As of this writing, the school board associations of at least 11 states have withdrawn from the National School Boards Association.
I hope the number will rise to 50.
As many readers will know, the NSBA, a left-wing lobbying group, made headlines a couple of weeks ago.
Merrick Garland, attorney general of the United States, cited a letter from the group to the White House complaining about parents who had the temerity to vigorously criticize their local school boards for attempting to insinuate the Marxist teachings of “critical race theory” into schools, foisting virtue-signaling mask mandates on students, and injecting noisome gender-identity politics into primary and secondary schools.
The vocal criticism of those parents, the NSBA letter said, was “a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.”
In response, Garland quickly issued a memorandum instructing the FBI and other DOJ entities to create a “Partnership among federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement to address threats against school administrators, board members, teachers and staff.”
What threats?
The NSBA cites a score of incidents, but almost all involve nothing more than parents loudly criticizing members of their school board. A good example is this splendid performance by a parent called Simon Campbell, a Brit who understands the American Constitution much better than many Americans.
One example where there was violence involved Scott Smith, who was tackled by police, arrested, and found guilty of resisting arrest and disorderly conduct in Loudoun County, Virginia.
Smith claimed that his daughter had been raped by a “gender fluid” boy who entered the girl’s bathroom wearing a skirt.
At first the school denied that anything happened.
We now know that Smith was right and that the boy in question not only raped his daughter but then, having been quietly sent to another school, went on to sexually assault another girl.
The NSBA, panicked by the criticism and defections, issued an apology.
They didn’t really think “or at least they are no longer prepared to say” that parents who criticize school board members are “domestic terrorists” who are guilty of “hate crimes.”
But I suspect that this effort at damage control will fail. It is too little, too late.
Garland’s breathtaking memorandum was subject to instant and scathing criticism.
And remember, Merrick Garland was supposed to be a “moderate.”
When Barack Obama toward the end of his second term proposed him for the Supreme Court (for the seat that eventually went to Neil Gorsuch), even many conservatives rallied round to tout his credentials, talents, and impartiality.
It turns out that the Republicans who kept him off the Court were right: he was a left-winger masquerading as a moderate.
We got to witness exactly what sort of partisan operative he is during the Senate Judiciary Committee’s sometimes blistering cross examination of Garland last week.
Especially noteworthy were the exchanges between Garland and Senators Josh Hawley, Ted Cruz, and Tom Cotton.
Among other things, Senator Cruz pushed the Attorney General on the interesting fact that his son-in-law is the founder and president of Panorama, a multimillion-dollar company that sells critical race theory and related ESG (environmental, social, and governance) materials to schools around the country.
Was Garland’s son-in-law, Senator Cruz wondered, likely to be enriched by more schools hopping on the critical race theory bandwagon, a predictable result of the Department of Justice’s threat to sic the FBI on parents who objected to the prospect of their children being indoctrinated.
All concluded their remarks calling on him to resign.
Tom Cotton found a silver lining, “Thank God you are not on the Supreme Court.”
Far from repudiating his memorandum, the Attorney General repeatedly reaffirmed it. He himself worked on it. He said, “It reflects my view. I stand behind it.”
Which leaves us where?
I very much doubt that Merrick Garland will resign, at least not until Republicans retake the House and the Senate in fifteen months.
In the meantime, we are left with an Attorney General who is happy to mobilize the police power of the state to quash dissent.
Sure, he says he is in favor of the First Amendment, and he repeatedly stressed that he was only trying to protect school officials against violence.
But the “violence” at school boards is parents yelling ridicule at the board members, behavior they are entitled to engage in.
The journalist Chris Bray put his finger on our predicament in a thoughtful article at his substack about (in part) what is happening at school boards.
“The trap in our own moment,” he writes, “is that, first, governments have in many cases entirely stopped listening, as officials signal with growing clarity that they regard all grievances to their right as inherently without merit.”
Bray continues: “You express a grievance, and the school board orders the police to clear the room (and the police, incredibly, always do). But, second, resistance is coded as domestic terrorism at the first sign of raised voices, even if Merrick Garland pretends to be coy about the maneuver.”
Bottom line: “If you don’t resist, you won’t be heard; if you do resist, you’re a terrorist and a criminal and FBI SEARCH WARRANT—GET ON THE GROUND.”
You can ask Mr. Smith about how that works.
Bray concluded: “The game is that everyone takes their turn and then, whatever moves any players make, you lose.”
Maybe there is a silver lining here, too.
Despite the best efforts of the regime media to bury stories like the Attorney General’s police state memorandum, the word is getting out and people are angry and getting angrier.
The Obama administration was able to paint the Tea Party as a bunch of Bible-thumping rednecks and “deplorables.”
In fact, the vast majority were ordinary citizens: business men and women, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, doctors, even some teachers and lawyers.
But the campaign of vilification worked. The Tea Party was declawed, rendered irrelevant.
The strategy backfired, though, because those millions of people did not go way. They voted en masse for Donald Trump in 2016.
That is something that the agents of the administrative state might wish to keep in mind.
With every passing day, legitimacy drains from the Biden administration.
Terry McAuliffe will lose the Virginia Governor’s race on Tuesday.
Republicans will retake the House and the Senate in 2022.
You know what will happen in 2024.
It won’t necessarily be Trump, but it might be.
And if it isn’t it will be someone equally obnoxious to the Left.
My three boys were in Virginia public schools from the beginning of their education. But no more. At the end of last year, after seeing exactly what was being taught and how little my schools prioritized education, I pulled them out. It is a sacrifice: I now have to pay tuition for my two younger children and am homeschooling my oldest child. It’s worth it.
More and more, parents are waking up to the reality that the public school system is broken. They aren’t just failing to teach kids basic skills; the public schools are misusing the trust that is placed in them. What’s worse, school boards and administrators are pushing political agendas and harming children in the process.
Many citizens still don’t know what’s going on. There is a reason why: Schools lock the public out, and the media supports it. They’ve even colluded with social media mobs to torment parents who try to speak up. Informing the public is an uphill battle.
Consider this: It recently came to light that numerous Virginia high school libraries stock a graphic novel (a genre geared to preteens) that includes extreme and violent sexual content. Parents understandably objected.
But this isn’t a case of parents trying to prevent their child from learning the facts of life or griping about the depiction of routine romantic or sexual situations. This is pornography.
A parent brought the existence of this book to the attention of the Fairfax County school board and read sections of the book out loud, revealing the obviously inappropriate content. The school board pulled the book from the libraries and is reviewing whether it should continue to be carried.
It’s nice that they have temporarily removed these books, but parents deserve more answers. Who included this book in the library in the first place? Are they reviewing what else is being featured in libraries? Is anyone being held accountable for exercising such poor judgment?
Independent Women’s Voice created an advertisement to raise awareness about this issue, which included images from the book. The ad was rejected as too explicit to run during the 11 p.m. hour on television in Virginia. Think about everything you see on TV and imagine what it takes for a television station to decline to run an ad that late at night.
Parents and citizens should be asking one question: Why are our schools so much less protective about what high school students as young as 14 are exposed to than TV stations catering to adults?
Will more parents start pulling their children from public schools?
This isn’t the only problem with Virginia schools. Students routinely endure race-obsessed classes, are given surveys that ask intimate questions about their sex lives, are treated to absurd lessons that tell them a British accent is a microaggression and form of racism, and are forced to watch misleading videos about Christopher Columbus in anticipation of “Indigenous People’s Day.”
Many parents woke up to the fact that something is very wrong with our schools last year when classes went virtual. Parents logged their kids into class and were surprised by what was being taught. As private schools quickly and safely resumed in-person learning, the public schools remained closed for most of the year.
We now know that our kids suffered tremendous learning losses during virtual learning, as well as from mental health issues due to the isolation and long hours spent staring at screens.
Since in-person classes resumed, safety has arisen as a major concern. For example, Loudoun County parents just found that school officials failed to report a violent sexual assault that occurred in a school bathroom, and that the student assailant was placed in another Virginia public school and went on to attack another girl.
Why was this student back in school just a few months after this first attack? Why weren’t parents alerted of the first attack? How many other incidents have Loudoun County school officials failed to report? Disturbing footage of violence in other schools has also been posted on social media. Are Virginia schools committed to actually providing students with a safe environment, even if it is at odds with their political narratives?
Gubernatorial candidate Terry McAulliffe recently said he doesn’t “think parents should be telling schools what they should teach” and as governor, he actually vetoed a bill that would have required schools to give parents more information about sexually explicit content covered in schools. Now administration officials in Washington are seeking to label concerned parents domestic terrorists.
What’s going on here? Why is the left demonizing parents and suggesting that we somehow aren’t supposed to be our children’s chief advocate responsible for ensuring that they grow to be healthy and responsible adults?
Public school officials need to remember that they work for parents and that their top priority should be to provide kids a safe environment in which to learn. That’s not happening in Virginia schools. Until that happens, parents will continue to do as I did — pull their children out of the public schools. And it will be worth it.
As the Biden White House and Congress’ radical progressives continue their efforts to reach an agreement with Capitol Hill moderates and conservatives on their proposed $1.75 trillion social spending bill, it’s becoming more apparent than ever that their pie-in-the-sky agenda is anything but fiscally responsible.
And that’s putting it very gently, believe you me.
On Thursday, the White House released its final version of President Joe Biden’s “Build Back Better” spending plan, which includes billions in funding for universal preschool, child care, public housing and climate initiatives and pins it all on the wealthy to — say it with me now — “pay their fair share.”
Of course, for this to even begin to make sense, one would certainly hope that the wealthy are made to payenough of their “fair share” to make the ends of the trillion-dollar-plus spending package meet, right?
According to an analysis from the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business, the White House has overshot its estimate for how much the plan’s tax increases will offset the ambitious spending initiatives by about $468 billion.
“At 9AM this morning, the White House released a set of revenue options for budget reconciliation that the White House estimated to total $1,995 billion over 10 years,” a summary of the school’s budget model released on Thursday reads.
“PWBM’s estimate of the same package is $1,527 billion, a difference of $468 billion,” it states.
The White House’s preliminary estimated revenue effects of selected provisions in its budget reconciliation package estimate a total of $1,995B over 10 years. This is $468B more than our #PWBM‘s estimate of revenues, which amount to $1,527B.
(2/2) Notable differences in revenue estimates include the 15% minimum tax on book income and increased IRS funding by $80B over the next 10 years. The White House estimated $325B and $400B, respectively, while $PWBM only estimates $195B and 190B in revenues, respectively. pic.twitter.com/8eXL3jHJe9
The most substantial discrepancy between the White House’s plan and the Penn Wharton Budget Model’s projection is the revenue that would be brought in by increasing funding to the Internal Revenue Service. While the Biden administration projected this would bring in $400 billion, PWBM estimated $190 billion.
A 15 percent minimum corporate tax on companies that report earnings of over $1 billion, meanwhile, was estimated to bring in only $195 billion, although the White House’s figure projected $325 billion.
This is exactly the kind of thing that Dave Ramsey is always warning us regular folks about doing with our own budgets — yet we’ve gotten so used to our own federal government’s wildly excessive and irresponsible funding that when we see these facts and figures, our eyes glaze over.
It’s likely not a coincidence that as our culture has moved so far away from any cohesive sense of personal responsibility, we’re lost most of our interest in fiscal responsibility on both a personal and state level.
Our nation is sinking into crippling debt, and yet younger Americans still clamor for high-priced social spending with the misguided assumption that because our nation is the wealthiest in history, surely money is growing on trees that are kept in some massive proverbial orchard, access to which has been cruelly cut off to more deserving and sympathetic people.
“Tax the rich” looks great when it’s pithily conveyed in tweets — or on the back of high-dollar Met gala gowns — but even if such a scheme were so simple, the figures still have to line up on paper.
Do Democratic politicians behave as if money grows on trees?
Yet we live in a world where large-scale riots that destroy millions of dollars of private property, often owned by minorities, is seen as racial justice, being forgiven for debt you agreed to pay to go to a fancy university is seen as a human right, and forcing taxpayers of conscious to pay for abortions is seen as a matter of women’s health.
Is it any wonder that it is so controversial to pass legislation that simply lines up with mathematical reality in such a twisted world?
We are terrible stewards of the material blessings our nation has generated, just as we are terrible stewards of the reasoning and philosophy that led to the foundation of our nation in the first place.
Way back in 1967, in that brief window of time between the media’s notice of the sexual revolution and its dawning awareness of second wave feminism, Hollywood made a movie called “A Guide for the Married Man,” which celebrated the joys of (male) adultery. Nowadays Tinseltown may practice it but doesn’t (usually) preach it; then it did both.
In one segment the mentor of a prospective adulterer answers the question of what to do if you are caught in the act by your wife by saying: “Deny, deny, deny.” There follows a vignette in which a man so caught does just that—until his partner in sin gets up, dresses and leaves.
“What woman?” says the husband.
“The one who just left,” says the wife.
“When?” says the husband.
“But, Charlie …” says the wife.
“What?”
“Aren’t you even ashamed of yourself?”
“Why?”
“Because of … Charlie?”
“What?”
“What would you like for dinner?”
Deplorable as the whole idea of such a movie is, there is a deep wisdom in this scene, which is this: when it ceases to be possible to catch someone in a lie, it also becomes impossible for that person to lie.
So long as the liar, like Charlie, holds the whip hand and therefore is powerful enough that it is impossible for anyone else to require him to admit to his lie, it’s not a lie.
The principle is basically the same as that expressed by the 16th century poet Sir John Harington:
“Treason doth never prosper; what’s the reason?
“For if it prosper, none dare call it treason.”
I tried to make a similar point, as you may remember, two weeks ago in this space, when I wrote that a lie that everybody knows to be a lie is no longer a lie but a kind of functional truth, since our knowledge that it’s a lie can reveal to us the truth.
It’s at that point, anyway, where those of us without the power to force an admission of lying can only shrug our shoulders and say of the liar, “Well, I guess he’s only expressing his truth.”
The examples I gave in that earlier column were taken from the collected works of President Joe Biden—most egregiously the obvious lies that the American evacuation of Afghanistan was “an extraordinary success” and that a $3.5 trillion spending bill would actually cost “zero.”
Of course, the power of the president to lie with impunity is not a constitutional one but is conferred upon him by the media, whose own greatest power is the power to ignore.
Applied to presidential lying, this power to ignore and therefore not to expose the lies means that, even if everybody knows they are lies, they can continue to function as truth—the president’s truth.
Despotisms have always functioned in this way, but usually through the despot’s direct control of the media. In America today the situation is somewhat different. The media’s power to ignore or to promote as truth the lies of the ostensible autocrat is assumed voluntarily and without constraint or fear of punishment.
Why should that be? I don’t know, but it suggests to me that it is not, under the Biden-style of despotism, the executive which is in control of the media but the media which is in control of the executive.
