Click here for instructions on running Gaggle daily on your own site. There's also an archive of previous toons available here.

Apparently, hearing both sides of the global warming debate is too much for Hollywood heartthrob Leonardo DiCaprio. Rush & Malloy of New York’s Daily News reported that Leo doesn’t like "contrary" views in his “documentary” about global warming, “The 11th Hour.” After being part of an ABC special about “threats to the Earth,” Leo decided that dissent ist verboten! So now he’s making a real documentary—minus all of that pesky questioning (emphasis mine throughout):

Leonardo DiCaprio has heard enough bilge from oil-company apologists. At last week's Natural Resources Defense Council gala here, the three-time Oscar nominee recalled taking part in an ABC film a few years ago that focused on threats to the Earth. "Unfortunately, the message was drowned out by the inclusion of the contrary viewpoint," said DiCaprio, who narrated and co-wrote the forthcoming environmental doc "The 11th Hour." DiCaprio said this film focuses only on those who acknowledge global warming, such as Stephen Hawking, Mikhail Gorbachev and Andrew Weil. "The message won't be diluted by our having to yell over oil-company-funded 'scientists,' " he said.

Two weeks ago, we reported (in this NB post) that the Archdiocese of Los Angeles publicly objected to coverage of the priest abuse scandal by the Los Angeles Times. Two articles by the Times in the second half of March contained false information, contended the Archdiocese. One of the articles was cited as being particularly "insulting to all Catholics." Rebuttals to the Times were printed in the archdiocese newspaper, The Tidings, the largest diocesan paper in the United States. (Here and here are the rebuttals.)

Is the Times now retaliating against Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony for calling the paper out on its falsehoods?

I'm not sure if this is new or not, but while reading Ace today, I learned about an anti-Rosie O'Donnell site which is designed to rally those who object to the increasingly ridiculous statements of the "View" co-host.

Their mission:

is to influence current and prospective viewers of The View to not watch the program until the situation concerning Rosie O'Donnell and her anti-American falsities is addressed and amended by Disney-ABC.

Their reason:

for calling this boycott is to raise awareness of the "blame America first" mentality being displayed in the mainstream media today. We aim to show Disney-ABC (and their sponsors) that we, as American citizens, will no longer enable an unchecked anti-American individual to occupy our network television airtime.

You know you must be watching PBS when Good Friday is a time to interview promoters of gnostic gospels and leftist preachers who equate the persecutors of Christ with "rugged individualism." On this Good Friday, April 6, Charlie Rose interviewed Princeton professor Elaine Pagels and Harvard professor Karen King, who explored with Rose how the "Gospel of Judas" shows parallels between early Christian martyrs and modern-day Islamic suicide bombers. Leftist Rev. James Forbes of New York’s Riverside Church carried the anti-individualist message.

Rose began with the professors by promising "some fascinating new information about Judas and Jesus. The New Testament presents Judas’ actions towards Jesus as the most infamous of betrayals. The long-lost Gospel of Judas tells a very different story. It shows Judas as Jesus` favorite disciple and willing collaborator."  

UPDATE at bottom of post

Citing a new study that shows no statistical difference in sexual activity between kids taught abstinence-only sex ed and kids taught about contraceptives, the April 14 Washington Post presented the results as a moral and scientific vindication for critics of abstinence-only education.

From the get-go, abstinence-only proponents were dealt a short hand in reporter Laura Sessions Stepp's page A2 article. The headline read: "Study Casts Doubts on Abstinence-Only Programs."

But was it really the survey itself that cast doubts, or liberal activists reading into the data a way to score political points against abstinence-only advocates? (continued...)

In the midst of the Don Imus/Rutgers women’s basketball team controversy, one would think that calling a woman a prostitute, or any similar epithet on the air, would be so inexcusable that it would meet with extraordinary media outrage.

After all, if you did a Google news search of the name Don Imus, it would generate almost 15,000 stories about the controversial radio host. The phrase "Nappy-headed hos" garnered almost 10,000 results.

Yet, when the New Black Panther Party leader Malik Shabazz called Fox News contributor Michelle Malkin a “political prostitute” on Thursday’s “O’Reilly Factor,” the media largely ignored the event. In fact, a Google news search of his name identified that only one major media outlet reported this outrageous comment, albeit at the USA Today Online Politics blog.

Regardless of the double standard, here is the disgraceful segment of this interview which coincidentally occurred within hours of Imus being fired by CBS Radio for his comments (video available here, h/t Hot Air):

Those with delicate constitutions should avoid reading the Los Angeles Times's latest puff-profile of Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, taken apart by Patterico. Here's an excerpt:

As the highest-ranking woman in elective office, Pelosi is as much a power player as the men who preceded her.

“She’s well-bred, a lady through and through,” said Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Atherton), Pelosi’s friend of 30 years. “But anyone who knows her knows not to mess with her.”

With a father who was a Baltimore mayor and congressman who ran a political machine out of the family’s brick row house, Pelosi cultivates loyalty in ways large and small, much as her father did — keeping careful political tallies, but still remembering birthdays.

For the last few weeks I have been watching two stories that, were they about Conservatives or Republicans, would have been scandals that would have shaken the rafters of the MSM. But, since these stories are about two favored Liberals, one old and one newly minted, we have seen no faux outrage, no shocked commentary, no calls for heads on pikes to be posted at the entrance to Congress, and no calls for resignations. Oh, the stories were reported all right, but all sensationalism was eschewed with the usual extrapolation to the level of a “culture of corruption” cast aside for a straight, newsy style atypical to their normal means against Republicans.

These two stories and the lack of passionate coverage of them by the MSM shows that the MSM employs as much liberal bias in what they chose not to cover as they do in what they chose to go ahead and focus upon.

Original caption:

The Rev. Jesse Jackson leads a protest outside Chicago's NBC Studios Monday, April 9, 2007, calling for the firing of radio talk show host Don Imus for his offensive comments about the Rutgers women's basketball team.