“Well-Regulated” Media (Not)

The progressive left, in its never-ending desire to enslave ordinary Americans, have deliberately misinterpreted the Second Amendment.  They caterwaul about how it refers to a “well-regulated militia” but avoid consulting The Federalist Papers or the personal writings of the Founding Fathers to see if their assumptions are correct.  Understanding the intent is critical if you want to know the spirit behind it.  (Long story short:  those guys make the NRA look like pikers.) 

It’s not just sloppy journalism that makes them want to look the other way:  What WE don’t know can’t hurt THEM.   

OK, two can play this game.  How about well-regulated media?

For several months now, the lovely publisher of this blog and I have had an interesting discussion about the limits of freedom of speech.  Not only as it pertains to our blog (of which you are a part) but to the concept of liberalism in general.   I’m talking about liberalism as it is classically understood, i.e. in the Jeffersonian sense.

Our default position is the absolutist one:  as long as the speech is not defamatory, inflammatory, libelous, or slanderous, we say, “Bring it.”  But you can’t call someone a . . . if you know or suspect it’s not true.  Oh sure, you can think he’s a “. . .” and it probably would do him some good to hear it, but it would be like labeling an IV solution sodium chloride when it’s really dextrose.  They look the same but dextrose is extremely harmful to patients who are severely dehydrated, anuric, or in hepatic coma.

Just because you can get away with it does not make it acceptable but that is what journalists do these days; forcing us to find alternate news sources who hosts appear on screen in t-shirts and flip flops.     

In other words, good journalists should be careful with their words and be prepared to back up what we’re saying.  It’s fine to be wrong once in a while, but it is not fine to be wrong on purpose.     

As a professional, myself, who must abide by certain strictures in the performance of my field, I am beginning to see congruence between said field and the profession of responsible journalism (or lack thereof).  

That goes for other professionals, as well:  physicians, lawyers, accountants, business executives, even dog-catchers all have one thing in common: they have to abide by the rules and regulations that govern them. 

So why not journalists?  What makes them so special?  Why should they have near-absolute immunity from what they say when their intent is to deceive?  No more is it about the 5Ws; it’s now about “How do I spin this?”  Opinion pieces pass for journalism.  Favorable opinions benefit “favorable people” by shaping the world into something more favorable than it is.

This sort of thing doesn’t happen that often in other professions.  There are consequences for what we do.  Think about it: a doctor who prescribes unnecessary surgeries can be called a quack.  Lawyers who chase ambulances and pursue negligible torts are called shysters.  Pharmacists who knowingly fill fraudulent prescriptions are called pill-pushers.  As a result, each of these professionals can be hauled before their respective boards and be called into account.  If their malpractice is sufficiently odious, they can be subject to criminal proceedings, as well.    

Why?  Because these are examples of fraud (or worse).  They do real damage to real people.  Then society, itself, is hurt which is why we have laws to govern professionals. 

Journalists should not be immune from their own malpractice.  In comparison to other professionals, they do far more damage to far more people.  

Don’t believe me?  How about WMD?  Remember those days?  That outright lie caused our nation to invade a sovereign country where we “shocked and awed” them to death in a heap of rubble that we’ve spent the last 18 years trying to clean up.  Then there is Afghanistan.  We spent decades trying to soldier up the people in the poppy fields only to lose in the most bizarre way possible.  We just Motel 6 the Taliban and told them “We’ll leave the light on for you.”     

Then there is global warming, which has caused untold misery thanks to the unemployment caused by the closing of hundreds of factories and counting.  With the Mueller investigation, we wasted $40 million on an obvious hoax and hobbled an entire administration for no reason at all.  We even impeached a president on a lie, unnecessarily dividing our nation. 

And now COVID.  Australia has become a cautionary tale.  No one wants to wind up in a giant penal colony.  How much misinformation about this virus has been bandied about over the last 18 months is incalculable.  American schools, businesses, even churches, have been shut down, depriving untold millions of people of their First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights, to say nothing of people’s livelihoods.

Because of COVID, real people have lost real liberties and all because a disinformation campaign aided and abetted the mainstream media.  

