AT&T All In on the Woke Agenda

AT&T and its subsidiary DirecTV recently dropped Newsmax from its lineup, while leaving in place 22 liberal news channels.

The subsidiary canceled the fourth highest-rated news channel, which left 25 million cable viewers scrambling to get their preferred channel from a different source.

DirecTV’s parent company doesn’t appear to be operating under any kind of conventional business model. The blatant ideological discrimination begs the question: Just how woke is the telecommunications giant?

It turns out that AT&T is so woke its executives are asleep at the wheel.

Congressional investigations are surely coming, as are a growing number of boycotts, etc., that could really have an impact.

In a nutshell, the world’s largest telecommunications company (and third largest provider of cell phones) has insidiously morphed into a far-left organization that poses as a service company.

According to OpenSecrets, during the time period between 1989 and 2019, AT&T was the fourteenth-largest donor to United States federal political campaigns and committees, contributing tens of millions of dollars, a majority of which went straight into Democrat hands.

As Newsmax contributor Jeffrey Lord reported in the American Spectator, the company’s leaders have backgrounds that link them with politicians of the liberal Democrat kind.

AT&T’s board of directors includes a chairman of the board that previously served as FCC chair, and was appointed by former President Bill Clinton. This same chairman of the board was an ambassador that was appointed to the position by former President Barack Obama.

Two board members are reliable contributors to prominent Democratic candidates, including one individual who was an advisor and supporter of former President Bill Clinton, as well as being the co-chair of the left-leaning Brookings Institution.

One board member was an appointee to President Obama’s “President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness.”

Another board member was a former President of the Ford Foundation, an outfit that donated millions of dollars to an anti-Trump organization.

AT&T’s board is extremely suspect when it comes to decisions concerning conservative political expression, as Lord wrote in his conclusion:

“Board of Directors of AT&T that is stacked with like-minded far Left extremists who cannot abide conservatives or political dissent.”

And what about AT&T’s top management position?

According to City Journal’s Christopher Rufo, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, AT&T’s CEO John Stankey launched a radical re-education program in 2020 for his employees, which promoted the following racially tinged idea: “American racism is a uniquely white trait.”

The CEO’s program also pushed left-wing concepts such as “reparations,” “defunding of police” and “trans activism.”

The training essentially massages the minds of white employees into believing that they “are the problem.”

The line of reasoning is based on core principles of critical race theory that include “systemic racism,” “white privilege” and “white fragility.”

So the person at the helm of the telecommunications company is pushing an agenda that could have been crafted by Saul Alinsky?

As Lord observed, “AT&T has been changed from a politically neutral communications company to a woke, far left censor which has charged itself with an obsessive mission of silencing conservatives — Newsmax in this case, and One America News before that.”

AT&T doesn’t exactly have a track record that inspires trust.

–In January of 2006 The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed a class action lawsuit, alleging that the company had allowed a government intelligence agency to monitor, without warrants, phone and Internet communications of its customers.

–In May of 2006, USA Today reported that all of AT&T’s international and domestic calling records had been handed over to a government intelligence agency for the purpose of creating a massive calling database.

–In June of 2006, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that AT&T had rewritten rules on its privacy policy so that “AT&T – not customers – owns customers’ confidential info and can use it ‘to protect its legitimate business interests, safeguard others, or respond to legal process.’”

–In July of 2006, a federal district court rejected a federal government motion to dismiss EFF’s case. After the case had been appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the federal appellate court dismissed it in June of 2009.

–In August of 2007, National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell confirmed that AT&T was one of the telecommunications companies that assisted with the government’s warrantless wire-tapping program on calls between foreign and domestic sources.

AT&T’s DirecTV pays cable license fees to all 22 left-leaning news channels that it carries, despite the fact that most of the channels have far lower ratings than Newsmax.

Additionally, leftist organizations have exerted pressure on the already woke company to actually get rid of conservative programming.

New York Magazine in January 2022 reported the following: “In recent months, several organizations, including the NAACP and Media Matters for America, had been pressuring AT&T and DirecTV to dump OAN for promoting false information…”

Added to those lobbying the telecommunication company to deplatform Newsmax and other conservative media outlets are Democrats in Congress, who sit on a committee that is charged with regulating AT&T.