That would fit, too, with the sense that many of us have that, nasty as the old Joe Biden could be at times, the nastiness of his administration is no more all his own work than anything else that’s happened over the last nine months.
We caught a glimpse this week of how the process of collaboration between the media and Democrats in power to set the administration’s agenda works. The notorious letter from Attorney General Merrick Garland to the FBI, as reported in this space three weeks ago, setting up a task force to investigate as potential “domestic terrorism” any complaints by parents about left-wing curricular or other changes to public schools affecting their children turns out to have been not quite what it seemed at the time.
It was a result of collaboration between Garland and a few left wingers at the National School Boards Association, from which numerous state boards have since dissociated themselves, and was based at least in part on an incident in Loudoun County, Virginia, last June.
Then an aggrieved father, Scott Smith, was tackled by police and arrested at a school board meeting after complaining that his 15-year-old daughter had been raped in a girls’ restroom at Stone Bridge High School by a boy taking advantage of current left-wing orthodoxy to pose as a “transgender” girl.
On that occasion, Scott Ziegler, the Loudoun County school superintendent proclaimed that, “To my knowledge, we don’t have any record of assaults occurring in our restrooms,” adding on the authority of Time magazine that “the predator transgender student or person simply does not exist.”
This was a lie on both counts. The Daily Wire reported two weeks ago that numerous allegations of sexual assault at the school had not been reported, as state law requires school authorities to do.
That, apparently was why “we don’t have any record” of such assaults. They didn’t trouble themselves to make one.
Then, on Monday, the “transgender” predator was convicted of assaulting not only Smith’s daughter but another girl at another school to which he had been transferred later as a potential embarrassment to Stone Bridge’s transgender restroom policy.
At this writing, Superintendent Ziegler still has his job. Deny, deny, deny certainly seems to have worked for him.
And, although the National Association of School Boards has since repudiated its own letter calling for investigation into “domestic terrorism,” Attorney General Garland still has his FBI task force to investigate it, as he informed the Senate Judiciary Committee on Oct. 27.
Joe Biden still has his job too, though now we have a better idea than we did nine months ago what that job is. It’s to cover up left-wing lies by playing the role of doddering old Uncle Joe who doesn’t know what he’s saying half the time anyway. You could call it type-casting.
Loudoun County’s sheriff rejected a request by the school district’s superintendent to dramatically ramp up the law enforcement presence at a pair of school board meetings in August, newly released emails show.
Scott Ziegler, the superintendent for the Virginia county, asked the Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office (LCSO) for three deputies to be inside the administration building for the Aug. 10 and Aug. 11 meetings, the emails show. He also requested a “K-9 explosive sweep,” a five-person “Quick Reaction Force,” undercover deputies, and another team “stood up and on standby at nearby location.”
Loudoun County Sheriff Mike Chapman rejected the request, according to one of the emails.You May Also Like
Chapman informed district officials that there would be no uniformed officers inside the building where the meetings were taking place nor would there be a law enforcement presence on campus.
Officers would be “in the area” in case they needed to quickly respond to a call, he said, according to a report on a discussion between district officials and the sheriff’s office conveyed to Ziegler in one of the emails.
Chapman said he was motivated not to approve the requests because the school board made a number of decisions without consulting the sheriff’s office, including deciding to limit public comment for a previous June 22 meeting and hiring a security firm with a metal detector.
“LCSO has been made to appear as the muscle for school board and work at the school board’s direction,” Kevin Lewis, a district official, told Ziegler in the call summary. The sheriff also said he believed citizens should have a right to address the board and that the board was being dismissive of people with whom they disagreed.
The documents were obtained by the Fight for Schools PAC and published by Fox News.
An LCSO spokesman confirmed to The Epoch Times that the conversation took place.
“The concerns raised by Sheriff Chapman was regarding the request for extensive resources and security measures that were not deemed necessary based on intelligence gathering for that meeting,” he said in an email.
He also said that the sheriff’s office does and continues to provide security for the school board meetings.
“For safety and security reasons, we cannot share law enforcement sensitive operational plans in regards to public meetings but we can assure residents that we allocate the appropriate level of resources based on the nature of the public meetings and the intelligence developed prior to each meeting,” he said.
The school district did not respond to a request for comment.
The northern Virginia county has become the epicenter for tension between parents and school board members seen across the nation in recent months.
Members have been vocally challenged in recent meetings on proposed policies like one that would let children who identify as a sex different than the one they are born with use various bathrooms. That policy was eventually approved, even though most parents who publicly testified opposed it.
Ziegler claimed in the June meeting that the district had no record of assaults happening in bathrooms, which was factually untrue, according to an email recently disclosed by district officials. He has said he misunderstood the question and is defying calls to resign.
Does your child have issues with gender dysphoria? Are they identifying as a different gender at school and asking teachers to use their preferred pronouns? Do you think this is something you, as their mother or father, should have some control over?
Check your parental privilege, say school administrators in Oshkosh, Wisconsin.
In a letter to parents on Oct. 22, the Oshkosh Area School District — saying it was “committed to doing what is best for students and fostering a safe, supportive and inclusive learning environment for all” as well as “partnering with families to support the unique needs of every student” — announced it would no longer ask for parental consent if their child changed their gender pronouns or name in the classroom environment.
“The District recently changed a section of administrative guideline 2260E that required parental consent in order for district staff to use a student’s preferred name or gender pronouns if they differed from the student’s biological sex assigned at birth,” read the letter from Matthew Kaemmerer, the district’s director of pupil services.
“District staff members are no longer required to seek parental consent prior to honoring student requests to be called by their preferred name and/or pronouns.”
“While we understand that there are varying perspectives related to gender identity, we know that in order to put students first we must acknowledge and support each student’s unique needs,” the letter continued.
“In making this change our goal is to empower students to advocate for themselves, while ensuring that our classrooms and schools are places where all students are able to be their true selves. It is our hope that by providing students with the support they need at school they will be able to have those same conversations at home and with those around them if they haven’t already.”
Three days earlier, Kaemmerer sent a similar letter to district employees regarding the new transgender student policies.
Notice that just went out to all school district employees in Oshkosh, Wisconsin.
Parents are an afterthought, even for issues as serious as a child changing their gender identity. pic.twitter.com/mPbOc15v2t
“That’s something that we’ve reviewed and have found some difficulty with sometimes with staff engaging with students,” OASD superintendent Bryan Davis said, according to WLUK-TV. “We really want to make sure that we’re advocating for our students and with our students.”
Information wasn’t sent to parents until the change was fully implemented — three days after the notice was sent to district employees about the change to the transgender student policy.
“It was sent to the staff and it was not sent to the parents, and I guess I would ask myself, ‘Why would you not inform the parents?’” Oshkosh resident Chad Radtke told WLUK. “That seems like the first thing I would do!”
“It was just another sign that things are going in the wrong direction,” Radtke said. “From my perspective, and it’s hard to see it any other way, almost as if they’re deliberately riling up the parents to see how far they can push things; how many things they can kinda sneak past.”
Oshkosh city councilman Aaron Wojciechowski, however, said not allowing parents prior knowledge or input regarding what their minor children were doing in regard to their gender identity in public schools that their tax dollars pay for was important for the “comfort” and “safety” of their kids.
“Someone’s identity and their expression is so important to their core values and who they are, and I think this is important because now they have that comfort, that safety that they wouldn’t have otherwise,” Wojciechowski said.
School officials tried to make clear that this didn’t mean they wouldn’t inform parents of their child’s decision to start using different pronouns or changing their gender identity. Not at all, Superintendent Davis told WLUK.
“It’s actually just the opposite of that,” he said. “It’s an opportunity for our kids to feel valued and to open up in conversations and for our staff to be able to validate that, and many students need support in these difficult conversations, being able to engage with their parents and family members.”
Do you support this school district’s decision?
The parents would be told. They just had no say in it anymore, that’s all. See? No big deal! The school would do the right thing and open up conversations with their parents to explain why they shouldn’t have objections anymore.
Erika Sanzi, outreach director for Parents Defending Education, pointed out the hypocrisy of the policy when speaking to the Daily Caller.
“Oshkosh Schools likely require parental consent to give a Tylenol to a student at school. What school officials fail to understand, it seems, is that parental rights do not disappear when parents send their children to school — the very reason the school has authority over the child is because of parental consent,” Sanzi said.
“Concealing information from parents, or worse, deceiving them, is entirely at odds with that delegation of authority.”
Meg Kilgannon of the Family Research Council also noted the acetaminophen paradox.
“Deliberately concealing this information from parents, when those same parents would be consulted over the administration of Tylenol or permission to go on a field trip, is beyond outrageous,” Kilgannon said.
“This one of the many reasons we are seeing sustained pushback at school board meetings across the country.”
And make no mistake: This is is deliberately concealing information from parents. They may or may not eventually be told — the policy was only implemented less than two weeks ago, after all, and we haven’t seen how it will play out — but the assumption is that parental guidance for their child is unwarranted, unnecessary and problematic.
Once the student discloses it to school, the school will be there for “support in these difficult conversations” — and after all, the parents don’t get to have the final say.
More importantly, however, it’s a school board unequivocally saying that parental value judgments about gender identity not only don’t matter, they’re wrong and any decisions regarding them are being taken out of parents’ hands. This is the madness of transgender ideology: The school knows best. It’ll not only teach your kids, it’ll teach you, dear hidebound parent.
The New Hampshire School Boards Association (NHSBA) announced Thursday that it has withdrawn from the national organization following the group’s efforts to target parents.
The National School Board Association (NSBA) recently sent a letter to the Biden administration’s Department of Justice that described the actions of parents protesting policies such as critical race theory or COVID-19 rules as the equivalence of “domestic terrorism.”
“This email is to inform you that NHSBA [the New Hampshire School Board Association] has decided to withdraw its membership from the National School Boards Association, effective immediately,” NHSBA Executive Director Barrett Christina wrote. “NSBA’s recent actions have made our continued membership untenable.
The NSBA wrote Sept. 29 (pdf), “America’s public schools and its education leaders are under an immediate threat.”
The letter added, “As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes.”
Following the NSBA’s letter, Attorney General Merrick Garland sent a memorandum to the Federal Bureau of Investigations to direct investigators to address the “disturbing spike” in harassment involving school board members by parents.
The controversy led lawmakers in Washington to discuss the matter with Garland this week. Republicans on the Judiciary Committee blasted the attorney general after he failed to rescind the letter or apologize regarding the matter.
“Thank God you’re not on the Supreme Court,” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) told Garland. “You should resign in disgrace.”
The NSBA has since apologized for its letter.
“On behalf of the NSBA, we regret and apologize for the letter. To be clear, the safety of school board members, other public school officials and educators, and students is our top priority, and there remains important work to be done on this issue,” the NSBA wrote last Friday.
“However, there was no justification for some of the language included in the letter. We should have had a better process in place to allow for some consultation on a communication of this significance,” the letter added.
Despite the apology, the damage has already had negative consequences nationwide.
In addition to New Hampshire, state school board associations in Ohio, Missouri, Louisiana, and Pennsylvania have already withdrawn from the NSBA.
Three additional states, Alabama, Florida, and Kentucky, have also announced they are considering a departure from the national organization.
The Orange County School Board in Florida removed a speaker from a board meeting after the man read a sexually explicit passage from a book that was available in local school libraries.
In a video recorded on Oct. 26 by a member of the Orange County chapter of pro-parental rights group Moms for Liberty, a man was ordered to be taken out of the meeting chamber by a police officer after he read from the 2019 graphic novel “Gender Queer: A Memoir.”
“I’m going to read a passage of a book that’s floating around in your schools that has been banned from many other schools,” said Jacob Engels, the speaker who was removed, according to Orange Observer. “As a member of the LGBT community, the fact that this is floating around for children as young as ninth grade is concerning.”
Engels then read a scene from the book depicting sexual acts before board chairwoman Teresa Jacobs asked him to stop, saying that he was “out of order.”
“If you don’t stop now, we will remove you from the chamber,” Jocob said. She then ordered the man’s removal as he continued to read.
Other community members in the audience can be heard protesting the interruption. “Our kids are reading this,” one man said.
“The language he just read is inappropriate in the forum,” Jocob explained.
“Then why it is appropriate for schools?” asked a woman.
“I understand the contradiction here,” Jocob replied, noting that neither she nor the board were aware of the book. “We will look into it, and I do hope the book is removed. OK? And if not, we’ll be back here having this conversation again, but I can guarantee you, I did not know that book was in the library.”
The school district later confirmed to the Observer that they have taken down all four copies of “Gender Queer” in three of the district’s 22 high schools.
“At this time, the book is not on library shelves and is under review,” the district said in a statement. “If anyone has a concern about materials or books found in our media centers or in our classrooms, Orange County Public Schools has a process in place for parents or guardians to submit a form to the school principal to address a concern.”
The graphic novel, created by California-based cartoonist Maia Kobabe, sparked a controversy earlier this week in Virginia, when conservative advocacy group Independent Women’s Voice (IWV) tried to run a 30-second TV ad containing the same sexual scene that Engels read. Local Virginia TV stations, including ABC, CBS, and NBC, have reportedly refused to air the ad, citing federal law which prohibits airing pornographic images.
“It’s shocking that images, and even some words, that federal law prohibits TV stations to share with adults are the same images being shared with Virginia students with no accountability,” said Victoria Coley, vice president of communications at IWV.
The book was available in schools in several Virginia districts, including in Fairfax, Loudon, and Arlington counties, according to IWV.
The irony regarding CRT is that is actually white supremacy. If they believed in what they preach, shouldn’t they kill themselves to serve “the greater good?” [US Patriot]
On Friday morning, supposed “white supremacists” clad in white button-down shirts greeted Virginia gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin’s bus with tiki torches. Leftists immediately claimed they were Youngkin supporters showing their true colors.
“To my fellow Virginia residents: please vote against this blatant display of racism, hatred and intolerance,” NBC News legal analyst Glenn Kirschner wrote in a since-deleted tweet.
“Please vote FOR a kind, welcoming, diverse Virginia. Please vote @TerryMcAuliffe for governor. Because #JusticeMatters.”
But as the morning went on, other Twitter users began to notice the “white supremacists” were not Youngkin supporters at all. Instead, they appeared to be former Democratic staffers in the state of Virginia.
Virginia Young Democrats financial director Camden Layton and Democratic Party of Virginia staffer Colleen Wachenfeld were among the alleged participants in the stunt.
OMG LOL Va Dems did *not* just send a black man to play a ‘white supremacist for Youngkin’ 😬 pic.twitter.com/h0SZujvKX1
🚨 I am now confident that we have identified the woman in this group of political actors as Colleen Wachenfeld, with @vademocrats. pic.twitter.com/qySknRSUrd
Many Republicans saw the stunt as a last-ditch effort for Democratic candidate Terry McAuliffe, who is falling in the polls ahead of next week’s gubernatorial election. Conservative pundit and strategist Greg Price called the actions “desperate.”