And please don’t tell me that we have something called “free speech”.  We don’t.  Just try saying the words Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine, Eric Ciamarella, etc, on Youtube, Facebook, or in any other media outlet.  You can’t.  They won’t let you.  If this isn’t censorship, nothing is.  

You want another example?  How about the recent Rolling Stone story which alleged that us poor rednecks in Oklahoma were so scared of getting the plague that we started overdosing on “horse paste”, clogging up the emergency room at the local hospitals.  According to RS, things were so bad that “victims of gunshot wounds were not able to be treated”.  

This is a lie on so many levels.  Unfortunately, it was believed by all the “right people”.  It’s an example of something called “informational flooding”.  Flat-out lies; worse, threadbare propaganda in that it went after three different groups of people and ideas.  To wit:  a Red State (Oklahoma); Trump voters (gun owners); and hundreds of rural residents who were so desperately sick from COVID that they were reduced to overdosing on horse paste. 

MAGA country, its denizens, and their folkways all tied up in a pretty ribbon to make it easy for the readers of The Atlantic and The New York Times to digest.  No better way to keep liberals in their imaginary bubble.  Tribal politics at its best if you ask me. 

In case you were wondering, Ivermectin in its veterinary form is a de-wormer.  Otherwise it is a safe and effective human-grade pharmaceutical which has been used in humans for decades.  

OK, since you asked me, I’ll bite:  why is Ivermectin receiving the Hydroxychloroquine + Zpak treatment?  Is it because all three of these drugs are ineffective?  Or is it because they’re available generically, thereby depriving Big Pharma of big bucks?  

However, if they told the truth they’d run the risk of dampining the terror they instilled around the world by the mere mention of COVID and it’s “dangerous” varients.  The last thing they’d want is introduce cheap, effective drugs into the equation.  

Unfortunately for the “official media”, however, not one syllable of the Rolling Stone story is true.  Not one.  It was handily dismissed within 36 hours of publication.  You can read the details for yourself right here:  https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/rolling-stone-horse-dewormer-hit-piece-debunked-after-hospital-says-no-ivermectin.

So, what’s sauce for the goose is good for the gander.  Let’s hold journalists and newspapers up to the same standards as we do physicians, pharmacists, lawyers, butchers, bakers, and candle-stick makers.  These practitioners have to abide by certain ethical standards which are spelled out in black and white.  Transgressors are in danger of suspension of their licenses, thereby putting their livelihood at risk for a change.

Let’s do the same for the vaunted “Fourth Estate”.  They ain’t holy.  And they do far worse damage to our nation than some quack or shyster. 

So how exactly could we regulate the Fourth Estate?  With local state boards of journalism, that’s how.  Let’s try these on for size:

Journalists should answer to state boards and abide by abide by a code of ethics.  They should also have to take a prescribed number of hours of yearly continuing education.

All stories have to be vetted by a journal’s ombudsman.  Any story with too many adjectives and adverbs would be struck down and sent for a re-write.  

If the nature of the story requires public anonymity, the sources should be made known to the ombudsman.

Stories which promulgate frivolous charges against public officials should be spiked and their purveyors should have their credentials yanked.

Named individuals should be allowed a chance to challenge the story and/or seek legal damages.  (That should make the lawyers happy.)

How’s that for a start?  Proper journalism is strictly a matter of four criteria:  who, what, when, and where.  Not why, unless they’re prepared to support their opinions with facts.  

                                                                     * * *

Getting back to the RS, yes, all they had to do was call the Sequoyah County sheriff’s department and ask them how many people had gunshot wounds in that county and then call the Sallisaw regional hospital to ask if the emergency room doctor’s claim that they were turning away people because they were overdosing on Ivermectin was correct.

In case you were wondering, the answer to the first question is 1 person had had a gunshot wound for the first eight months of the calendar year 2021.  (For which he was treated and released.)   

The answer to the second question is that the doctor whom they quoted hadn’t been on staff at the Sallisaw emergency room for the past 2 months.  Interestingly, the same time period in which people with gunshot wounds were allegedly dying in the streets of rural Oklahoma because the local emergency room was clogged with people who had ingested too much horse paste. 