Did corporate heads at AT&T via its DirecTV subsidiary set out to suppress the speech of Newsmax? And was the company following the dictates of its fellow left-leaning politicians, media apparatchiks and radical activist groups?

The pieces of the puzzle seem to be falling into place.

Meaningful steps can be taken to let AT&T know that it doesn’t get to rewrite the Constitution.

–Cancel DirecTV by calling 877-763-9762.

–Cancel AT&T by calling 888-855-2338.

–Call congressional representatives and senators at 202-224-3121.

–Sign the online petition at IwantNewsmax.com

–Spread the word.

Freedom of speech hangs in the balance.

What’s Behind DirecTV’s Censorship of Newsmax?

DirecTV just recently removed Newsmax from its channel lineup.

It was less than a year ago that the AT&T-owned media outlet deplatformed One America News (OAN), another digital news source that offers folks a more balanced option to the far-left fare that overwhelmingly dominates the current media ethersphere.

The selective decision by corporate heads appears to have been highly politically motivated, since a host of channels that are filled with radical-left programming are still readily available to DirecTV users, even though viewing audiences remain in short supply.

Newsmax, on the other hand, ranks as the fourth highest-rated cable news channel in the nation. But now the more than 15 million customers of DirecTV, DirecTV Stream, and U-Verse are no longer able to access Newsmax’s alternative to the knee-jerk liberal content that appears on almost all of the other news and information channels.

One of the outlets with an extreme left-wing agenda that is allowed to freely prattle on is Vice Media. The channel is a virtual promoter of the trademark liberal political violence that has been witnessed over the past several years. Not only does Vice Media get to remain on the platform, it turns out that it is being subsidized financially by a managing owner of DirecTV.

Newsmax has experienced tremendous growth precisely because it continues to deliver to audiences the content that they seek; content largely denied to them elsewhere. Comprehensive coverage of national and international news, governmental operations, legal procedures and rulings, federal, state and local politics, etc., are on the daily docket.

With this latest move, DirecTV is essentially stifling speech that counters the Democratic Party’s carefully crafted and disseminated narrative.

Could it have anything to do with the looming 2024 presidential election? You be the judge.

Republican congressional members are rightly indignant about DirecTV’s decision. Many are publicly condemning the unprecedented move.

In light of the recent Twitter file revelations that point to probable collusion between government and technology platforms, it seems as though the perfect opportunity has presented itself for the new GOP-controlled House to investigate the origins of DirecTV’s decision to engage in what appears to be blatant ideological discrimination.

House committees may be taking a closer look at an entity called TPG Capital. This is a private equity fund that reportedly owns a 30% stake in DirecTV and also appears to oversee the cable company’s operations.

A few more details. TPG Capital is the private equity arm of the global asset firm TPG, which has fully adopted a woke-oriented agenda referred to in the business world as Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG).

ESG is a sort of measuring tool to gauge whether or not business organizations are sufficiently onboard with the woke agenda in order to qualify for financing and other advantages that equity firms provide.

On its website, TPG boasts about its ESG bona fides:

“TPG first adopted a Global ESG Performance Policy in 2012 and became a signatory to the UN Principles of Responsible Investment in 2013. Each year, we continue to strengthen and deepen the integration of ESG performance throughout the firm.”

While AT&T owns 70% of DirecTV, the telecommunications company had earlier sold a 30% stake to TPG.

AT&T named TPG as DirecTV’s operational manager. Under the terms of the transaction, the current DirecTV is governed by a board with two representatives from AT&T, two from TPG, and an additional fifth seat designated for the CEO.

The politics of those at the top rung of TPG are of the ultra-liberal kind. TPG’s executives have given Democratic candidates 90% of their political donations. The private equity firm has also subsidized the aforementioned far-left news network Vice Media to the tune of hundreds of millions.

The TPG partners that have been appointed to the DirecTV board are David Trujillo and John Flynn. Trujillo is a source of funds for Democrat politicians that include former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Senator Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra.

Interestingly, prior to the time OAN was jettisoned from DirecTV, Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee had admonished the cable carrier for the “spread of dangerous misinformation.”

