Facebook is suddenly worth looking at today. USC journalism professor (with whom I had a friendly “dustup” at the L.A. Times Web site six years ago) had some criticism for New York Times editor Dean Baquet today:

And then, it got good, when Baquet waded into the comment section:

Bwahahahahaha. I’m jealous:

In case there is any doubt in your mind, by the way: yeah, that’s really him.

[guest post by Dana]

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, responding to the events in France, addressed the struggle that seems to plague those who work hard to separate Islam from the acts of barbarism, and also expressed her views on what the media’s next steps should be. Judging by her comments, it’s clear to see that she did not consult with Joe Biden.

We do need to wake up to the fact that there is a movement—a very lethal movement, very cruel—that has a political vision about how the world should be organized and how society should live. And in order for them to realize their vision, they are willing to use any means. They are willing to use violence. They are willing to use terror.

Is this some kind of cult? Or are the principles of this cult embedded in Islam? I happen to think they are embedded in Islam. The only way peace-loving Muslims can get rid of this is by reforming their religion so that, for example, it can no longer provide justifications for murdering people deemed to be blasphemers. And while they go about reforming their religion, which will take some time, we who do not adhere to that religion need to defend our own values. Freedom of speech. Freedom of publication. And the rule of law.

…

The more we appease, the more we indulge, the more emboldened the enemies of freedom become.

The ball is now in the court of the media. If the press responds to this by not reprinting the cartoons, by not defending the principle that Charlie Hebdo was defending, then we have given in. Then they have won. Those three men yelled, “Allahu Akbar.” They yelled, “The Prophet is avenged. Charlie Hebdo is dead.” Our duty is to keep Charlie Hebdo alive. Our duty is to make sure that they realize that the Prophet is not avenged.

In 2006, when Jyllands-Posten in Denmark published the Muhammad cartoons, the mainstream media made the decision not to reprint those cartoons, to respect the sensibilities of Muslims and to avoid Muslim rage. This time it would be the biggest mistake for the Western press to repeat that—absolutely the biggest mistake.

…

I would urge everyone in the media to take a stand now. An entire magazine has been wiped out. If you think they won’t one day come for you, too, just because you abstained from mocking the Prophet, then you are gravely mistaken.

In other news, Christine Amanpour is referring to the barbarians as “activists”; Howard Dean refuses to refer to them as Muslim terrorists, but rather mass murderers; and Ezra Klein, clearly having gone over the edge, claims that two men went on a “murder spree with no motive involved” and that “their crime is not explained by cartoons or religion.”

–Dana

[guest post by Dana]

In case you forget during the outrage of the Paris massacre that there other pressing matters of outrage that must be addressed, let me assure you, there are. Things such as potty discrimination. Surely one of the uglier forms of discrimination that must be flushed immediately.

Feminist writer, media critic and activist Soraya Chemaly, whose areas of expertise include “Gender Violence and Women’s Equity, Sexual Assault, Women in Media, Rape, Gender-based Violence, Media Portrayal, Women in the Military, Gender Equality Issues, Free Speech, Gender Politics, Business and the Economy, Education, Media and Entertainment, Politics, Religion Social Justice”, is on a roll about the unfairness of women’s public restrooms. And you know whose fault that is? You’ve got it: men’s. In what suspiciously sounds like a bad case of penis envy, Chemaly is upset that all public restrooms are not equal-opportunity facilities:

“[W]omen are still forced to stand in lines at malls, schools, stadiums, concerts, fair grounds, theme parks, and other crowded public spaces. This is frustrating, uncomfortable, and, in some circumstances, humiliating. It’s also a form of discrimination, as it disproportionately affects women.

She explains why public restrooms are sexist:

Women need to use bathrooms more often and for longer periods of time because: we sit to urinate (urinals effectively double the space in men’s rooms), we menstruate, we are responsible for reproducing the species (which makes us pee more), we continue to have greater responsibility for children (who have to use bathrooms with us), and we breastfeed (frequently in grotty bathroom stalls). Additionally, women tend to wear more binding and cumbersome clothes, whereas men’s clothing provides significantly speedier access. But in a classic example of the difference between surface “equality” and genuine equity, many public restrooms continue to be facilities that are equal in physical space, while favoring men’s bodies, experiences, and needs.

…

Women aren’t standing in lines because we bond over toilet paper pattern or because we’re narcissistic and vain. We’re standing in line because our bodies, like those of trans and queer people, have been historically shamed, ignored, and deemed unworthy of care and acknowledgement. We shouldn’t have to wait or postpone having these needs fairly met in public space.

So unfair! Why do our bodies have to be burdened with the ability to carry a new life, to nurse, to menstruate. If only we had a penis!

Look, Ms. Chemalya, we’re waiting in line because women take f-o-r-e-v-e-r to use a restroom. It’s not just a zip-in, zip-out experience. It’s a use the facility, wash your hands, do your makeup, fix your hair, gab with your friend who went to the restroom with you social event. Of course there is a line!

Note: Chemalya ignores that middle-aged men and older face their own biological difficulties which can cause lines at public restrooms for men as well.

–Dana

He seems to have learned something.

Kudos to the guy for actually doing it. You won’t see Al Sharpton doing anything like this.

Too much going on to summarize; follow updates at Hot Air.

The L.A. Times reports:

California’s budget, which bounced back after years of deficits, is now being squeezed by rising healthcare costs for the poor and for retired state workers.

The mountain of medical bills threatens to undermine Gov. Jerry Brown’s efforts to strengthen state finances — his central promise of the past four years.

Enrollment in the state’s healthcare program for the poor, known as Medi-Cal, has exploded by 50% since President Obama’s signature law took effect. Although the federal government picks up most of the tab, state costs have also been growing, and faster than expected.

Don’t worry, though. It will get much worse:

Over the next year, total Medi-Cal enrollment is expected to reach 12.2 million, he said — about one-third of the state’s population. It was less than 8 million in 2013.

. . . .

Obama’s new immigration policy could also increase healthcare costs. More than a million California immigrants who are in the country illegally are expected to be protected from deportation, and many will probably qualify for Medi-Cal, but those costs cannot yet be calculated, according to the Brown administration.

So, yay.