It kind of makes you wonder if the RS reporter actually even talked to the doctor in question.  I’m gonna say “no”.  


About GShep


  1. New York Times v. Sullivan

    That’s what brought us to this point. If you report about a public personality on a matter of public interest, in order to be sued for defamation a plaintiff must prove that you actually knew or had to have reason to have known that you were printing a lie. In normal cases it’s called scienter (which in Latin means “knowingly”), but SCOTUS gave it a fancy name in Sullivan: “actual malice”.

    It set the bar of proof so high that the press practically has a license/shield to print propaganda. Overturning it would be a good start.

    • George Michalopulos says


    • New York Times v. Sullivan is what makes Monomakhos possible, since the bread and butter of this blog is attacking bishops who are “public persons” where Gail and George can credibly claim to not have known the full details but merely to have been “asking questions”. Careful you don’t take the saw to the branch you’re sitting on.

      • Gail Sheppard says

        We don’t attack our bishops.

        The bread and butter of this blog are our readers who recognize and appreciate the hard work we put into our stories. We very rarely get something wrong, but when we do, we acknowledge it and change it.

        Our commitment to speaking the truth has served us well.

      • George and Gail might print facts or they might print opinion or a mix of both. What they do not do is print falsehoods and I dare say they never knowingly print falsehoods.

        It is not publishers like Monomakhos who have anything to fear by striking down Sullivan, it is publishers like the one in the original case, the New York Times, who knowingly print lies for political purposes. Proving that they know they are lying is very difficult and must be based on what you already have access to, not any fishing you can do in discovery.

        Actually, they have gotten so brazen that that is increasingly the case that plaintiffs can show that the NYT, CNN, etc. knew they were lying in a story given their own prior reporting that is of public record.

  2. “progressive left, in its never-ending desire to enslave ordinary Americans”

    Regressive right is also doing good job. Transferring wealth to 1%, reaching world records in prison industry, introducing laws like Patriot Act, waging wars in countless countries, etc …

    • “Regressive right is also doing good job. Transferring wealth to 1%, reaching world records in prison industry, introducing laws like Patriot Act, waging wars in countless countries, etc”

      G. W. Bush just compared the current/mainstream Right to the terrorists that he passed the Patriot Act for. You’re either with the Satanists, Chinese Communism, lockdowns and the greatest transfer of wealth to the rich ever, anti-science national child abuse with religious ritual masks, forced vaccination against the Nuremberg Code, and the Mark of the Beast like vaccine passports, or you’re with us, Christians and other Americans and allies of basic humans rights around the world.

      Two vaccinated African American men talk about the vaccine passports and mainstream media and government leader openly wishing death on the unvaccinated:




      Anyone on the wrong side of this issue, I don’t care if you’re Orthodox, or even an Orthodox bishop, that only leaves you more accountable and with less excuse for being on the side of evil.

      • “I don’t care if you’re Orthodox, or even an Orthodox bishop, that only leaves you more accountable and with less excuse for being on the side of evil.”

        This that I do not like extreme wealth stratification, wanton wars and I support vaccination puts me “on the side of evil”?

        • Gail Sheppard says

          Huh? Those who wish evil on the other side are “on the side of evil.”

          • George Michalopulos says

            Myst, Martin, you bring up valid points.

            The resurgence of the Right by Goldwater, then Reagan was not meant to turn into a social Darwinist dystopia. Bush 41 took what was bequeathed to him by Reagan and Clinton, Bush 43 and Obama ran with it. Remember, Reagan didn’t want to destroy the people of the Soviet bloc or force them to become Midwesterners, he wanted to destroy the Soviet system. Had he had a third term, he likely would have declared victory and pulled out of NATO.

            Globalism is not conservatism if by “conservatism” means locking in place and defending what we now have in America. We saw this MSM word game being played in the 90s when the out-of-power Communists in the Russia were constantly being called “conservatives”. Strictly speaking, they were conservatives if by using that word one meant they wanted to go back to the glory days of the USSR.

            American conservatives on the other hand –Randian libertarians, Evangelicals, American exceptionalists–had nothing in common with these “conservatives”.