Representatives Jerry McNerney, D-Calif., and Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., had written letters to a dozen cable, satellite and streaming video companies, including DirecTV, demanding without evidence that the content providers give an explanation as to why they were allowing Newsmax, OAN and Fox to remain on their platforms, accusing the media companies of “disseminating misinformation to millions” of users.

“Misinformation on TV has led to our current polluted information environment that radicalizes individuals to commit seditious acts and rejects public health best practices…,” the representatives wrote, singling out Newsmax, OAN and Fox.

With two out of three outlets on the list going down, Congress needs to act fast to rescue free speech from the clutches of the stealth partners in the censorship battle.

The Fate of Disney’s Brand Hangs in the Balance

The Happiest Place on Earth is in pretty sad shape.

A lot of folks, particularly some of the major shareholders and former diehard fans, are well aware of the predicament that The Walt Disney Company currently finds itself in.

Not too long ago Disney pulled CEO Bob Chapek out of his post and brought back the company’s former CEO, Bob Iger.

Iger now finds himself facing an extremely tough task – how to stop the deconstruction of the Disney brand before its too late, and how to then lift the company back up out of the rubble.

Signs of Disney’s decline recently became manifest by the Axios Harris Poll and the 2022 Corporate Reputation Rankings.

Disney’s score on the poll was 73.4, which resulted in the company’s ranking being 65th on the list. The entertainment giant had fallen 28 places since the previous year, experiencing its worst results in the history of the Harris Poll.

The Trafalgar Group conducted its own poll in Spring 2022, which showed that 68% of Americans consider themselves less likely to do business with Disney, due to the company’s activism.

A recent incident illustrates exactly why Iger needs to act swiftly. WDW Pro, a Twitter account that specializes in all things Disney, reported that the company has engaged in something that Christians of all persuasions consider an abomination, blasphemy.

The Epcot Candlelight Processional has been a tradition at Florida’s Epcot Center for the past 64 years. The event takes place at Christmas time and is part of a larger devotional service in which narrators provide inspirational messages that contain heartfelt Christian content.

In the most recent candlelight processional, the Christian content of the messaging was somehow modified. It turns out that within the content of the revised messaging, the actual divinity of Jesus Christ was denied, not once, but five times.

Simu Liu was one of the event’s theatrical readers. The actor performed a passage that actually denied a central tenet of Christianity.

“For all the miracles of Jesus Christ the Prince of Peace himself was simply a man, a human being, and he walked through this world in the most human way possible with love…,” Liu said.

Being labeled in the scripted words as “simply a man,” Jesus Christ, who is recognized by hundreds of millions of Christians around the globe as Lord and Savior, was stripped of His divine nature.

Across all of history there have been those who have attempted to rewrite Christian dogma.

But did Disney have to get into the heretical act?

Many may not have heard, but Disney was founded by a deeply committed Christian, Mr. Walt Disney himself. Early Disney entertainment fare was filled with Christian values, imagery, symbolism and storylines.

Here are but a few examples:

Several Christian leaders offered prayers during the opening ceremonies of the original Anaheim, California theme park. The finale of the “Fantasia” film includes the hymn “Ave Maria,” music that was created to honor the Virgin Mary. And even the character of Snow White takes time out to talk to the Ultimate Maker of her universe.

During the 1940s, Walt proved himself to be an ardent anti-Communist. He founded the Motion Picture Alliance for the Preservation of American Ideals, a group that once stated, “We find ourselves in sharp revolt against a rising tide of Communism, Fascism and kindred beliefs, that seek by subversive means to undermine and change this way of life.”

In an article penned in 1949, Walt revealed how his religious faith had guided him in life.

“I was grounded in old-fashioned religious observance,” he shared. “My people were zealous members of the Congregational Church in our home town, Marceline, Missouri. My father, Elias Disney, who was a contractor, built our local church and was a deacon of the congregation. I was baptized there and attended Sunday School regularly.”

Walt was vigilant in making sure that the company he founded did not stray from the principles of his faith.

“I have watched constantly that in my work the highest moral and spiritual standards are upheld, whether my productions deal with fable or with stories of living action,” his article read.