Terry McAuliffe’s campaign was feeling so desperate at their terrible poll numbers that they made a bunch of their staffers dress as white supremacists and condemned them to being memes for the rest of their lives.
Later on Friday, The Lincoln Project attempted to take credit for the stunt in a statement. The group claims to be dedicated to “protecting democracy” by fighting against former President Donald Trump and “Trumpism.”
“Today’s demonstration was our way of reminding Virginians what happened in Charlottesville four years ago, the Republican Party’s embrace of those values, and Glenn Youngkin’s failure to condemn it,” the statement said.
“The Youngkin campaign is enraged by our reminder of Charlottesville for one simple reason: Glenn Youngkin wants Virginians to forget that he is Donald Trump’s candidate. We will continue to hold Glenn Youngkin accountable. If he will denounce Trump’s assertion that the Charlottesville rioters possessed ‘very fine’ qualities, we’ll withdraw the tiki torches. Until then, we’ll be back.”
It is unclear whether the Democratic staffers coordinated with The Lincoln Project to perform the stunt. Judging by their social media reactions, the staffers weren’t nearly as proud to take public responsibility for their participation.
There are essentially two main explanations for the event. Either the participants were actually trying to fool people into believing they were Youngkin supporters, or they were trying to politically harm him by dressing up as white supremacists. In both scenarios, their actions are still reprehensible.
Youngkin has a real chance to win the governorship in Virginia next week, and that scares the life out of Democrats both in the state and around the country. If they think gimmicks like this one are going to help change that, they are sorely mistaken.
Ever since the National School Board Association issued an open letter to President Joe Biden which essentially branded parents who protest mask policies, critical race theory and transgender bathrooms as “domestic terrorists,” it’s become abundantly clear that school boards aren’t particularly thrilled about this new rip-roaring form of American populism coming from concerned parents.
The organization has since had to walk back its inflammatory suggestion, as member groups around the country have been pushing back, but not before the Department of Justice has taken up the cause. It appears that plenty of school boards are still very disgruntled that tax-paying parents want to show up and let them know exactly what they think about infusing COVID tyranny and leftist indoctrination into public school curricula.
One Minnesota school board has gone way, way too far, however.
Alpha News reported this week that residents of Mankato, Minnesota, who might want to point school board members to, say, COVID-19 case rates among children or to read aloud from pornographic novels they’ve found in the school library, will have to state their home address before they participate in the public portion of the meetings.
On Oct. 18, Jodi Sapp, Mankato Area Public Schools board chair, detailed the new rules, which include the disclosure of one’s home address, a ban on addressing board members directly or discussing any issues not on the agenda for the meeting, and — oh yeah — if anyone cheers, claps, or even hollers, by George, she’s shutting the public forum down at once.
“Effective tonight, open forum participants are prohibited from calling out or addressing any individual school board or school district staff member. If this occurs, open forum will be closed,” Sapp stated during the meeting that evening. “Beginning at the Nov. 1 school board meeting, open forum will be limited to those individuals who wish to speak to an item on the board agenda.”
“Crowd noise, or any sort of grandstanding during open forum, including applause, talking, hollering or any outburst will result in open forum being closed,” she also said. “Further, beginning at the Nov. 1 school board meeting, open forum participation will be limited to those individuals who wish to speak to an item on the board agenda.”
As Alpha News noted, this effectively dictates that the public will not be allowed to address any topics the board hasn’t already decided are kosher and that individual members of the board will be shielded from any direct public criticism during board meetings.
Have school boards gone full tyrant?
Perhaps Sapp has observed from afar the fate of Loudoun County board member Beth Barts, who recently stepped down amid efforts to remove her from office over her alleged involvement with a left-wing parents’ group that was compiling lists of local parents who opposed the LGBT and “anti-racism” policies the board was attempting to pass.
Additionally, the Mankato board is now openly requiring that any parents that speak during the public portion of their meetings dox themselves prior to giving comments.
“Each speaker is asked to state his or her name and address for the record. Failure to do so will result in an individual not being allowed to speak,” Sapp stated during the meeting as reported by Fox News.
According to Alpha News, this appeared to be the first time such a policy was put in place. A meeting on Sep. 20 requested no such thing from members of the public.
Disturbingly, as the Minnesota-based outlet reported, one man initially refused to state his home address but finally acquiesced, turning away from the microphone in the hopes that it wouldn’t be captured and broadcast to online viewers of the meeting.
However, “Sapp was sure to restate his exact address into her microphone so all could know where he lives,” they noted.
The stringent new requirements for members of the public came after an Oct. 4 meeting during which fewer than 10 people spoke to the board for roughly 25 minutes altogether.
“The majority of this time was used by community members to speak out against the district’s mask mandate and policy on staff vaccination,” Alpha News noted. “Some speakers’ remarks were followed by modest applause, much to the chagrin of Sapp, who appeared uncomfortable in the face of criticism.”
On Oct. 18, Sapp credited these people, whose behavior she derided as “unacceptable,” as being the reason behind the new regulations.
I’m sorry, even if these people had been heckling, shouting, and knocking chairs over during the previous meeting, what sane person thinks that forcing members of the public to disclose their home address is an acceptable means of maintaining decorum during a school board meeting?
This is not only petty and vindictive, it’s highly disturbing. Tax-paying members of the public certainly ought to be able to publicly address the board of the local school district they’re required to support without worrying that some nutjob could easily come and find them and their family while they sleep at night.
How is it remotely sensible or acceptable to risk the safety of every single member of a person’s family, including their own children, because you’re irritated that people don’t like mask policies and vaccine requirements?
Besides, if we’re supposed to believe that parents who hate masking, critical race theory and transgender students are basically domestic terrorists, wouldn’t it put any members of the public who spoke out in support of these policies at serious risk at the hands of these maniacs?
This is exactly the kind of subtle tyranny that’s being implemented across the country, from private employers to the federal government to classrooms and everywhere in between.
Sure, no one is forcing you to take the vaccine, but you’ll lose your job if you don’t. Sure, no one is forcing your child to adopt the ideology of critical race theory, but they’ll be alienated by their peers and told in class they’re a racist if they don’t repent of their whiteness.
Sure, no one is banning you from speaking out against local school board policies, but just go ahead and tell everyone where your kids sleep if you’d like the opportunity to do so.
All across America, parents are fighting back against school boards. They are getting more and more outraged that our public schools would defy their concerns and teach their kids a revisionist version of our history. Parents have spoken up, confronting these liberal-controlled school boards.
Biden struck back by having the DOJ brand these parents as criminals. But that hasn’t stopped patriotic parents from fighting for their children’s educations. And in Republican-controlled Texas, they are taking steps to take out one poisonous form of curriculum.
From The Hill:
The chairman of a Texas state House committee tasked with conducting investigations is launching a probe into books that school librarians keep on their shelves in the wake of a measure the legislature passed earlier this year to bar teaching of critical race theory in public schools.
Texas state government is launching investigations to probe the kinds of books available on public school shelves. They are searching for anything that teaches the previously barred “critical race theory” curriculum being pushed by Democrats in our schools.
Texas banned this kind of teaching in the classrooms. But it’s possible that schools found loopholes by putting these books in their libraries. Teachers and liberal librarians could easily encourage kids to read these books on their own, circumventing the law.
Critical race theory has been widely panned by many historians and conservatives. Many believe the ideology twists American history by branding our founding fathers as villains over slavery and other issues. It removes the merits of our leaders and the incredible work they did to found the United States.
Many, including leaders like Ben Carson, fear how this teaching can warp the minds of millions of young people. At least in Texas, their leaders are taking the steps to eliminate this toxic teaching and restoring accurate, honest historical curriculum.
But in many other states, parents have to fight to get their voices heard. Meanwhile, the DOJ and the media branding Americans for simply speaking their mind. The only way CRT will fail is if Americans refuse to back down.
Key Takeaways:
Texas state legislature is investigating to take CRT books from school libraries.
The state banned the teaching of “critical race theory” and is ensuring it isn’t in the libraries.
American parents have fought school boards to remove this teaching from schools.
Luke Rosiak’s report in The Daily Wire is further evidence that Democrats are pro-corrupt school boards and anti-parents. This should be a clear sign that Virginia needs Glenn Youngkin as governor to protect children.
The report from Luke Rosiak, a highly regarded investigative reporter, in The Daily Wire is quite disturbing. It details a cover-up of alleged sex crimes against a 12-year-old student in Fairfax County. Democrat Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe was a senior advisor to a law firm which is actually fighting against the victim. Please share this story as it should have a significant impact on the governor’s race and reinforce how we need to have control over our children’s education system.
Public schools attempting to indoctrinate children with woke ideologies have been a problem for years. But Broward County, Florida, is reportedly taking things to a whole new level of crudity.
On Wednesday, Broward County school board member Sarah Leonardi tweeted pictures of a field trip she took Wilton Manors Elementary students on. The problem was the destination of the field trip was a gay bar.
“I was SO honored to be invited to chaperone @WiltonManorsES’s field trip to the incredible Rosie’s!” she wrote. “The students and I had a fun walk over and learned a lot about our community!”
I was SO honored to be invited to chaperone @WiltonManorsES’s field trip to the incredible Rosie’s! The students and I had a fun walk over and learned a lot about our community! A huge thank you to @RosiesBnG for hosting this special field trip every year! pic.twitter.com/A3rpMbyUJP
— School Board Member Sarah Leonardi (@bcpsleonardi) October 27, 2021
In one picture, young students in masks can be seen outside the bar with three adults. Another image shows the young children sitting at tables inside the gay bar.
On its online menu, Rosie’s has items such as “Naked Sweaty Lovin’,” “Smack My Cheeks and Make ‘em Rosy Sauce,” “Miley Highclub” and “Beet Your Brains Out.”
Doesn’t that sound like a nice, family-friendly establishment?
Seeing children at a bar like this is disturbing in any capacity, but the fact that it appeared to be a school-sanctioned event was even more grotesque. Many users took to Twitter to express their concern.
In her tweet, Leonardi suggested the gay bar field trip was an annual event. One can only hope this exposure will spare future students from such gross mistreatment.
Previous actions from the Broward County school board suggest the body is on the political left. For example, the board voted in August to enforce a universal mask mandate despite a ban on such mandates by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, WPLG-TV reported. (The board later voted to make masks optional at the district’s high schools.)
Unfortunately, sexually charged school events promoting an LGBT agenda are becoming more prominent. On Oct. 15, Burlington High School in Vermont hosted a drag show during halftime at a high school football game.
VT: Burlington’s high school homecoming drag show leaves LGBTQ+ students with mixed emotions.
Principal Lauren McBride waited near the field, her walkie-talkie crackled: “They’re coming out, and they look fabulous.”
Abuses like this are the reason parents are becoming more involved in their children’s education. They are also the reason why politicians like Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe, who said parents should stay out of education, are falling in the polls. Meanwhile, students in China have reached the top of the world charts in reading and math performance.
Parents care about what their children are being taught, and they have every right to do so. If woke educators keep pushing leftist ideas on their students, the effects will almost certainly be felt in future elections.
For over nine months, the establishment media has attempted to use the Jan. 6 Capitol incursion to demonize the Republican Party. This week, Fox News host Tucker Carlson announced his latest effort to fight against the leftist narrative.
According to Newsweek, Carlson revealed a trailer on Wednesday’s episode of “Tucker Carlson Tonight” for a documentary about “the true story behind 1/6, the war on terror 2.0 and the plot against the people.”
Carlson also posted the trailer to his Twitter account.
“The domestic war on terror is here,” a man says at the beginning of the trailer. “It’s coming after half of the country.”
Later in the trailer, President Joe Biden is shown characterizing Americans as terrorists.
“Terrorism from white supremacy is the most lethal threat to the homeland today,” he says.
Biden is correct that white supremacy is terrible and should be eradicated. The problem is that for many leftists, “white supremacy” is synonymous with “anything I don’t like.”
“False flags have happened in this country, one of which may have been Jan. 6,” a woman says as the trailer continues.
Will you watch Carlson’s new documentary?
The documentary will premiere on Nov. 1. Newsweek reported that it will be in three parts and will be available on the subscription-based streaming platform Fox Nation.
“We believe that it answers a lot of the remaining questions from that day,” Carlson said. “Our conclusion? The U.S. government has in fact launched a new war on terror. But it’s not against al-Qaida; it’s against American citizens.”
That language is certainly strong and could be jarring to many people. But given what we know about the Jan. 6 incursion, the possibility is at least worth exploring.
For one thing, the FBI reportedly had at least one agent planted in the crowd that day. Video footage of the incident shows a majority of the people inside the Capitol simply standing around. While they may have been guilty of unlawful entry, they were certainly not the violent terrorists the left made them out to be.
In August, Reuters reported that the FBI found “scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result.” Nonetheless, the establishment media continued to cover the event as a right-wing scheme to overthrow the government.
If Carlson’s documentary makes these points and attempts to answer questions about FBI involvement and media coverage, that would be completely valid. If it tries to defend violent rioters, that should be condemned.
Of course, the establishment media has already jumped at the opportunity to label Carlson a conspiracy theorist.
“Tucker Carlson’s Most Deranged Moment Yet?” a Rolling Stone headline blared on Wednesday.
“Tucker Carlson’s new documentary baselessly suggests the January 6 riot was a false flag,” Business Insider declared. How can you know the claim is “baseless” if you haven’t watched a minute of the documentary to see what evidence is presented?
The media has already made its determination about the accuracy of Carlson’s documentary before it has even come out. That kind of dishonesty is exactly why Carlson needed to make the documentary in the first place.
Attorney General Merrick Garland was utterly humiliated on Wednesday by Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Garland was grilled over his Oct. 4 memorandum in which he called on the FBI to mobilize against parents who were concerned about what their children were being taught in public schools.
Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, who was at the top of his game, told Garland: “Thank God you are not on the Supreme Court.” He then called on Garland to “resign in disgrace.”
Next up was Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley who laced into the attorney general for weaponizing the FBI and the DOJ against parents for political purposes.
“It’s wrong, it is unprecedented to my knowledge in the history of this country, and I call on you to resign.”
Then, it was Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’ turn, and by the end of this exchange, I almost felt sorry for him.
Almost.
Do you believe that Merrick Garland’s son-in-law’s business poses a conflict of interest?
Most of Garland’s activism can be chalked up to being a team player, but he does actually have some skin in the game in the debate over critical race theory being forced into U.S. public school curriculum. His son-in-law, Xan Tanner (not to be confused with Dan Tanna), is the co-founder of Panorama Education, a company that markets critical race theory-based software platforms to school districts throughout the country.
Lest you think Tanner’s company is small potatoes, an article in the “Press” section of the company’s website informs readers that “25 percent of American students are enrolled in a district served by Panorama today.”