            In the international sphere, neither Goldwater nor Reagan (nor Nixon for that matter) believed our job was to go overseas and enforce the globo-homo agenda.

            The disparity in wealth that has been created in America has been caused by the outsourcing of labor to China, this much is true, but it is also caused by more subtle domestic forces, towit feminism and illegal immigration. Together, all three forces decimated the working man’s buying power. You couldn’t destroy the nuclear family better than that.

            I could go on but in the final analysis that’s where we’re at. China has grown wealthy at our expense and has used their vast wealth to buy off the American ruling class, so much so that there is no congruence between said ruling class and the rest of America, black, brown or white.

            They simply don’t care about the 99%. And the COVID “pandemic” has only accelerated the growth in wealth disparity.

            Trump’s nationalism was a speed bump on the road to the continued increase in the ruling class’s power and wealth.

            If you mean pure Friedmanesque economic “free market” is what you mean by “conservatism” then I’m not a conservative. I’m a nationalist. And I apologize to Pat Buchanan for disparaging his fair-trade nationalism.

        • Martin,

          It is one thing to be in favor of vaccination. It is quite another to force it upon others on pain of their livelihood and/or shame/bully them into submission. Those among the latter group (and I am not assuming you are) are on the side of evil whether they realize it at this moment or not. Evil never presents itself as evil or it would be unable to overcome its victims. It always tempts with that which seems good.

          • “Those among the latter group (and I am not assuming you are) are on the side of evil whether they realize it at this moment or not. ”

            Would you be against mandatory measures in case of smallpox or tuberculosis?
            I would support such measures.

            Now with COVID it is debatable, but seeing one side as evil is more like a cult.

          • Brian “It is quite another to force it upon others on pain of their livelihood and/or shame/bully them into submission.”

            It depends. In such cases as smallpox or tuberculosis, I am in favor of mandatory measures.

            • George Michalopulos says

              Under those conditions, you would have a solid case for mandatory vaccinations. Unfortunately, COVID has a greater than 95% survival rate, higher than 98% for certain demographics.

              In addition, there are tried and true therapeutic modalities for the two diseases you mention. The so-called vaccines for COVID are not without serious side-effects and were in fact rushed through the pipeline.

              • George Michalopulos “COVID has a greater than 95% survival rate”

                Let us say that it is 96%. At what percentage would you make vaccination mandatory? 80%?

                • “To be honest with you Martin, I’d have to look up the history of pandemics. ”

                  I asked at what survival/mortality rate would you make it mandatory. History has nothing to do with that.

                  Is 4% mortality acceptable? What about 10% or 20%?

                • Given that COVID-19 ‘vaccination’ prevents
                  neither infection with nor transmission of COVID-19
                  and the absolute risk reduction of the ‘vaccines’ is around 1%
                  and short-term side effects include blood clots, paralysis and death
                  and medium-term and long-term side effects are not known
                  because safety studies have not been and cannot be completed
                  because the studies have been deliberately unblinded,
                  I would never make this ‘vaccination’ mandatory.

                • Cynthia curran says

                  Mississippi has the worst case not because the white people tend to be republican but because the state has a high poverty state do to the rural delta. In fact a lot of folks not Vac in MS are black and vote Democratic .

    • The fundamental problem is that there are those in power who have no loyalty at all to the country or people but only to the Democratic Party (and its evil ideology), as the ruling party of America, much as the CCP is the ruling party of China. That’s what’s behind The Steal, that’s what’s behind Milley, that’s what’s behind the Border Crisis, the Spending Bonanza, etc.

      • George Michalopulos says

        FWIW, even a Deep-Stater like Lt Col Alexander Vindman, the man who made himself a nemesis of President Trump, recently commented that Milley should resign for his rank insubordination.

        Stopped clock/twice-a-day I guess.

        • Antiochene Son says

          Biden should fire him. Even if he agrees with Milley’s actions, what president could trust a general who admits to going behind the CIC’s back? A sniveling ladder climber like him can’t be trusted by anyone.

      • Cynthia curran says

        Well, also people don’t think that a lot of unvac people in Mississippi, or Louisiana, or Alabama are black and not whtie and tend to vote Democratic. Sim the unvac in the south might involved a lot of black democraatics not just white republicans.