The Candlelight Processional incident compelled Dr. Gregory Seltz, Executive Director of the Lutheran Center for Religious Liberty, to call upon parents to seriously distance themselves from Disney.

“Any Christian parent who allows the glitter and glitz of Disney movies and Disneyland theme parks to take hold of our children’s imagination now delivers one’s children into the hands of people who actively seek to steal our children’s childhoods, and now, even their faith,” Dr. Seltz declared.

He concluded with the following unambiguous message for parents:

“This is about the hearts and minds of our children, not just a ride on Space Mountain. Parents of all faiths need to find other avenues for entertainment rather than anything Disney.”

Other boycotts of Disney are ongoing, including the one from One Million Moms, an arm of the American Family Association.

Iger led The Walt Disney Company for 15 years. It is time for him to do what Chapek failed to do.

He has to dissociate the Magic Kingdom from woke Hollywood. He has to stand up to anyone within or without the company who seeks to undermine Walt’s legacy. And he has to rebuild the public trust in the once-beloved Disney brand.

Texas Congressman Takes on the World Health Organization

January of 2023 marked the beginning of the 118th Congress.

The process that led up to the election of the Speaker of the House turned out to be pretty high drama. It was also quite revealing, particularly when it comes to a pivotal Capitol Hill character, Congressman Chip Roy, R-Texas.

Rep. Roy played a key role in the negotiations that helped Kevin McCarthy ultimately take the gavel.

In addition to being a top negotiator, the congressman is a true idea man. One recent idea of his is particularly noteworthy. He has introduced legislation to stop sending taxpayer dollars to the World Health Organization (WHO).

There are plenty of good reasons to stop spending money that we don’t have. Sending gobs of cash to a highly questionable international organization is way up there on the list.

A glaring example of exactly the kind of group WHO has devolved into occurred in January 2020. Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the organization, issued a statement on the then-emerging COVID outbreak.

“As I have said repeatedly since my return from Beijing, the Chinese government is to be congratulated for the extraordinary measures it has taken to contain the outbreak, despite the severe social and economic impact those measures are having on the Chinese people,” the statement read.

The WHO official wasn’t done praising the CCP yet.

“The speed with which China detected the outbreak, isolated the virus, sequenced the genome and shared it with WHO and the world are very impressive, and beyond words. So is China’s commitment to transparency and to supporting other countries,” the statement further read.

America didn’t agree. Neither did then-President Donald Trump, who promptly halted our nation’s financial support for the organization.

However, the Biden administration later reversed the decision and reinstated the WHO funding.

A significant reason why Congressman Roy and President Trump agree on defunding the WHO is the global group’s incessant promotion of abortion.

“Funneling millions of taxpayer dollars to the corrupt World Health Organization that serves the Chinese Communist Party is a slap in the face to hardworking American families struggling under record high inflation, and to all those whose lives and livelihoods were ruined and destroyed by the COVID pandemic,” Congressman Roy recently stated.

During the COVID pandemic, the WHO indicated in its statement that “services related to reproductive health are considered to be part of essential services during the COVID-19 outbreak,” adding, “Women’s choices and rights to sexual and reproductive health care should be respected, irrespective of whether or not she has a suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection.”

Rep. Roy shared that his political philosophy took root as a result of his early Baptist faith and Reagan-era values upbringing.

As a young man he took field trips to the nation’s capital and Civil War battlefields, and enjoyed watching John Wayne and World War II movies alongside his parents.

“Fairly early on I had a belief in limited government being good for freedom,” he said. “I was raised on the idea of rugged individualism.”

The House member, who was once Senator Ted Cruz’s chief of staff as well as assistant attorney general of Texas, has been guided by his Christian faith into a deeper commitment to the pro-life cause.

Several years ago he co-wrote a piece for the National Review about the annual Women’s March.

“In their zeal to shock and to trumpet a convoluted notion of freedom to have their bodies ‘left alone,’ these marchers exclude the bodies of the unborn. What about the rights of an unborn child? What about the safety of an unborn child?” Rep. Roy wrote.