TechCrunch reports that the company raised $60 million in new funding to expand the company in September.
Note that one of the “existing backers” is the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. Priscilla Chan is Mark Zuckerberg’s wife.
Cruz grilled the attorney general about this glaring conflict of interest. He asked Garland repeatedly whether he had “sought an ethics opinion” on the matter, a question he refused to answer. (A full transcript of the exchange can be viewed on Cruz’ website.)
Holding up a copy of Garland’s memo to the FBI, Cruz declared, “This memo was not law. This memo was politics.”
“I’ll tell you what, the NSBA is so embarrassed of this letter, they’ve apologized for it and retracted it, but you don’t apparently have the same willingness to apologize and retract what you did,” Cruz said. “Let me ask you something else. A big part of this letter is that they’re upset about parents not wanting critical race theory taught. Your son-in-law makes a very substantial sum of money from a company involved in the teaching of critical race theory.
“Did you seek and receive a decision from an ethics adviser at the Department of Justice before you carried out an action that would have a predictable financial benefit to your son-in-law?”
In the exchange that ensued, the attorney general refused to answer the question 12 times … yes, 12.
“This memorandum is aimed at violence and threats of violence,” Garland replied.
“I just asked a question. Did you seek an ethics opinion?”
Garland danced around the question each of the 12 times it was asked, in a thoroughly infuriating but all too typical manner.
“[Attorney] General, are you refusing to answer if you sought an ethics opinion?” Cruz pressed.
“I’m telling you that there’s no possible con[flict] … “
“So, you’re saying no. Just answer it directly. You know how to answer a question directly. Did you seek an ethics opinion?”
Finally, Cruz’s time expired. He said, “Let the record reflect the attorney general refuses to answer whether he sought an ethics opinion. And apparently ethics are not a terribly high priority in the Biden Justice Department.”
In addition to establishing that Garland had not sought an ethics opinion regarding his son-in-law’s business interests, Cruz humiliated the attorney general by demonstrating that neither he nor anyone else at the DOJ had bothered to investigate any of the 20 incidents of “intimidation” of school board members by parents before hastily firing off his memo to the FBI.
“Let me ask you something, General Garland. In the letter, which you told the House of Representatives was the basis for this abusive memo targeting parents, how many incidents are cited in that memo?”
“I have to look back through the memo,” Garland replied.
Cruz pressed. “You don’t know. How many of them were violent?”
“Again, the general report … ”
The senator interrupted the attorney general and asked, “How many of them were violent, do you know?”
“I don’t know.”
More back and forth ensued, and Cruz finally summed it up: “Okay. Fifteen of the 20 on the face of it are not violent. They’re not threats of violence. They’re parents who are unhappy. Yet, miraculously, when you write a memo, the opening line of your memo, ‘In recent months, there has been a disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation and threats of violence.’ You know what? You didn’t look, and nobody on your staff looked. Did you even look up the 20 instances?”
Garland replied, “As I testified, the decision to send a memo is for an assessment … ”
He was immediately cut off. Cruz asked, “Did you look up the 20 instances? Did anyone on your staff look them up?”
“I don’t know the answer. But it’s not all of the memo.”
Cruz took his kill shot. “But of course you don’t, and General, there’s a reason. Look, you started your career as a law clerk to Justice Brennan. You’ve had many law clerks during the year, during your time as a judge. I was a clerk to Chief Justice Rehnquist.”
“I’ll tell you what, if I drafted an opinion for the Chief Justice and walked in, and it said there’s a disturbing pattern of violence, ‘Well, Ted, how do you know that?’ ‘Well, I got an amicus brief here who claims it.’ You would fire a law clerk who did that. You’re the attorney general of the United States. This was not a tweet you sent. This is a memo to the Federal Bureau of Investigations saying, ‘Go investigate parents as domestic terrorists.’”
I guess we shouldn’t be surprised by any of this; Garland’s disregard for the Constitution is evident in every move he makes.
The DOJ is no longer committed to enforcing U.S. laws. Rather it exists to advance the Biden administration agenda, and it uses its vast powers to punish political adversaries.
The attorney general’s testimony demonstrated once again that his DOJ has picked up right where the Obama DOJ left off. The politicization of the DOJ is nearly complete.
The event “Defending Freedom in American Education,” held by a non-profit organization in Georgia on Oct. 23, addressed how parents can oppose Critical Race Theory (CRT), eradicate the harmful indoctrination, and preserve American values and principles in schools.
“We are vocal. We are loud. We are tenacious. We must be heard. But we are civil. We respect the rules of society and legitimate authority. We will not stand down. We are the majority—patriotic Americans who believe that a fair and just society can only be achieved when malleable young minds are free from the indoctrination that suppresses their independent thought,” said the organizer, Dr. Elana Fishbein from No Left Turn in Education.
Fishbein founded No Left Turn in Education in the fall of 2020 after her son was taught CRT at his Pennsylvania elementary school.
At the event, Fishbein said the first step is understanding the dangers of CRT and how it has infiltrated our culture through school curriculums, and that the goal of No Left Turn in Education is to empower parents to fight back.
CRT started in the mid-1970s in the writings of various American legal scholars, including Derrick Bell and Alan Freeman. It was revisited by Kimberlé Crenshaw in the 1980s.
CRT claims to study racism in society, and it presents racism as the root problem for a wide variety of social ills. In recent years, it has been endorsed by many in academia as well as U.S. civil-rights thinkers, seeking to examine the intersection of race and legal justice, or as an approach to racial justice.
Dr. Carol Swain, Best Selling Co-author of “Black Eye for America: How Critical Race Theory is burning down the house” attended the event “Defending Freedom in American Education” in Georgia on Oct. 23, 2021. (Joan Wang/The Epoch Times)
Dr. Carol Swain, a best-selling author, pointed out that the current goal of leftist educators is to extend CRT into the 5–12 school system, from its well-established perch in U.S. colleges and universities, with the aim of diminishing American pride.
Paul K. Lott, the founder and president of the National Society for the Advancement of Black Americans (also NSABA) at the event “Defending Freedom in American Education” in Georgia on Oct. 23, 2021.(Joan Wang/The Epoch Times)
Paul Lott, the founder and president of the National Society for the Advancement of Black Americans told The Epoch Times “that the statistics show there is no discrimination in America.”
“Average white poverty went up in 2018,” he said. “The statistics comparing 1959 to 2018, show white babies were three times more likely to remain poor than black babies in America. … If racism was happening, this would never have happened.”
He also said he believes that this notion of race-based inequity is bred by the Hollywood media pushing these assumptions of fact on young people.
A recent lawsuit, handled by Southeastern Legal Foundation, challenges mandatory student segregation being exercised in Illinois schools. It’s said the white students and non-white students are separated from the same teacher and receive different curriculums.
Kimberly Hermann, the General Counsel of Southeastern Legal Foundation, attended the “Defending Freedom in American Education” event in Georgia on Oct. 23, 2021. (Joan Wang/The Epoch Times)
Kimberly Hermann, general counsel of Southeastern Legal Foundation, advised parents of children who were being forced to accept divisive concepts based on race, to pursue legal help. She also said she believes that history should be taught in school and children should be educated with love, kindness, and caring for each other instead of hating each other.
An NBC News analysis earlier this year found at least 165 local and national groups have arisen, seeking to “disrupt or block lessons based on race and gender.”
A Minnesotaschool board is facing criticism because of new policies for public comment sessions at its meetings, including requiring that commenters state their home address in order to speak.
The Mankato Area Public School Board updated its open forum guidelines earlier this month, but only sparked controversy recently after video footage of an Oct. 18 meeting was shared on social media. During the meeting, parents and community members were told they must give their full address before they could speak for three minutes.
“I just want to remind everybody this is a business meeting of the school board, it is not a meeting that belongs to the public,” chairwoman Jodi Sapp told the audience before the open forum segment began.
She went on to read out the guidelines, stating that each speaker will be asked to state his or her name and address for the record, and that failure to do so will result in an individual not being allowed to speak.
The new rules also banned “calling out or addressing any individual school board or school district staff member.” If it occurs, the open forum will be closed, and the violator will not be allowed to participate in future open forums.
“Crowd noise, or any sort of grandstanding during open forum, including applause, talking, hollering or any outburst will result in open forum being closed,” Sapp added.
One of the public commenters was a Mankato man who identified himself as John Wicklund. When Sapp asked him to reveal his address, he replied that he “would rather not,” saying that he had suffered from “property damage, eggs, and everything else” by “fun people and their friends.”
After Sapp repeatedly pressed Wicklund for his precise home address, the man turned away from the microphone and gave his address in an attempt to avoid potential harassment. Sapp then restated that address using her microphone so that all could hear where he lives.
Mankato’s new policies were first reported by Minnesota news site Alpha News, which noted that rule was apparently not enforced or did not exist before October, since public forum participants were not asked to “dox themselves” at a Sept. 20 meeting.
The policies caused widespread criticism on social media, with many people questioning whether it is legal for the board to make such requirements, or whether the rules should also apply to board members themselves. The website of the Mankato school board currently doesn’t disclose each member’s home address.
The controversy comes amid a nationwide debate over parents’ role in their children’s upbringing and education. While advocacy groups like Parents Defending Education call for more parental involvement in local school districts’ decision-making process, the National School Board Association requested federal law enforcement to help handle what it described as “angry mobs” of parents who allegedly threaten the safety of teachers and school officials.
The school board did not respond to request for comment on the public forum policies.
Denouncing efforts by the National School Boards Association to demonize parents who demand a say in the education of their children, the Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday announced they will investigate potential collusion between the Biden administration and the National School Boards Association.
A rising tide of parental anger has been building across America as schools boards have jammed mask mandates, critical race theory, transgender activism and assorted other far-left extremist indoctrination tactics down the throats of children.
In response to defiant parents refusing to be pushed around any longer, Attorney General Merrick Garland earlier this month issued a memo saying that the Justice Department will now intervene on the side of school boards against parents.
“As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes,” the group wrote in a letter.
The school boards association has since issued an apology for the reference to domestic terrorism, but not the general tenor of its attack on parents.
Is the Biden White House anti-parent?
Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee sent a scathing letter to the National School Boards Association on Wednesday announcing the launch of their investigation into the organization’s war on parents in partnership with the White House.
“We are investigating the troubling attempts by the Department of Justice and the White House to use the heavy hand of federal law enforcement to target concerned parents at local school board meetings and chill their protected First Amendment activity,” the letter thundered.
Noting that the group’s letter denouncing parents produced the knee-jerk reaction of Garland’s memo, the letter added that Garland told the House panel that the letter’s wild claims were the basis of his anti-parent memo.
Merrick Garland tells @ChuckGrassley he will not dissolve school board task force even though the National School Boards Association apologized for the “domestic terrorism” letter that seemingly prompted Garland to create the task force
“The Biden Administration seemingly relied upon the NSBA letter — which it coordinated in advance with the NSBA — as justification to unleash the full weight of the federal law enforcement apparatus upon America’s parents,” the letter read.
“Parents have an undisputed right to direct the upbringing and education of their children, including expressing concerns about the inclusion of controversial curricula in their child’s education,” the House Republicans wrote, noting that the school boards association appears not to recognize that.
“Unsurprisingly, the NSBA’s September 29 letter to President Biden never once mentioned ‘parents’ or parents’ role in their children’s education — although its subsequent apology memorandum purported to value the ‘voices of parents.’ Concerned parents are absolutely not domestic terrorists and, to the extent actual threats exist, local law enforcement — and not the FBI — are the appropriate authorities to address those situations,” the letter read.
“Parents cannot tolerate this collusion between the NSBA and the Biden Administration to construct a justification for invoking federal law enforcement to intimidate and silence parents using their Constitutional rights to advocate for their child’s future.”
The letter called for a release of all the documents from the group and the Biden administration that were germane to its demand that parents be restrained from publicly advocating for their children.
The letter also asked whether, in light of its new-found claim that it values parents, “the NSBA will urge Attorney General Garland to withdraw or rescind his October 4 memorandum.”
The letter was signed by Republican Reps. Jim Jordan, of Ohio; Steve Chabot of Ohio; Louie Gohmert of Texas; Darrell Issa of California; Ken Buck of Colorado; Matt Gaetz of Florida; Mike Johnson of Louisiana; Andy Biggs of Arizona; Tom McClintock of California; Greg Steube of Florida; Tom Tiffany of Wisconsin; Thomas Massie of Kentucky; Chip Roy of Texas; Dan Bishop of North Carolina; Michelle Fischbach of Minnesota; Victoria Spartz of Indiana; Scott L. Fitzgerald of Wisconsin; Cliff Bentz of Oregon and Burgess Owens of Utah.
There are two possible explanations for President Joe Biden’s recent antics.
Either, one, Biden is completely fine with the current economic crisis as it devastates his constituents, or two, he somehow doesn’t even know about it.
Either way, there’s no denying the president has lost touch with the reality of the situation.
On Tuesday, at a campaign event for Virginia gubernatorial candidate and fellow Democrat Terry McAuliffe, Biden demonstrated as much when he said four simple words, claiming that America was “on the right track.”
Prices are up, the supply chain is in crisis, real wages are down, and Biden calls this the “right track”? pic.twitter.com/frUBoEPQtH
“If this is the ‘right track’ there are millions of Americans who want the heck off this train,” Loudoun County activist Aliscia Andrews wrote.
No one in their right mind can possibly argue that the United States is on the right track under Biden’s administration.
Cultural and political differences are dividing us more than ever before. Inflation is destroying the value of each American’s savings. Furthermore, the supply chain crisis continues to barrel out of control, with many left wondering whether or not store shelves will be empty come Christmas season.
We need a leader who acknowledges these problems and has a plan to stop them.
Sadly, it appears that the current U.S. president is not that man.
Parents group fires back, says DOJ memo designed to suppress dissenting parents
Attorney General Merrick Garland said on Oct. 27 that it was appropriate for the Department of Justice (DOJ) to send a memo to school boards despite a National School Boards Association (NSBA) decision to withdraw its letter comparing parent protesters to domestic terrorists.
During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Garland attempted to distance the DOJ’s memo from the NSBA letter.
“All it asks is for federal law enforcement to consult with, meet with local law enforcement to assess the circumstances, strategize about what may or may not be necessary to provide federal assistance, if it is necessary,” Garland said, in response to questioning from Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas).
The memo, he said, “alters some of the language in the letter that we did not rely on and is not contained in my own memorandum. The only thing the Justice Department is concerned about is violence and threats of violence.”
After the NSBA letter and DOJ’s memo were issued, Republicans in Congress said the Biden administration was trying to quash parental dissent against the teaching of controversial subjects, including the quasi-Marxist critical race theory.
Republicans have said the DOJ should withdraw the memo since the NSBA retracted and apologized for its letter last week. The original letter referred to protests against school board members and likened such actions to domestic terrorism, asking the DOJ to use the Patriot Act.
