National Review’s Decline Continues With Jonah Goldberg’s Lazy, Dishonest Censorship Screed

If it’s a day ending in Y, odds are that Jonah Goldberg is lying about something or someone.

The latest example is his May 10 G-File at National Review, which discusses the latest round of right-wing personalities to be banned from Facebook as “dangerous individuals.” As has become Goldberg’s trademark over the last three years or so, it’s high on condescension and low on familiarity with the actual facts and arguments in dispute.

We’ve never been in this kind of situation before and that should cause thoughtful people to have a little humility before setting their hair on fire about the obvious injustice of denying, say, Laura Loomer the “right” to spread bigoted lies and conspiracy theories about staged mass shootings on a privately owned platform. And I think it’s deeply revealing that so many people can muster blind rage for the “silencing” of people like Loomer and Milo what’s-his-name but can’t rouse themselves to criticize any of the stuff these people did or said that got them in hot water in the first place. Most of the same people wrapping themselves in the First Amendment for Milo cheer every time the president talks about opening up the libel laws and taking away broadcast licenses. So forgive me for not seeing them as champions of principle here.

First, an aside: there are few more grating examples of SwampCon mindlessness than their hysteria about “opening up the libel laws.” Apparently Jonah forgot that Roger Kimball set him straight on this very point in January.

Anyway, I’m perfectly willing to criticize Milo, Loomer, Jones, Watson, and Nehlen. Their banning troubles plenty of mainstream conservatives who are clearly against cranks, like Ben Shapiro. So fixating on the dubious company kept by some Facebook critics won’t work as a shortcut around the “debate” part of the debate.

But to hear Goldberg tell it, the issue is just a bunch of people who “believe they have an unalienable right to have their jackassery boosted over someone else’s microphone,” whining that “any consequences for our own asininity are definitionally unjust.” As long as you don’t “lie,” “be a jerk,” or “encourage bigotry and thuggery,” he suggests, you should be fine. Continue reading

New at Live Action: OH “Censorship Zone” Bill Threatens Pro-Life Speech

Our friends at Created Equal are sounding the alarm on H.B. 408, a bill proposed in Ohio they warn would essentially create “censorship zones” around abortion facilities, threatening legal penalties against any pro-lifer who dares to exercise his or her First Amendment right to protest abortion.

The legislation provides that “Any employee of a health care facility who is subjected to harassment or intimidation may commence a civil action for” not only reasonable grievances such as physical injury or property damage (which are already illegal), but also “harassment,” which the bill defines as:

[A] knowing and willful course of conduct that is directed at one or more employees of a health care facility, that would cause a reasonable person to be seriously alarmed, annoyed, or harassed, that in fact seriously alarms, annoys, or harasses the employee or employees, and that serves no legitimate purpose.

Any pro-lifer who runs afoul of the statute within fifteen feet of the property would be “liable to the plaintiff for damages in the amount of five thousand dollars.”

Read the rest at Live Action News.