Motivated by his pro-life sensibilities, he introduced the subject bill to disallow any federal funding for the WHO. The legislation is titled “No Taxpayer Funding for the World Health Organization Act.”

Congressman Roy’s House colleagues, Tom McClintock, R-Calif., Jeff Duncan, R- S.C., Mary Miller, R-Ill., Andrew Clyde, R-Ga., Diana Harshbarger, R-Tenn., Matt Rosendale, R-Mont., Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., Dan Bishop, R-N.C., John Moolenaar, R-Mich., Pat Fallon, R-Texas, Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., Wesley Hunt, R-Texas, Clay Higgins, R-La., and Greg Steube, R-Fla., have joined with him in introducing the legislation.

In 2022, the WHO went on record seeking global abortion on demand and calling for pro-life nations to allow abortions without limits.

The WHO is also seeking to restrict medical conscience rights, eliminate physician approval, allow abortion pills via mail, and permit abortions for sex-selection.

Congressman Roy told the truth about the dishonest anti-life organization.

“The WHO not only regularly promotes abortion and radical gender ideology but also…has done nothing to hold the CCP accountable for the spread of COVID-19. It is far past time for Congress to use its power of the purse to cut off US funding to this corrupt international body…,” he stated.

Big Trouble in Little Hollywood

Over the past year, the gap between Hollywood and its customers has widened to a degree that should send shivers down the spines of every entertainment exec.

The industry has routinely used a fairly reliable gauge to measure the size of this gap. It’s called profit.

Sadly, 2022 was a disaster for the once-golden city. Media companies saw the loss of half a trillion dollars in equity.

A town that for a century had been recognized as the entertainment capital of the world has seemingly been reduced to a shadow of its former self.

How could this have happened?

In my opinion, somewhere along the road a decision was made to have entertainment take a bow so that a one-sided agenda could take center stage.

“Especially this past year, ideology has become more important than art,” Quentin Tarantino recently told the host of HBO’s “Reel Time with Bill Maher.” “It’s like ideology trumps art. Ideology trumps individual effort. Ideology trumps good.”

From the youngest of age, our primal need makes itself known with the simplest of words: Tell me a story.

It’s universal. Human beings crave stories, ones with characters, plots, and themes that reflect life’s truths. This is how Hollywood initially came to be. And how it grew to be an industry like no other, all entwined within our minds, hearts and imaginations.

We were happy when Hollywood profited. It meant more entertainment fare would be forthcoming, maybe even greater than that already experienced.

It’s hard to believe the once-great ocean of entertainment that existed steadily devolved into a digital stream of woke stories.

Evidently, the public doesn’t have the appetite for what the industry has been serving up of late. There are definite consequences when audiences’ wishes are ignored.

Movie theater attendees are now a fraction of what they used to be. Despite the solid successes of Tom Cruise’s “Top Gun: Maverick” and James Cameron’s “Avatar: The Way of Water,” the 2022 multiplexes saw their audiences essentially cut in half, when compared to four years ago.

Of course, movie theater companies experienced record losses in their share prices. AMC’s value dropped almost 80 percent, and Cineworld, owner of Regal, headed for bankruptcy court.

Likely hampered by projects that were saturated with woke ideology, Disney experienced its worst yearly stock-drop since 1974. Disney is the largest, most influential and sole media company that is listed in the Dow Jones Industrial Average, and it saw its shares drop a whopping 44 percent? Unbelievable.

The board of directors suddenly terminated CEO Bob Chapek and brought back former CEO Bob Iger, ostensibly to rescue the Mouse House.

Warner Bros., Discovery and Lionsgate also saw their stock prices take a plunge of over 60 percent.

With regard to television, traditional broadcast and cable TV (aka linear television) saw a significant ratings dip. Similar to what happened earlier to the music business, Hollywood executives discovered that streaming media does not yet provide sufficient revenue to offset the losses incurred in linear television and theatrical film releases.

However, a bright spot appeared on an otherwise dismal media landscape. “Yellowstone,” which is a modern perspective on the classic Western, garnered a huge audience hungry for retro-drama. Consequently, the series is continuing to enjoy stellar ratings.