“I think all of us have seen these reports of violence and threats of violence—that is what the Justice Department is concerned about,” Garland said on Oct. 27. “That’s the reason that we responded as quickly as we did when we got a letter indicating that there was violence and threats of violence with respect to school officials and school staff.”
Real and concrete threats of violence against school officials “are not protected by the First Amendment,” he said. “We are not investigating peaceful protests or parent involvement in school board meetings.”
The follow-up apology letter issued by the NSBA “does not change” its concern about the threat of violence, Garland said, telling Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) that the DOJ directive merely addresses whether any federal laws were being broken.
Without providing any concrete examples or data, the attorney general’s memo issued earlier in October said there has been a “disturbing spike” in threats of violence, harassment, and intimidation against teachers, school board members, and other educators. In a separate statement, the DOJ also announced the creation of a task force that would deal with such threats, which includes the agency’s National Security Division.
In response to Garland’s testimony on Oct. 27, Parents Defending Education head Nicole Neily said in a statement that a “number of people across the country” were terrified by the DOJ memo. The memo also suppressed parents from attending meetings and voicing their concerns “because they feared a knock at the door by the FBI,” Neily said.
Garland confirmed during an Oct. 21 House Judiciary Hearing that the basis for the claim of a “disturbing spike” in threats was based on the NSBA letter—not on law enforcement intelligence or academic studies.
But the NBSA has since distanced itself from its initial letter.
“On behalf of the NSBA, we regret and apologize for the letter,” the group’s Oct. 22 letter said. “To be clear, the safety of school board members, other public school officials and educators, and students is our top priority, and there remains important work to be done on this issue.
“However, there was no justification for some of the language included in the letter. We should have had a better process in place to allow for some consultation on a communication of this significance.”
As Republican Glenn Youngkin insists that the election for governor of Virginia is all about parents and their children, to President Joe Biden, it’s seemingly all about Donald Trump.
Biden name-dropped the former president 24 times in 17 minutes Tuesday during a campaign stop to help Terry McAuliffe, the Democratic candidate for governor of Virginia, according to the New York Post.
Youngkin has made the race a dead heat, leading to an onslaught of big-name Democrats coming to Virginia in hopes of energizing their voters in the Nov. 2 election.
Biden’s jabs at Trump were part of a Democratic strategy to paint Youngkin as a wild-eyed Trumpist who would bring the kind of chaos witnessed in the Jan. 6 Capitol incursion to the sedate liberal mainstream of Virginia voters.
Biden said “extremism can come in many forms,” including “the rage of a mob” and “a smile and a fleece vest,” according to Yahoo.
One of Youngkin’s campaign trademarks is a fleece vest.
Youngkin has Trump’s support, but given the highly divided nature of the state from its liberal enclaves around Washington, D.C., to its more conservative counties, Youngkin has decided on a campaign strategy that does not include using Trump as an in-person speaker to rally the Republican vote.
However, Biden pictures Youngkin as a Trump loyalist.
“I ran against Donald Trump. Terry is running against an acolyte of Donald Trump,” Biden said.
Will Democratic scare tactics work this time around?
“He (Youngkin) won’t allow Donald Trump to campaign for him in this state. He’s willing to pledge his loyalty to Trump in private; why not in public? What’s he trying to hide? Is there a problem with Trump being here? Is he embarrassed?”
During his speech, Biden was heckled by protesters concerning the Line 3 pipeline from Alberta, Canada, to Wisconsin.
“This is not a Trump rally; we let them holler,” Biden said
Biden, along with former President Barack Obama, Vice President Kamala Harris and former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, are trying to energized Democrats.
Youngkin has turned away from the traditional political name game and has been strong in his focus on recent in-state controversies, including sexual assault accusations at Loudoun County Public Schools.
He also has backed parents who oppose certain books in schools that discuss sex in explicit detail. That has pitted him against McAuliffe, who has backed schools against parents.
What’s it like to have Terry McAuliffe block you from having a say in your child’s education?
“I’m not going to let parents come into schools and actually take books out and make their own decision,” McAuliffe said in a debate against Youngkin, according to the New York Post.
“I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.”
Youngkin, however, said the upcoming election will define if parents will be relegated to second-class status.
“Virginians have a moment to stand up, not just for the future of Virginia’s kids, but for America’s kids. And that’s why this race is so important to everyone right now,” he said, according to Fox News.
“The nation is watching because they recognize that when Virginians stand up and take a state that has been blue and elect a Republican governor, it’s going to make a statement that’s going to be (heard) not just around the country, but around the world.”
The parents of a Leon County school student have filed a lawsuit against school officials for violation of parental rights in an effort to stop enforcement of the district’s transgender-affirming “guidance” for their minor-aged daughter that was kept secret from the parents.
The Plan
As reported by The Epoch Times in August, January Littlejohn of Tallahassee, Florida, was horrified to discover that school officials held a secret meeting with her 13-year-old daughter to discuss how the school would accommodate her decision to be acknowledged as non-binary and use an alternate name at school. The plan made it clear to staff that the parents were not “aware and supportive of their child’s gender transition.” Therefore, while the school psychologist/social worker, principal, assistant principal, counselor, student teachers, substitute teachers, and the child’s peer group were allowed to know what was going on, the use of “privacy when speaking to parents” was listed as one of the “considerations” that “must be accounted for in implementing this plan.”
Excerpt from the Leon County School District’s transgender gender nonconforming student support plan, directing staff to keep all guidance regarding a 13-year-old daughter’s new “non-binary” status secret “when speaking to parents,” filled out in a secret meeting on Sept. 8, 2020. (Obtained by The Epoch Times from January and Jeffrey Littlejohn in August 2021.)
According to the Leon County School District’s Transgender/Gender-Nonconforming Student Support Plan—filled out during a Sept. 8, 2020, private meeting and first obtained by The Epoch Times—a “checklist” was used to record the child’s new non-binary status, “preferred name,” and “preferred pronouns.” The child also determined which bathroom she preferred using and that she would “be comfortable rooming w/either sex” on overnight school trips. This opened the door to having the 13-year-old girl rooming with teenage boys without her parents’ knowledge.
Excerpt from the Leon County School District’s transgender gender nonconforming student support plan, directing staff to keep all guidance regarding a 13-year-old daughter’s new “non-binary” status secret “when speaking to parents,” filled out in a secret meeting on Sept. 8, 2020. (Obtained by The Epoch Times from January and Jeffrey Littlejohn in August 2021.)
Through the series of emails and meetings between January and Jeffrey Littlejohn, their attorney and Leon County Schools Superintendent Rocky Hanna—which followed the discovery of the secret meeting—Hanna eventually conceded in a May 24, 2021 letter addressed to Mary McAlister—lead counsel for the Littlejohns—that “there was no basis to exclude” the parents from the private meeting. In the letter—also obtained by The Epoch Times—Hanna also said “a revised Q&A specific to the Littlejohn’s concern was provided to the administrators reiterating the directive to promptly contact parents of students who identify as LGBTQ+.” In conversations with the Littlejohns, Hanna further admitted the passage of H.B. 241, the Florida Parents’ Bill of Rights, “changed everything” in this matter.
Leon County Schools Equity Officer Kathleen Rodgers also told The Epoch Times in August that the district was “working to put together a more detailed policy to be more inclusive of the Parent Bill of Rights” and that “a committee” would meet “in the next few weeks to tweak policies and begin the process to present them to the School Board for adoption.”
The Broken Promises
“We have been meeting with the district for over a year and we were holding faith in what the superintendent was telling us,” January Littlejohn told The Epoch Times the day after the lawsuit was filed, “They said ‘you’re absolutely right, you should have been included,’ and ‘from here on out parents will be included.’ We thought that hiring attorneys would let them know we were serious and that passing the Parents’ Bill of Rights and having that signed into law would be enough.”
However, while the Littlejohns believed their July 1 meeting with school officials and their attorney went well—just after Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the Florida Parents’ Bill of Rights into law—the passage of time found nothing had changed.
While the Littlejohns requested to see the promised revised policy from the Leon County School District, all they found was that the school had pulled the old guide from the internet.
Despite Hanna’s assurance that parents will be included in important decisions being made for their child, it has become very clear that Leon County school officials are maintaining their policy of keeping everything secret.
“That was a huge red flag for me that they weren’t adhering to what was promised at the meeting,” Littlejohn said “and I became very concerned that we were being dragged along and they were not going to make good on their word. So we filed the lawsuit.”
The Lawsuit
According to Littlejohn, school officials continue to insist that they are following school guidelines, which are to protect the privacy of the children. However, their lawyer insists school officials are twisting the definition of the word “privacy” to push their own agenda.
“When we say ‘private,’ these school officials are taking the position of ‘keeping things private from parents,” Vernadette Broyles, president and general counsel at Child & Parental Rights Campaign Inc. in John’s Creek, Georgia, told The Epoch Times. Broyles is one of the attorneys representing the Littlejons in their lawsuit.
“We have no quarrel in protecting children’s privacy from a third party,” Broyles explained. What they do have a problem with is when school officials take the position that the decisions they make that affect the mental health and well-being of someone else’s child—like the decision to identify as something other than their sex, what bathrooms the child will use, and where they sleep on a field trip—should be kept secret from parents.
“Those are profoundly impactful decisions and they’re taking a position of saying they cannot share it with parents,” Broyles asserted “and that is a distortion of the concept of privacy of a child to keep such information from the child’s parents.”
According to Broyles, the individuals named in the complaint filed on Oct. 18 are Hanna and Rodgers. Broyles said the Leon County School Board was also named in the suit because they have reason to believe the board had “some complicity and knowledge of what was going on.”
The complaint alleges that the Defendants “violated Plaintiffs’ fundamental rights by implementing a protocol and training district staff to conceal from parents information regarding their children’s assertion of a discordant gender identity,” and “violated Plaintiffs’ fundamental rights by directing staff to deceive parents by using the children’s birth name and corresponding pronouns in the presence of or communication with the parents while using the children’s new chosen name and pronouns at all other times.”
‘Common Sense Things’
According to Broyles, they are asking for “some very common sense things.” They want the school to formally rescind the old guidance they had on the website, specifically the directives to “intentionally deceive parents by using the child’s given name and pronouns when the parents were around or when speaking to parents” and to “revert to using the assumed identity of the child” once the “parents were out of the way.”
“That is unconscionable,” Broyles said.
They also want a new policy drafted that makes it clear, “whenever a child expresses confusion about their gender identity or their sex that parents would be immediately notified because it is a health issue.”
In addition, “no meetings will be held and no actions will be taken until school staff and/or officials have first spoken to the parents and obtained their permission and their participation in these decisions.” They also demand that “any new policies be implemented through school board notification and voting.”
“That’s a big issue,” Littlejohn noted, explaining that many schools are able to keep parents in the dark about what is going on in their children’s schools by calling these procedures “guidance” rather than “policies.”
“We’re seeing around the country where these kinds of “guidance” are being implemented through back channels, decided somewhere in private conversations and then put in place not through the public school boards, which are accountable to parents and the community,” Littlejohn explained.
Asked if they believe the implementation of “guidance” through “private conversations” suggests there is an intentional violation of Florida’s Sunshine Laws, Broyles said the possibility is obvious.
“We suspect there is but we decided not to focus on that because those types of violations typically have a short statute of limitations and limited remedies,” Broyles explained. “This is a bigger picture. This lawsuit is about protecting the fundamental rights of parents to raise their children without the interference of government officials so we have focused on the guarantees under the Unites States Constitution, the Florida State Constitution, the protections of the Florida Parents’ Bill of Rights, and other Florida statutes.
“This is not just a Florida thing,” Broyles insisted. “This is a national agenda to drive a wedge between parents and their children because somehow public school officials have taken the position and have somehow come to believe that they know better than parents and that children are nothing more than the mere creatures of the state. This case is to establish that children belong to families and that parents are the rightful adults to be making these decisions about what’s in their child’s best interest.
“I want to be very clear about something,” Broyles added, “affirming a child’s discordant gender identity is a significant mental health and medical decision that affects the well-being of children with potentially life-long consequences. To affirm a child’s discordant identity is a treatment decision to a complex mental health issue that schools are not qualified to make. Parents must immediately be involved in such decisions. So this case is about establishing the rightful place of parents to make those decisions and that’s what protects children.”
The Secret Game of ‘Guidance’ Versus ‘Policy’
“This issue of ‘guidance’ versus ‘policy’ is really significant,” Littlejohn reiterated, sharing that she had watched a conference hosted by Equality Florida “that specifically told the schools, administrators, guidance counselors, and all of the attendees to implement guidance, not policy because you don’t have to have any input to do that.”
When they call it “guidance” rather than “policy” Littlejohn said school officials “can effectively train teachers, put on seminars, webinars and implement these procedures without ever having to go through the school board to get public comment.”
“It’s all done very much in secret from parents,” Littlejohn said, explaining how she had found “these same exact LGBTQ non-conforming guides” in many other Florida school districts including Broward, Dade, Palm Beach, Pinellas, Orange, Pasco, Hillsborough, and Alachua.
“And these were just the ones I researched,” Littlejohn noted. “I didn’t have time to research all the counties in Florida yet but it’s very easy to find these guides and it specifically states to keep this information from parents because outing a child to the parents could result in abuse or homelessness.”
Quisha King, the mother whose speech opposing critical race theory before the Duval County School Board went viral, produced a video warning parents that what happened in secret with the Littlejohns could also be happening to their children in Duval County. In the video, King reads directly from the Duval County Public Schools’ “Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual, Transgender & Questioning LGBTQ+” Support Guide (pdf), which instructs any teacher or school administrator who is asked about a child’s chosen status by a child’s parent to provide the following “appropriate response”:Based on policy and federal guidelines, I cannot divulge whether your child and I have had any such confidential conversations, as even students are legally afforded rights of privacy.
The guide further instructs that “upon notification of a transgender or gender non-conforming student’s status,” school staff should complete a support plan, just like the one filled out by the Littlejohn’s daughter in secret meeting with school officials, “in collaboration with the student and parent/guardian (if aware) to provide guidance to school staff on how to support the child at school.” The guide also provides a “reminder,” that “a student’s gender identity should never be disclosed without their consent even to a parent or guardian.” As it reads on the booklet cover, this guidance is to be practiced in “every school, every classroom,” with “every student, every day.”
“That’s devotion, honey,” King told The Epoch Times, clarifying that this means it applies to all Duval County children in kindergarten through twelfth grade. “They even have in the guide how to talk to kindergartners about this.”https://www.youtube.com/embed/fYbeqhTYvTA?wmode=transparent&wmode=opaque
“They put this out there under the umbrella of civil rights, privacy, and anti-bullying,” King explained. “But I don’t understand why we have to cater to one specific group. Nobody should be bullied. No one should be harassed. Why do we have to have LGBTQ signs everywhere as if they’re a special group? It should just be ‘we don’t tolerate bullying or harassment of anyone,’ period.”