  3. This is going to result in a civil war. Once one side as abandoned all pretense of accountability or legality the only remedy is obvious. I assume it will happen at the state level.


  4. “…hosts appear on screen in t-shirts and flip flops.”

    What…??? And nothing else…???

    No wonder it is becoming more popular…

  5. Facebook’s special database for privileged class.

    Equality is not for the little people, then…

  6. Read “Live not by Lies” by Solzhenitsyn.
    “If you have the truth, argue the truth; if you don’t have the truth, argue the facts; if you don’t have the facts, attack your opponent’s character.” On my dad’s Univ. of Chicago law school class room circa early 1950’s after coming home [with Silver Star and Purple Heart amongst others] from Korea-3rd Infantry Div.-and having served in Europe during WWII with 82nd Airborne.
    Doxa to Theo, John D.

  7. 350,000 California Recall Votes Vanish on CNN

    [Video – 00:44]

    Even when they are winning,
    they can’t not cheat

  8. Firefox burns the building down…

    Firefox: Primary Password is
    replacing Master Password


    ” Firefox is removing terminology from the browser that has been identified as derogatory or exclusionary. We’re listening to conversations happening within the Mozilla community and in the world at large, and are paying attention when people tell us that some terms we use in Firefox exclude and damage people.

    ‘Master-slave’ is a metaphor that perpetuates racism. Firefox strives for inclusion and clarity; we have no need for terms derived from harmful metaphors when we have plenty of alternatives that are more inclusive, more descriptive and non-racist. For this reason, all instances of Master Password are being replaced with Primary Password in the Firefox browsers and products.

    Deprecating the term Master Password is also in accordance with the “Derogatory Language” section of the Mozilla Community Participation Guidelines. … ”

    ” ‘Master-slave’ is a metaphor…” So is ‘master-pupil’ , ‘master-mistress’ etc…
    Context enables us to distinguish between connotation and denotation.
    Yet these crass Marxists (failing to note that ‘Primary’ is itself exclusionary)
    would effectively turn Frodo into a bishop; thus –
    Gollum: “The Primusss has the Preciousss…”

  9. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/09/29/jen_psaki_on_budget_negotiation_its_like_an_episode_of_the_west_wing_if_it_goes_well_veep_if_not.html

    This is an interesting off hand comment. The press seems to be trying to make this a “make or break” moment for the Biden regime – i.e., pass the two bills, or at least one, or bust. However, no one has dared speak the flip side of that, what if they fail?

    Evidently Jen Psaki just did.

    Now, for most of us, the Biden regime was cursed and doomed from the get go. However, for those latecomers within the Democratic Party, she seems to be playfully indicating that perhaps Kamala steps in if Joe fails on this one. It has just enough deniability, due to the disparate tenor of the two shows, to avoid a jaw dropping reaction. Bear in mind, just the other day she was saying her main objective that day was just to not say anything that would get her fired.

  10. George Michalopulos says

    Lenin famously said “Who? Whom?”

    He also knew that whoever controlled the telegraphs could shape the outcome of battles, even those he lost.

    Looks like the Maricopa County audit raised more questions than it answered. Actually, it answered none. If anything, the number of fraudulent and/or questionable ballots outnumbered the Biden’s supposed win by 4 to one.

    Kinda makes you go, “hmmmmm…..”


    • George,

      I’ve always looked at the audits and Lindell’s machine challenges as being useful mostly for propaganda. Keep it in the press, keep the revelations coming. Slowly you convince more and more people that the 2020 election was illegitimate. In that sense, it’s working quite well. However, we probably won’t actually get any real electoral relief until the mid-terms and 2024. The courts are cowards and no one else really has the power to do much of anything other than to pursue election reform.

      There were close to 60,000 illegal ballots cast in Arizona. You’ll see more numbers like that, and greater ones, coming out of Georgia, Pennsylvania and Texas. Combine that with our Loser in Chief and his reverse Midas touch and you will get an electorate primed to vote MAGA come the midterms and beyond.

  11. George: “Looks like the Maricopa County audit
    raised more questions than it answered”

    …so far! The fat lady has yet to sing.