Another media company that actually saw its investment value rise is the sports entertainment powerhouse WWE, which ended 2022 with a gain of 38 percent. It could be that this increase has to do with the moral sensibilities of a huge segment of viewers that find the clear distinctions between heroes and villains quite appealing.

The studios spent money galore on streaming content in 2022, and the cash layout just never panned out. Executive chairman James Dolan of AMC Networks explained Hollywood’s quandary in a memo that he recently wrote.

“It was our belief that cord-cutting losses would be offset by gains in streaming. This has not been the case. We are primarily a content company and the mechanisms for the monetization of content are in disarray,” he stated.

The AMC executive pointed out a reality that most of Hollywood is facing in 2023 and warned of “a large-scale layoff as well as cuts to every operating area.”

Netflix was first out of the gate to layoff employees, following a substantial loss of subscribers. Other major entertainment companies have also announced or have already started their layoffs, hiring freezes, and/or cost-cutting measures, including Disney, Warner Brothers, Paramount and CBS.

Warner chief David Zaslav actually stunned the entertainment world last summer, when he decided to shelve and write off the costs of “Batgirl,” a funded and completed film that was in post-production and had been approved by previous leadership at the company.

At an investor conference in November of 2022, he noted that in the past few months, things had gotten “a lot worse.”

The road that Hollywood will take going forward is yet to be mapped.

With a hope and a prayer, it will be one where entertainment takes center stage once again.

Walter Hill’s Stand against Wokeness

It has been noted recently by many of the greats within the comedy arts that wokeness has killed comedy.

But the truth is wokeness may actually be killing art itself.

Walter Hill is a famed director, screenwriter and producer.

He directed an amazing number of film projects over the years, including “48 hrs,” “Southern Comfort,” “Streets of Fire,” “Red Heat,” “Hard Times,” “The Warriors” and “The Driver.”

He also penned the screenplay for the crime drama “The Getaway” and produced a majority of the “Alien” film franchise.

Throughout his career, his baseline for storytelling has been the venerable western, the singular American genre that once upon a time was the envied export of the world.

He kick-started his Hollywood career as a production assistant. He was afforded the opportunity to work on iconic television shows that were set in the old American West; series such as “Gunsmoke,” “Bonanza” and “The Big Valley.”

To this day this classic American entertainment fare continues to be treasured by audiences around the globe.

Walter’s love for westerns has spanned the decades. It was on full display in works that include the 1980 movie “The Long Riders,” the 1995 film “Wild Bill,” the 2004 – 2006 television series “Deadwood” and the 2006 TV mini series “Broken Trail.”

The filmmaker once told a reporter, “Every film I’ve done has been a western.”

In a separate interview, he astutely pointed out that “the Western is ultimately a stripped down moral universe” and shared that he likes applying this principle to modern-day tales.

It is precisely this moral universe of which Walter speaks that is part and parcel of the western genre itself. It is also this moral universe that is in direct conflict with the dictates of contemporary woke ideology.

Traditional westerns have storylines that are in complete alignment with the moral constructs of integrity, justice, courage, individualism and loyalty, among others.

At the core of the filmmaking arts is contrast; i.e., clear distinctions between right and wrong, good and evil, hero and villain, etc. Not that there aren’t dimensions of character or plot or interrelationships. But good storytelling via film typically demands that the scriptwriter is able to freely create his or her work, untethered by external restrictions. This process results in characters to which viewers can intimately relate and storylines that can provide virtual life experiences that only one’s imagination could ever limit.

The present arts have hit a proverbial brick wall. This is because art cannot survive the current woke restrictions that Hollywood is imposing upon the entire entertainment industry.

Thankfully, the artist in Walter is unwilling to conform. Instead he is going against the grain, giving new life to his favorite genre.

His latest western, which he has directed and co-written, is titled “Dead for a Dollar.” The movie stars Christoph Waltz, Rachel Brosnahan and Willem Dafoe.

Perhaps not surprisingly it hasn’t been easy for even a successful director like Walter to get a western made these days. He recalls in his notes for the film that “getting it financed was a miracle” and that it had to be shot on a “very low budget.”