The ‘Mishandling of This Situation’
“While we seldom comment on pending litigation, we have seen that the district openly acknowledged their mishandling of this situation and apologized for the matter,” Christina Pushaw, press secretary for DeSantis told The Epoch Times.
This is not the first time Leon County has been in the legal hot seat. On Oct. 12, Leon County was slapped with a $3.57 million fine for violation of state law prohibiting vaccine mandates for government employees and for firing 14 who refused to comply. They have until Nov. 5 to pay the penalty.
“The district should take every step necessary to get a firm grip on its school operations and hold accountable all those who permitted this ridiculous situation to occur,” Pushaw stated further. “Governor DeSantis has always stood strong for parents’ rights and will continue fighting to protect parents’ rights to make health and education decisions for their own children.”
“The Leon County School Board has admitted their mishandling of the situation and apologized to the family,” Brett Tubbs from the communications office for Florida Department of Education Director Richard Corcoran, told The Epoch Times, “however we must hold those who permitted this situation to occur accountable. The Leon County School District must take every step necessary to fix this situation. Governor DeSantis and the Florida Department of Education (FDOE) have fought for the rights of parents and will continue to do so when making health and education decisions for their students. FDOE has been extremely clear that elected officials cannot pick and choose what laws they follow and that parents have the right to make personal and private health care and education decisions for their families.”
The Epoch Times reached out twice to Hanna for comment. He did not respond.
The Epoch Times also reached out to Rodgers.
“We do not comment on open litigation,” Chris Petley in the communications office replied.
The Epoch Times also reached out twice to Leon County School Board Chair Georgia “Joy” Bowen (District 5). She did not respond.
“A group of four attorneys and three educators created this guide to be an antidote to the propaganda with which activists have flooded our schools,” Broyles said. “It is filled with medically accurate information that was reviewed and endorsed by fourteen medical professionals. ”
“They are really pinning the child against the parent and that’s what was so profound to me,” Littlejohn said. “There was not just one person in the meeting with my daughter but three school officials had her in a room, by herself, completing this guide with her and this is being done, not only in our state but all over America. This is a really significant issue happening that parents are in the dark about. Parents need to find a voice and stand up for parental rights before they’re completely gone.”
Loudoun County, Virginia, parents have a clear message for their school board and superintendent: It’s time for them to go.
At a meeting Tuesday night, parents demanded the Loudoun County School Board and Superintendent Scott Ziegler resign, according to Fox News.
This comes after an uncovered email showed the superintendent knew about a May 28 sexual assault in a high school girl’s bathroom by a boy wearing a skirt but didn’t disclose it when asked at a school board meeting regarding transgender bathrooms.
That student, who was transferred to another school in Loudoun County, was accused of a subsequent sexual assault on Oct. 6.
The school board meeting came just hours after The Washington Post estimated 2,500 students walked out of Loudoun County schools in protest of the alleged sexual assaults.
“You are so concerned with pushing race and gender that you sacrificed our children,” Patti Hidalgo Menders, president of the Loudoun County GOP Women’s Club, told the board on Tuesday. “A girl was sexually assaulted in May, and you all knew about it. The predator was put back in schools to sexually assault another girl. You all should be fired.”
“We demand the resignation of Scott Ziegler,” Alicia Brand said.
Amanda Shallott, meanwhile, told the board that “LCPS protects rapists” and said the school board “covered up the assault” and that “Ziegler lied about it.”
“I call for immediate resignations of Dr. Ziegler and any of you that had knowledge of the rape this spring,” Shallott said.
Another father called upon Ziegler to “end the mockery you have brought on this great county.”
Loudoun dad calmly told the school board to resign tonight and “end the mockery you have brought on this great county” pic.twitter.com/DlTwuHwszO
“You have buried a sexual assault to protect your precious 8040 policy,” said Carrie Michon, a grandmother of schoolchildren in Loudoun County. “Every last one of you, resign!”
“All students are entitled to have access to restrooms and locker rooms that are sanitary, safe, and adequate, so that they can comfortably and fully engage in their school programs and activities. Students should be allowed to use the facility that corresponds to their gender identity,” the pertinent part reads.
The Virginia Department of Education requires similar guidance on transgender students for all schools, although there’s a subtle difference in its model policies: “Schools frequently maintain separate restrooms, locker rooms or other facilities for males and females. Students should be allowed to use the facility that corresponds to their consistently asserted gender identity.” [Emphasis ours.]
This may not necessarily be a distinction without a difference; “consistently asserted” would entail, at some level, a higher bar to use the facilities of the opposite sex as opposed to mere “gender identity.”
In June, the New York Post reported, Ziegler said “we don’t have any records of assaults occurring in our restrooms.” Yet, as the email revealed, he’d been notified of the May 28 case on the day it happened.
At that same meeting, the father of the victim in the case — Scott Smith — was arrested after he confronted district officials and a scuffle with police ensued.
Ziegler apologized for his comments at the June meeting last week, calling them “misleading” and saying he thought the question was “about the process, the experiences of students, and plans for transgender students and bathroom use during that discussion.”Should the Loudoun County School Board resign?Yes No Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
“You just had hundreds of Loudoun County students walk out in protest because they feel unsafe in schools,” local mom Erin Smith said at Tuesday night’s meeting. “Did any of you even respond to this email on May 28 from Dr. Ziegler? Was that email alarming to anyone?”
Smith was referring to numerous protests at Loudoun County schools earlier in the day:
Smith also had choice words for school board Chairwoman Brenda Sheridan, who had said parental anger had much to do with the upcoming Nov. 2 gubernatorial election.
“We’re not here to impact elections, Brenda,” she said, adding they’d be back. “Get comfy because we are not going away.”
Loudoun County has been ground zero for parents revolting against school boards that have lurched too far to the left and don’t feel accountable to the parents whose children they teach.
The revelation that the superintendent knew about the sexual assault, refused to disclose it during a school board meeting and is now claiming he misunderstood the question has simply ignited the powder keg — particularly now that the convicted perpetrator has been accused of another crime.
The Loudoun County School Board and its superintendent need to listen to their students, parents, and constituents: It’s time to go. They’ve done enough damage.
A new group has been formed to fight against what it calls disinformation, using a model one activist said would “erode the public’s trust in media.”
A new public benefit corporation backed by far-left billionaires including George Soros and Reid Hoffman, the co-founder of LinkedIn, will do battle with the forces of any opinions it does not like under the banner of Good Information Inc., Axios reported Tuesday.
The outfit “aims to fund and scale businesses that cut through echo chambers with fact-based information” and will invest in local news outlets.
Axios did not disclose what form such investments might take but said it “could mean funding new or existing companies that boost news from existing news outlets.”
The group will be led by Tara McGowan, who has worked as a Democratic strategist and headed a progressive nonprofit called ACRONYM.
Are progressives trying to block all opinions except theirs?
Fox News has described the company as a “far-left website” that “has managed to drive liberal messaging in key states online and on social media, with piles of cash and no financial disclosure.”
Calling Courier a “left-wing dark money operation,” Fox reported that its alleged news stories “often appear to be little more than Democratic Party talking points.”
Former Nevada Attorney General Adam Laxalt, the outside counsel for Americans for Public Trust, said the group was not a healthy addition to the media universe.
“I think it’s an unprecedented political news organization. While there are complaints of media bias, fake news, no media outlet is doing what Courier Newsroom is,” Laxalt said. “They were stood up by a large, left-of-center political world and they appear to be directly engaged in political persuasion.”
The former state AG added that ventures like Courier have the potential to “erode the public’s trust in media.”
A report in Salon said the company “has set up what appear to be local news sites but are actually propaganda efforts aimed at creating content to be shared on social media to boost moderate Democrats.”
A purely political site that pretends to be news is “super opaque to the consumer,” said Kelly McBride, chair of the Poynter Institute’s Craig Newmark Center for Ethics and Leadership, according to Politico.
“When you click on Vox or some other news website that has a liberal bent to it, it still was created with the idea of putting out news for the sake of a business model. In this case, the very purpose for this site to exist is different,” McBride said last year.
The advisory committee for Good Information Inc.includes former White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer, Civic Signal Founder Eli Pariser, Check My Ads co-founder Nandini Jammi, former Chicago Tribune and Chicago Sun-Times Editor Mark Jacob, Accountable Tech co-founder Nicole Gill and others.
The Missouri School Boards Association board of directors announced Monday it was withdrawing from the National School Boards Association due to the NSBA’s letter likening parents to “domestic terrorists,” among other reasons.
“This decision was not made lightly,” MSBA executive director Melissa Randol wrote in a letter to its members.
“The National School Boards Association, through its recent actions, such as its letter to the White House, has demonstrated it does not currently align with MSBA’s guiding principles of local governance.”
“We also believe that no school board member or educator should ever have to endure threats of violence or acts of intimidation against themselves or their families for making these difficult decisions,” Randol added.
“However, attempting to address that issue with federal intervention should not be the first step in most cases, and is antithetical to our longstanding tradition of local control. Further, the use of inflammatory terms in the NSBA letter is not a model for promoting greater civility and respect for the democratic process.”
“The National School Boards Association, through its recent actions, such as its letter to the White House, has demonstrated it does not currently align with MSBA’s guiding principles of local governance.” pic.twitter.com/U19n4K5Pky
In a Sept. 29 letter to President Joe Biden, NSBA president Viola Garcia and interim executive director Chip Slaven wrote, “America’s public schools and its education leaders are under an immediate threat. The National School Boards Association (NSBA) respectfully asks for federal law enforcement and other assistance to deal with the growing number of threats of violence and acts of intimidation occurring across the nation.”
The two cited COVID policies and “propaganda purporting the false inclusion of critical race theory within classroom instruction and curricula” as stirring angry confrontations and protests at school board meetings.Do you think other states should follow Missouri’s and Ohio’s lead?
“As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes,” Garcia and Slaven argued.
“As such, NSBA requests a joint expedited review by the U.S. Departments of Justice, Education, and Homeland Security, along with the appropriate training, coordination, investigations, and enforcement mechanisms from the FBI,” they added.
Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memorandum less than a week later saying, “Threats against public servants are not only illegal, they run counter to our nation’s core values. Those who dedicate their time and energy to ensuring that our children receive a proper education in a safe environment deserve to be able to do their work without fear for their safety.
“The Department takes these incidents seriously and is committed to using its authority and resources to discourage these threats, identify them when they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate,” Garland added.
The AG directed the FBI to convene meetings nationwide to “facilitate the discussion of strategies for addressing threats against school administrators, board members, teachers, and staff, and will open dedicated lines of communication for threat reporting, assessment, and response.”
On Friday, the NSBA board of directors issued a memorandum apologizing for its Sept. 29 letter, saying, “there was no justification for some of the language included in the letter.”
“We should have had a better process in place to allow consultation on a communication of this significance,” the memo added.
On Tuesday, the Ohio School Boards Association joined its Missouri counterpart in terminating its membership with the NSBA, also citing the Sept. 29 letter to Biden.
In Loudoun County, almost everyone has made their voice heard.
Parent protesters both for and against the school district’s progressive curriculum continue to make headlines. School board members, district officials, teachers and other employees have made official statements to the media.
The one group we haven’t heard from, however, is the students themselves.
That changed on Tuesday morning when students in schools across the county decided to walk out of class in protest. The crowds of students were seen outside of Stone Bridge High School, Loudoun County High School, Briar Woods High School, Broad Run High School and Lightridge High School, according to WJLA-TV.
HAPPENING NOW —
Walkouts at Loudoun County High School, Briar Woods High School following sexual assault reports.
Students at Broad Run could be heard chanting “Loudoun County protects rapists.”
Listen to Broad Run High students start chanting “Loudon County protects rapists” & shouting other messages. Clarification: The suspect in both sex assaults at 2 different high schools in Loudoun County was not charged or convicted of rape. @7NewsDC#7NewsITeampic.twitter.com/VnoPAvl8jO
Why would the students say such a thing? Because they’re right: The evidence shows Loudoun County officials did indeed lie to their constituents in order to protect the perpetrator of multiple sexual assaults.
On May 28, a reportedly “gender fluid” 14-year-old boy wearing a skirt attacked and sexually assaulted a girl in a girls restroom at one of the district’s schools. The boy then went on to assault another girl on Oct. 6 at a different school where he was being electronically monitored.
According to WTOP-FM, the teen has been found guilty of sexual assault relating to the May 28 incident. When it comes to the Oct. 6 attack, he has been charged with sexual battery and abduction.
Leaked emails from May 28 show that county officials knew about the attacks and said nothing to their constituents.
In fact, during June 22 school board meeting, as parents voiced their concerns over a new policy allowing transgender students to enter the restroom of their choice, school superintendent Scott Ziegler went as far as to say, “To my knowledge, we don’t have any record of assaults occurring in our restrooms.”
Scott Smith, the father of the teen’s first victim, attempted to speak out at the June 22 meeting, hoping to share the story of his daughter’s assault with the school board and parents present.
Instead, following a tense exchange with a pro-LGBT activist who claimed Smith’s daughter was a liar, police officers grabbed Smith and when he pulled away subsequently tackled him and dragged him out of the room.
In the many weeks that have followed, as news continues to break regarding the county’s cover-up of the sexual assault, parents have continued to become more agitated at the school district.
And now, it appears that the students have had enough as well.
Loudoun County, Virginia, continues to find itself at the center of controversy.
The county’s school board is already in hot water after recent reports revealed its members had seemingly covered up a rape allegation. A boy has since been found guilty of sexually assaulting a female student in one of the school district’s girls’ restrooms. The board falsely said it had no knowledge of such a case before voting in August to allow males to use girls’ restrooms.
Concerned parents say progressive ideas have entered Loudoun County school curricula and are currently being taught to children enrolled in the district. They continue to protest at school board meetings in hopes of pressuring the district to remove the controversial teachings from classrooms.
Now, it appears that parents in Loudoun County are required to sign non-disclosure agreement-style documents in order to see exactly what their children are being taught, including a curriculum called Second Step Programs.
According to documents reportedly obtained by the Daily Caller, parents who wish to review the program must sign a form agreeing not to “broadcast, download, photograph, or record” the curriculum “in any manner whatsoever.”
Additionally, the district’s agreement with Second Step says the curriculum is “not subject to traditional Virginia Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) laws,” according to the Daily Caller.
The Second Step Programs utilize a teaching style known as social-emotional learning and are promoted by the left-leaning non-profit Committee for Children. According to the organization’s website, SEL is “fundamental to achieving social justice.”
Many of the controversial ideas found in critical race theory and left-wing gender theories appear central to the Committee for Children’s agenda.
Speaking with The Western Journal on Tuesday, James Lindsay — a leading expert on, and critic of, CRT and other far-left academic philosophies — broke down what exactly SEL is.
