to prospective replacements about what kind of treatment they ought to expect should they choose to join the show.

Moreover, McCain is far from the only Republican cast member to lodge complaints about abusive behavior. Past co-hosts, including Elisabeth Hasselbeck, Nicolle Wallace, and Candace Cameron Bure have also expressed similar sentiments about their time on "The View."

Even so, Behar, Goldberg, and Hostin seem befuddled as to why Republican women may be hesitant to join their gang.

The news prompted one commenter on social media to darkly quip, "Husband with history of beating past 8 wives struggles to find 9th."

What else?

On top of that, Politico added that another major source of the show's struggles to find a replacement stems from its incredibly specific criteria for a permanent Republican cast member. Citing anonymous sources, Politico reports the show will not consider anyone who denies the 2020 election results, supports the January 6 riots, or may be too close to MAGA Republicans, but any right-leaning co-host must also appeal to mainstream Republican viewers, including those who support Donald Trump.

Executives are said to be looking for a conservative woman who is willing "to fight — but not too hard, because they don’t want it to be ugly and bickering," per a former show staffer, Politico reports.

The Daily Wire summarized the criteria by saying the show "apparently wants to find a very niche, moderately conservative woman who won’t fight that hard and one who doesn’t support former President Trump or the base of the party."

Anything else?

Commenters on social media mocked the show's struggles Monday.

Newsbusters vice president Dan Gainor blasted the show's cast and staff as "anti-conservative lunatics."

That's because the people who run @theview are anti-conservative lunatics. | \u2018The View\u2019 to Fill Meghan McCain\u2019s Seat With Rotating Conservative Guest Hostshttps://www.thewrap.com/the-view-to-fill-meghan-mccains-seat-with-rotating-conservative-guest-hosts/\u00a0\u2026
— Dan Gainor (@Dan Gainor) 1640616733

Fox News contributor Karol Markowicz said, "Oh, please. Just admit you want a show of liberals for liberals. It would be best for all of us if people could just be truthful."

Oh, please. Just admit you want a show of liberals for liberals. It would be best for all of us if people could just be truthful.https://twitter.com/tripgabriel/status/1475479728031248401\u00a0\u2026
— Karol Markowicz (@Karol Markowicz) 1640624418

Hot Air's Ed Morrissey novelly suggested the show introduce actual parity by installing two Republican co-hosts.

"Maybe they should have *two*, which might make the cast more stable and also more balanced. Turning one woman into an isolated piñata certainly doesn't work for recruitment," he tweeted.

Maybe they should have *two*, which might make the cast more stable and also more balanced. Turning one woman into an isolated pi\u00f1ata certainly doesn't work for recruitment.https://twitter.com/tarapalmeri/status/1475478877082464261\u00a0\u2026
— Ed Morrissey (@Ed Morrissey) 1640619769