Waltz portrays a Danish bounty hunter who travels into Mexico. While there he encounters an individual, who years earlier he had sent to prison. The man, played by Dafoe, is a gambler and an outlaw.

While making the press rounds to promote “Dead for a Dollar,” Walter revealed some of his thoughts on the current woke state of affairs. In an interview with Moviemaker Magazine, he said ominously that wokeness is “death to the arts.”

“You’re giving me a chance to say this: this woke environment, politically correct environment, is a terrible thing. And it hurts. It is death to the arts and it’s death to creativity. There’s no question that there were injustices in the past. Nobody is arguing that point. But how you redress it is how you treat the future,” Walter remarked.

Most folks in Hollywood are under pressure to mold their projects to the prevailing woke mentality.

But like a character in one of his beloved westerns, Walter remains steadfast.

He understands that the creative impulses essential to filmmakers and all contemporary artists are thoroughly stifled by woke constraints.

Shallow characters, forced plots, anachronistic themes and the like make for extremely bland product, which is the antithesis of art’s purpose and its very essence.

Risking It All for the First Amendment, Elon-style

Thanks to Elon Musk’s release of the “Twitter Files,” it is now public knowledge that Twitter’s former executives were directed by government officials and campaign staffers to bury a report that contained information on an international influence-peddling scheme.

The scandal is a huge story, because it involves a Democratic Party nominee for the highest office in the land, just prior to the 2020 election.

Government officials were engaged in a supposed effort to address “disinformation.” However, said officials used social media companies to employ censorship, across media outlets of all types, of a story that was known full well to be accurate.

Among myriad other things, it was an attempt to influence an impending election.

Needless to say, the government’s involvement in the suppression of truth, with knowledge of same, is a violation of the First Amendment.

Although alarming in and of itself, what is perhaps even more disturbing is the tepid reaction at best, and indifferent response at worst, which has been exhibited on the part of the complicit media.

Woke-leaning venues ignored it and left-leaning outlets spun it.

Why does it matter? It makes all the difference in the world to those who seek truth, cherish freedom and love country.

Many press outlets have launched an attack against Elon himself. Personal remarks that have been directed at the CEO have been unfair, and in many cases, defamatory.

The radically intolerable judgmental left is in full takedown mode, characterizing Elon’s actions as those of an ambitious billionaire who seeks ever more wealth and power.

But how does one even begin to evaluate the sincerity of the motives and/or actions of fellow human beings?

One of the ways is to ask the question, What’s in it for them? That is, What do they have to gain?

Equally or even more telling is the question, What do they have to lose?

When we look at Elon’s position in the business world, it’s fairly obvious that he has a whole lot to lose in terms of tangible things. After all, he’s the richest person on the planet.

There’s also the matter of his reputation, an immaterial possession that many value even more than all of the material combined.

Yes, it could easily be said that Elon has risked everything in order to bring this important story to light.

In a recent “Twitter Spaces” appearance, the self-described Chief Twit engaged in a Q and A session.

He was asked a rather odd question about whether he was having any “suicidal thoughts.”

He replied, “I do not have any suicidal thoughts,” adding, “If I committed suicide, it’s not real.”

He also revealed that he perceives a greater risk to his personal safety, due to his widely reported actions at Twitter.

“Frankly, the risk of something bad happening or literally even being shot is quite significant,” he said. “I’m definitely not going to be doing any open-air car parades, let me put it that way.”

No exaggeration. Elon is risking his life, fortune and sacred honor.

When the First Amendment was adopted, the only institution with enough power to inhibit freedom of speech was the government. Now we know that big-tech companies are in on the speech-suppressing act. Whether ordered to or on a whim, they can muzzle us.

The Twitter Files confirm that our government worked directly with Big Tech. It was revealed that regular meetings took place between government and top executives of tech firms.

Thanks to Joe Rogan’s interview with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, it is now known that the same thing that was going on at Twitter was going on at Facebook.

It may be that some of those who were seeking to silence opposing views believed that they were resisting tyranny. If so, they were deluded. In reality, they were aiding and abetting tyranny.

In the words of Frederick Douglass, “Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one’s thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist.”

Many believe that after death comes resurrection. Pray it is so with liberty.