“Social-Emotional Learning started off trying to help emotionally troubled kids learn to deal with those issues so they could have better educational attainment, and it worked. It’s basically a psychological intervention that can work in the right cases and right circumstances,” Lindsay told The Western Journal via email.
Should school districts be allowed to hide what they’re teaching children?
However, problems with SEL began to arise when organizations like the Committee for Children started utilizing its practices “in uncontrolled, non-therapeutic environments (classrooms) by underqualified teachers without licenses to practice psychology,” Lindsay wrote.
In his view, this should be criminal.
These novel forms of SEL are referred to as “transformative SEL,” Lindsay said.
“These programs mirror the educational programs put in place by Mao in China during the Cultural Revolution and are wholly damaging to children. They’ve also adopted Marxian themes and methods, hence ‘transformative,’ and are used to groom children into Marxian views on sexuality and also Critical Race Theory,” Lindsay wrote.
Scott Mineo, leader of Loudoun County’s Parents Against Critical Theory group, told the Daily Caller he found the district’s lack of transparency about the SEL program suspicious.
“LCPS is partners with Southern Poverty Law Center, Racial Equity Tools, and Learning for Justice (SPLC), all of which have copyrighted material, however, LCPS freely provides access to these materials,” Mineo wrote in an email to Loudoun County Public Schools.
“Why is there such a double standard when parents want to review Second Step SEL material in its entirety?”
Logic seems to have been thrown out the window in today’s culture and society.
The Babylon Bee, a hilarious satirical news site, does not seem so far-fetched nowadays with headlines like “Finally: San Francisco To Require Proof Of Vaccination To Poop On The Sidewalk” or “Oh No! Someone Replaced Joe Biden’s Copy Of The Constitution With A Copy Of ‘1984’.” Sounds legitimate honestly.
Then we have Democratic former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, who is in a very tight race with Republican Glenn Youngkin, denying the existence of pro-life female CEOs.
He said to the Virginia Chamber of Commerce last week that, “There’s not a woman CEO in America that wants to go to a state where someone’s banning abortions.”
Could he or his staff not do a Google search on this one? There are plenty of CEOs, who also happen to be both pro-life and women, who would love to set up shop in a state that bans abortion. You’re reading the words of one right now.
I founded And Then There Were None in 2012, a ministry that helps abortion workers leave their jobs and find new, life-affirming ones. I founded ProLove Ministries in 2019 as an umbrella organization to stand in the gaps in the pro-life movement. I’m a CEO who lives in Texas because it is the great land of freedom and the first in the nation to effectively ban nearly all abortions.
I exist, Mr. McAuliffe. And I’m not the only one. Marjorie Dannenfelser, Cheryl Bachelder, Kristan Hawkins, Melissa Ohden, Janine Marrone, and Jeanne Mancini are all leaders of their respective organizations and are pro-life. Imagine that. Being a woman in charge of an organization and being pro-life. They do exist after all.
I understand that abortion is a huge, divisive issue in politics. I worked at Planned Parenthood for eight years and can attest to the urgency of both sides wanting to hold power in government.
Do you think McAuliffe will win his election?
But flatly denying the very existence of women in influential positions who hold the view that all life is precious and should be protected? At best that is ignorance; at worst, willful deception.
Abortion is almost always a big deal come election season, and this year, it is perhaps all the more crucial given the Texas law that bans abortion once a heartbeat is detected in the fetus, which is around six weeks.
In Virginia, abortion looms large as it should. Abortion ends the life of an innocent unborn baby and often harms the woman in emotional, physical and spiritual ways. It is the most imperative human rights issue of our time.
According to CNBC, McAuliffe is spending an extraordinary amount of money attacking his opponent for his pro-life stance.
“Three of McAuliffe’s most expensive ads, which cost from $510,000 to $922,000 to produce and run, have attacked Youngkin for his abortion stance,” the outlet reported. The ads have already run more than 1,100 times.
Polling also indicates McAuliffe’s support among suburban women is less than enthusiastic, which is problematic for him since it’s these women who have typically put candidates in his party into office.
Monmouth University Polling Institute president Patrick Murray attributes this lack of enthusiasm due in part to “a shift in key issues important to these voters and partly to dampened enthusiasm among the party faithful.”
Well, when you directly insult pro-life women and indirectly insult anyone who holds actual facts in some sort of relevance, what can one expect?
Terry McAuliffe is betting on the idea that Virginians cannot fathom a female CEO who is also pro-life. He’s wrong, obviously, but it’s up in the air whether his denial of reality sinks in with the women of Virginia come voting day.
The Ohio School Boards Association (OSBA) board of trustees has voted to cut ties with the National School Board Association (NSBA) over the latter’s attempt to have federal agents police school board meetings across the country.
“The Board of Trustees’ decision was prompted by NSBA’s recent letter to President Joe Biden requesting federal intervention at local school board meetings,” OSBA Chief Executive Officer Rick Lewis said Tuesday in a press release (pdf).
The letter in question (pdf), which was sent on Sept. 29, urged that federal law enforcement step in to handle “threats or actual acts of violence” against school leaders, alleging that “angry mobs” of parents who sought to express opposition to COVID-19 restrictions and the teaching of critical race theory have been “inciting chaos” during school board meetings.
“As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crime,” the NSBA argued in the letter, encouraging the federal government to invoke laws designed to counter terrorism, such as the PATRIOT Act, to address the alleged threats.
The Ohio school board group said they were not consulted by the national federation about the crafting of the letter, nor did they agree with the letter’s content.
“We were not informed of or asked for any input into the creation of the letter sent to the president,” Lewis said, adding that while it’s important to keep parental and community discussion at school board meetings free from violence and harassment, such interference should be dealt with at the local level, not by federal officials.
“We believe the letter from NSBA leadership demonstrated how out of touch the national association is with the concerns of local school boards and the principle of local control. Because of that, OSBA no longer sees the value of continued NSBA membership,” he said.
The announcement comes after the NSBA walked back its widely criticized message, saying that “there was no justification for some of the language included in the letter.”
“We should have had a better process in place to allow for consultation on a communication of this significance,” the NSBA said. “We apologize also for the strain and stress this situation has caused you and your organizations.”
The OSBA is the latest in a string of state school board organizations that have reevaluated or ended their membership in NSBA over the letter. According to statements collected by advocacy group Parents Defending Education, as of Oct. 21, 21 state chapters have distanced themselves from the national organization, with most of them clarifying that they were not consulted about the letter.
Remember when Kamala Harris was supposed to be so ready to take over the Oval Office that she might as well just set up her desk in there?
It seems like just yesterday Joe Biden and Harris were getting sworn in as the president and the next president — an office formerly known as the vice presidency, which has now been sold as a trainee program for Harris, so she’s fully prepared for whenever Biden finally makes a whirring noise and shuts down.
In fact, Biden touted Harris’ readiness vigorously when he introduced her as his running mate in August of 2020, a not-so-subtle hint for Americans who were worried about Uncle Joe’s continued seaworthiness. “Kamala knows how to govern,” he said, according to a Rev.com transcript. “She knows how to make the hard calls. She’s ready to do this job on day one, and we’re both ready to get to work, rebuilding this nation and building it better.”
He would, on other occasions, make it clear he was talking about Harris being ready for the presidency on day one — meaning she was just as ready for the job as he was. (Not that this was a particularly reassuring promise, but Joe sure thought it was.)
According to Joe, he says Kamala is ready to be President on day 1. Which tells me, if he won, he would transfer his power to her on day 1. pic.twitter.com/xJXWVTo9ia
The numbers don’t lie, however. The Los Angeles Times recently compiled a trove of information regarding Vice President Harris’ calendar, and the U.K. Daily Mail went through it. Not only is Harris drifting further apart from President Biden, the data show she’s missed 206 presidential daily briefs in person since the Biden-Harris administration took over at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
In January, Biden made it clear Harris was to be included in these meetings. Biden is “returning to the practice of having his vice president join for the briefing when they’re both in Washington,” officials said, according to NBC News. A vice presidential aid further commented, saying Harris had attended Oval Office briefings Biden’s first week as president, “and that is the plan going forward.”
Of the 275 presidential daily briefs — many of which were in person — between Jan. 20, the day of Biden’s inauguration, and Oct. 22, the last day the Los Angeles Times published her calendar data, Harris only attended 69.
Is Kamala Harris ready to be president?
And let’s be clear: The presidential daily brief isn’t just the Oval Office’s version of that endless morning meeting where Paul can’t stop talking about the grandchildren while he updates everyone on project progress and Anna makes sure to remind everyone to CC her on the expense reports.
As the Intelligence Community’s website notes: “The President’s Daily Brief (PDB) is a daily summary of high-level, all-source information and analysis on national security issues produced for the president and key cabinet members and advisers.”
The daily brief “has been presented in some form to the president since 1946, when President Harry S. Truman received the Daily Summary. Over the years, the PDB has evolved to meet the needs and preferences of each president and has expanded to include more information.”
Harris’ attendance at the presidential daily briefs has also been slipping as time has gone on.
In February, she attended 15 and in March, 17. As of Oct. 22, she’d only attended two this month. In September, she attended five, and in August, Harris appeared at just two. All in all, 39 of the 69 briefings she attended were in the first three months of the administration.
To a certain extent, this mirrors the increased political distancing between Biden and Harris as the first year of the new administration has moved into autumn.
In February, for instance, Harris did 18 open press events with the president. That fell to just one in September and one in October. (In September, she appeared with the president for the commemoration of September 11; in October, it was for the anniversary of the dedication of the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial.)
A former Harris adviser says the president and vice president still don’t fully trust each other and Harris isn’t happy that “she hasn’t been given any all-star portfolio” assignments, according to the Daily Mail.
The White House disputed the claims to the Daily Mail, arguing the schedule didn’t tell the full story: “The vice president keeps a busy schedule doing the work of the administration and always in support of the president,” said Harris spokeswoman Sabrina Singh.
“Sometimes those events are together, other times apart, sometimes she is on the road amplifying the agenda of the administration and highlighting the importance of Build Back Better.”
However, this wasn’t the bill of goods the Biden campaign was selling. It’s not even the bill of goods the administration’s been peddling, either.
The White House has made a big deal of calling this the “Biden-Harris administration,” a double-billing no president in memory has applied to itself. They were supposed to be so close they were co-presidents, with Kamala being ready to take over on day one. That was the message.
The reality appears to be quite different, and looking at how often she attends the president’s daily brief there is one question to ask: Feeling confident, America?
A 15-year-old boy at the center of a controversy surrounding transgender school bathroom accommodations in Loudoun County, Virginia, was found guilty on Monday of sexually assaulting a girl in the girls’ bathroom in May — a decision sure to bring new attention to the hot-button topic.
“I found the facts sufficient to support the charges,” ruled Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court Chief Judge Pamela Brooks after a two-hour hearing, according to WTOP-TV. The teen had been charged with one felony count of forcible sodomy and one felony count of forcible fellatio.
In court, the victim said the two were “just friends,” but that she had “hooked up with him” — engaged in sexual acts — two times in the weeks before the attack took place.
On May 28, the boy — then 14 — texted the victim, asking her to meet him in the girls’ bathroom. The Washington Post reported she told the court that when she got there, he threw her to the floor and forced himself upon her.
She would report the assault to the school and was questioned by investigators from the sheriff’s office the same day. However, the defense tried to argue the encounter was consensual and noted the girl hadn’t told investigators about her two previous encounters with the boy.
However, the victim maintained she “never” gave permission or consent for the May 28 encounter.
“He flipped me over,” the victim told the court, according to the Post. “I was on the ground and couldn’t move and he sexually assaulted me.”
The incident ignited a firestorm over transgender policy after the father of the girl who was assaulted, Scott Smith, was arrested at a June 22 Loudoun County School Board meeting after progressive activist called his daughter a liar, according to a report last month by the Daily Wire. Smith had said the boy in the case identified as “gender fluid” and was wearing a skirt at the time of the attack.
After a shouting match ensued, a deputy grabbed Smith’s shoulder. When Smith pulled away, a tussle began and the father was arrested. Loudoun County lead prosecutor Buta Biberaj — who also assisted the prosecutor in the sexual assault case involving Smith’s daughter — was seeking jail time for Smith over a disorderly conduct misdemeanor charge stemming from the meeting.
Are transgender policies making schools more dangerous?
While that’s a controversy in its own right, the case became a flash point over new Virginia Department of Education transgender policies that require, among other things, that “Access to facilities such as restrooms and locker rooms that correspond to a student’s gender identity shall be available to all students.”
“All students are entitled to have access to restrooms, locker rooms, and changing facilities that are sanitary, safe, and adequate, so that they can comfortably and fully engage in their school programs and activities. Schools frequently maintain separate restrooms, locker rooms or other facilities for males and females,” the policy reads.
“Students should be allowed to use the facility that corresponds to their consistently asserted gender identity. While some transgender students will want that access, others may want alternatives that afford more privacy. Taking into account existing school facilities, administrators should take steps to designate gender-inclusive or single-user restrooms commensurate with the size of the school.”
Loudoun County had adopted a similar policy, although it wasn’t in place at the time of the May 28 assault. A statement from the family, however, noted that the district had “formalized the policy regarding restroom use that was easily exploitable by a potential sexual assailant,” according to WUSA-TV.
While the Smiths say the perpetrator of the rape defined himself as gender-fluid, mainstream media accounts didn’t confirm this and referred to the defendant as male. However, the Post’s report confirmed the boy was wearing a skirt at the time of the assault.
“The defendant did not testify during the trial, but prosecutors played interviews he gave detectives investigating the case during which he acknowledged ‘messing up’ and said he did not intend to perform one sex act with the victim and said he stopped once he realized he was hurting the girl,” they reported.
“The defendant initially told detectives the second sexual act did not occur, but later said it may have happened briefly and accidentally when a knee-length skirt he was wearing got caught on his watch as the pair were fumbling around in the bathroom stall.”
The controversies don’t end there. The boy, now 15, is accused of allegedly assaulting a girl in a different school on Oct. 6, where he was being electronically monitored. A hearing to determine the boy’s guilt or innocence in that case is scheduled for Nov. 15, WTOP reported.
It later emerged the superintendent of Loudoun County Public Schools had been notified of the first attack on the day it happened.
According to an Oct. 15 WTOP report, Scott Ziegler, the superintendent, said that while the school system “complied with our obligations” under Title IX regarding the sexual assault of students, he said the district’s processes were “insufficient.”
Bill Stanley, a Republican state senator and an attorney for the Smith family, hailed the court’s judgment in a statement.
“We are greatly relieved that justice was served today,” he said, according to WTOP. “No one should have to endure what this family has endured, and now their focus is completely upon their daughter’s health and safety as she progresses forward with her life.”
The family, which is suing the school district, said in a statement they “stand stronger than ever in moving forward to ensure that those responsible in the Loudoun County School system are held accountable, so that this may never happen again to anyone else’s child.”
And yet, so many facts about this case indicate it very well might. Neither the Virginia Department of Education nor Loudoun County Public Schools appear willing to take a second look at their transgender bathroom policies.
If another culturally and politically inconvenient attack, they’re likely to be just as loath to learn from it. Parents who vent their anger at school board meetings will arguably be treated with greater venom than Smith.
The verdict may bring justice. Wisdom, however, remains a long way off.
Appointment is the latest indication of the Biden administration’s collaboration with the group
The Department of Education earlier this month tapped the president of the National School Board Association to serve on a federal board that tracks student progress, the latest indication of the Biden administration’s collaboration with the group that compared parents to domestic terrorists.
Education Secretary Miguel Cardona on Oct. 13 appointed National School Board Association president Viola Garcia to the National Assessment Governing Board, which develops the tests used to track student achievement across the country. Garcia was behind a Sept. 29 letter urging President Joe Biden to have the FBI monitor school board meetings for potential violence. The Department of Justice formed a task force on Oct. 4 consisting of the FBI and Justice Department’s national security and civil rights divisions, sparking outrage from parents groups who say the administration is trying to stifle parents who oppose mask mandates and left-wing curricula.
Garcia’s position on the board could raise questions about whether the appointment was linked to her advocacy work at the National School Board Association. Emails reported by the Washington Free Beacon show Garcia coordinated with the Biden White House and Department of Education in the weeks before releasing the controversial letter. “These are troubling times. NSBA has been engaged with the White House and the Department of Education on these and other issues related to the pandemic for several weeks now,” Garcia wrote in an Oct. 2 email obtained by the group Parents Defending Education.
The National School Board Association apologized for the letter on Friday, saying there was “no justification” for the language comparing parents to terrorists. Other emails showed that some National School Board Association directors were upset with Garcia for issuing the letter without the board’s input. One director said that the letter’s reference to parents as domestic terrorists inflamed tensions at local school board meetings.
Garcia’s tenure on the governing board began on Oct. 1, according to a Department of Education press release.
Congress established the National Assessment Governing Board in 1988 to set policy for the National Assessment of Educational Progress, the so-called Nation’s Report Card. Part of the board’s mission is to draft the questions used on the assessment and to use the results of the test to propose policies to the Department of Education.
The White House has released a fact sheet detailing their National Strategy on Gender Equity and Equality as part of the ‘Gender Strategy Report’. The document comes as part of Biden’s “Build Back Better” plan, and is broken down into ten interconnected priorities.
The report comes during a time of multiple national crises as supply chain failures are forcing the price of goods to soar, disproportionately impacting women and children. Coupled with the ignorance and downplaying of inflation, it would appear that the White House is leaning on the prevarication of buzz-word friendly rhetoric, instead of focusing on issues that are drastically altering the lives of all Americans.
Their areas of “intersectional” focus include:
economic security;
gender-based violence;
health;
education;
justice and immigration;
human rights and equality under the law
security and humanitarian relief
climate change
science and technology; and
democracy, participation, and leadership.
Despite the term “human trafficking” being mentioned twenty-one (21) times in the report, the term “border” only receives two mentions.
Reports found 125,000 unaccompanied children have crossed the southern U.S. border since President Joe Biden took office in January, the highest number since records began. There are still no official plans for Biden to visit the U.S. southern border, or do anything to mitigate the vast numbers of women and children being trafficked into the country for slave- and sexual-labor purposes.
Many priorities in the Gender Strategy Report fall in harsh opposition to laws in Democratic-run states like California.
CA state leadership classifies domestic violence, rape of an unconscious or drugged person, and various other assaults against women as “non-violent.” Under Assembly Bill 109 and Proposition 57 in California, individuals who have committed such acts are eligible for early release. New offenders are to receive relaxed sentences, with many unable to be arrested or tried for such crimes in the state.
A group of 19 Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee sent a letter to Biden administration Attorney General Merrick Garland on Monday to demand that he rescind a communication targeting parents at school board meetings.
The letter came after Garland appeared before the House Judiciary Committee last week following his Oct. 4 message which called out concerned parents.
The controversial memorandum was sent to the Federal Bureau of Investigations after the National School Boards Association sent a letter to President Joe Biden criticizing vocal parents as “domestic terrorists.”
“Your testimony before the Judiciary Committee last week concerning your October 4, 2021, memorandum targeting concerned parents at school board meetings was troubling,” the letter read.
#BREAKING: Judiciary Republicans demand Attorney General Garland withdraw school board memo.
“You acknowledged that you issued the unusual directive soon after reading about the thinly sourced letter sent by the National School Boards Association (NSBA) to President Biden and not because of any specific request from state or local law enforcement,” it added.
Despite Garland’s testimony, the letter concluded, the attorney general “sidestepped” the effect of his memorandum.
“During your testimony, you sidestepped the obvious effect of your ill-conceived memorandum and the chilling effect that invoking the full weight of the federal law enforcement apparatus would have on parents’ protected First Amendment speech,” the letter said.
Should Merrick Garland resign as attorney general?
The committee’s letter upheld the rights of parents to direct the education of their children, including involvement at school board meetings.
The response also clarified that local law enforcement is the appropriate group to respond to any threats or violence rather than the FBI.
“Parents have an undisputed right to direct the upbringing and education of their children, especially as school boards attempt to install controversial curricula. Local law enforcement — and not the FBI — are the appropriate authorities to address any local threats or violence,” the House members wrote.
GOP Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio accused the Justice Department of creating a “snitch line” to tell on parents during the committee’s hearing with Garland last week.
“When the attorney general, the United States sets up a snitch line on parents, Americans aren’t going to tolerate it,” Jordan said.
“I think they’re gonna stand up to this accelerated march to communism that we now see America is going to fight the good fight, they’re going to finish the course, they’re going to keep the faith, because Americans value freedom,” he added.
The NSBA apologized on Friday regarding its September letter.
“On behalf of the NSBA, we regret and apologize for the letter. To be clear, the safety of school board members, other public school officials and educators, and students is our top priority, and there remains important work to be done on this issue,” the NSBA wrote Friday.
“However, there was no justification for some of the language included in the letter. We should have had a better process in place to allow for some consultation on a communication of this significance,” the letter added.
Law excusing school officials from reporting crimes becomes political liability ahead of elections
A law passed by Virginia Democrats last year that exempts public school officials from reporting certain sexual crimes to the police has become a political liability ahead of November’s statewide elections.
In the wake of two high-profile sexual assault cases in Loudoun County Public Schools, one concerning an alleged rape in a high school bathroom, Republican candidates are hammering Democratic incumbents, including Gov. Ralph Northam, for passing and signing House Bill 257. The law excuses school officials from reporting instances of sexual battery and other violent offenses that do not meet the threshold of a felony to the police.
Republican Nick Clemente is running to unseat Democratic state delegate Wendy Gooditis, who cast the tie-breaking vote on House Bill 257. Clemente called Gooditis’s vote “reckless” and said he hoped voters will hold Democrats responsible for fostering an unsafe school environment.
“While the attacks that occurred in Loudoun County Public Schools were felonies that still required reporting, Gooditis’s reckless vote sent a message to victims that their being groped, molested, or abused isn’t as important as it was a couple years ago and tells potential predators that consequences have diminished,” Clemente told the Washington Free Beacon. “They are trying to deny, deflect, and hide from this dangerous bill, but voters are intelligent and will hold them accountable.”
Education-related issues, from pandemic school closures to progressive racial and gender ideology in the classroom, became a top priority for candidates this election cycle. The rape and assault cases in Loudoun County further ignited Republican candidates just weeks before the November elections, where they hope to take back control of the Virginia General Assembly and governorship.
Mike Mullin, the bill’s sponsor, and six of his Democratic colleagues who cosponsored the bill did not respond to requests for comment regarding the law and the cases in Loudoun County schools.
Jordan Gray, a Republican who’s running against Mullin, called on the delegate to resign in a statement on Oct. 20.
“As a teacher, I’m shocked and horrified by the news coming from the Loudoun County school system. This form of abuse must not go unchecked, which is why I am calling on Delegate Mullin’s resignation for his sponsorship of H.B. 257,” Gray said. “He must answer for his failures and resign immediately.”
Republican gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin called for an investigation into the Loudoun County school board. At a rally on Tuesday, Youngkin also blamed Virginia’s Democratic attorney general Mark Herring for failing to launch his own investigation into the district.
House Bill 257 was thrown back into the spotlight after the Daily Wire broke the story on the Loudoun County assaults on Oct. 11. The Daily Wire initially reported that officials at Stone Bridge High School, where the first victim was allegedly raped, called police not to investigate the allegations but to handle the alleged victim’s father, who made a scene at the school.
Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office records reported by Jesse Singal, however, revealed that the police were initially dispatched to investigate the assault. Those reports align with district superintendent Scott Ziegler’s email to school board members on the day of the assault, which noted that the school called for additional officers after the victim’s father “caused a disruption by using threatening and profane language.”
The father was arrested during a school board meeting in June after speaking out against the district’s transgender bathroom policies. Those policies were approved in August.
The boy accused of rape was arrested in July, according to NBC 4 Washington, but was released while investigators processed a DNA rape kit. He was transferred to Broad Run High School, where he allegedly sexually assaulted another student in a classroom. In a statement to the Free Beacon, Loudoun County school officials said they would not comment further on the case.
Indignation keeps growing over the Loudoun County Public School system’s response to two sexual assaults that have happened in the last six months. Now, many are calling for resignations after discovering the superintendent and school board knew about the initial assault and did very little.
The police investigated, arrested the boy in July, slapped an ankle monitor on him and told him to go to a different school. But the assault and its details were not made public.
The boy began this school year at different school. Then on Oct. 6, he was arrested again for allegedly assaulting another girl at his new school.
This second assault brought the May 28 incident to public attention. Outrage ensued.
Two sexual assaults perpetrated by the same student naturally raises the question: What were the school board and superintendent doing to stop this?
The answer is, nothing. What makes this worse is, Superintendent Scott Ziegler knew what happened. It was recently discovered that he even sent an email informing the school board on the day of the first allegation, according to the Loudoun Times-Mirror.
ONLY ON WTOP: Loudoun County’s superintendent notified the school board the same day a female student was sexually assaulted at Stone Bridge High School, according to an email obtained by WTOP. https://t.co/Re4vkD7H60
“This afternoon a female student alleged that a male student sexually assaulted her in the restroom,” Ziegler wrote on May 28.
Should superintendent Ziegler resign?
It doesn’t get much clearer than that. Still, the school board did nothing.
The family of the May 28 victim is now pursuing legal action against the Loudoun County Public School system.
While there is plenty of blame to go around, the root of the problem actually lies with the school’s policy over restroom use.
“All students are entitled to have access to restrooms and locker rooms that are sanitary, safe and adequate, so that they can comfortably and fully engage in their school programs and activities. Students should be allowed to use the facility that corresponds to their gender identity,” the policy says.
In the name of “safety” the LCPS allows students to use what restroom they want. Yet, it was in the restroom that a female student’s safety was compromised.
The May 28 victim’s family has been clear that they largely blame this policy for the assault their daughter suffered.
“The sexual assault on our daughter and the subsequent sexual assault by the same individual were both predictable and preventable,” a statement from the family read. “Subsequent to the sexual assault on our daughter, Loudoun County Public Schools formalized the policy regarding restroom use that was easily exploitable by a potential sexual assailant. Because of poor planning and misguided policies, Loudoun Schools failed to institute even minimal safeguards to protect students from sexual assaults.”
So, not only did the school board do nothing in reaction to the initial assault, but the policy they passed enabled it.
Yet, Ziegler continues to say that the problem lies in insufficient procedures.
He proposes that there be a change in how the school system and the sheriff’s department act together and communicate “to ensure school discipline and criminal investigations can happen simultaneously … This includes notification from the sheriff’s office to the superintendent and principal when students are charged with serious offenses,” WTOP News reported on Oct. 15.
Sure, the sheriff’s department probably shouldn’t have let the kid simply go back to school. The school should have actually disciplined and expelled the student. But that still would not have fixed the essence of the problem.
The problem is that the school is allowing students to use whatever restroom they want. So if a boy wants to rape a girl, the female restroom is an excellent place to do it.
Can’t go into the female restroom as a straight boy? No problem. Just say you are gender-fluid or in transition. Then the door is wide open — literally.
After the May 28 assault became public due to the Oct. 6 assault, the Loudoun Times-Mirror reported that local residents began calling for the resignations of Ziegler and other school board members.
Resignations are certainly in order. Ziegler and board members knowingly put students in danger by letting a sexual assailant in school. But the real problem is the policy.
Removing the superintendent and board members would be like only fixing the symptoms of a disease instead of treating the disease itself. If the cause is not fixed, then easily preventable situations of sexual assault and rape will keep happening.
A century ago, American women fought for the right to participate in our country’s representative democracy alongside men.
Today, American women are fighting for the right to simply be recognized as distinct from men.
Let’s pray that this second movement is as successful as the first.
Two Republican members of Congress found themselves censored on Twitter last week for stating a simple biological fact about Dr. Rachel Levine, the first openly transgender nominee to be confirmed by the Senate to a federal position as President Joe Biden’s Health and Human Services Assistant Secretary and, now, the first openly transgender four-star officer to serve in any of the nation’s uniformed services.
Biden announced last week that Levine had been appointed a four-star admiral of the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps and the United States’ “first-ever female four-star admiral.”
The Biden administration announces that Rachel Levine, a biological man, is now the “first-ever female four-star admiral” in the public health corps pic.twitter.com/1JIa5Eh0vZ
As you may have pieced it together by now (and if not, don’t feel bad, it’s sheer confusion all around), Levine is transgender, which means that he — yes, he — is a man, and thus, not the first female anything, much less the first female admiral in the USPHSCC.
Levine lived the first 40 years of his life as a man, and while he has long hair, a preferred pronoun, and, according to Reuters, has undergone “sex reassignment surgery” to convince his body to align with his inner “gender identity.” The legal world, the mainstream media, and contemporary American culture might pretend he’s a woman, but the pesky Y chromosome written into his DNA when he was hand-crafted in his mother’s womb by the creator of the universe certainly indicates otherwise.
Should Americans be able to speak the truth about gender?
So while anyone can agree that, as a man trying to live his life as a woman he certainly qualifies as the first transgender four-star admiral of a branch of the uniformed services that hardly anyone ever thinks about, it is no doubt wildly offensive to all the actual women in the Public Health Service Commissioned Corps who might qualify for this decorated office that he’s being called the “first-ever female four-star admiral.”
Of course, it is dangerous to agree that a man simply cannot be a woman these days, and while Greene and Banks are certainly perfectly accustomed to controversy and censorship, this earned them quick retribution on social media.
Banks’ offending tweet read, “the title of first female four-star officer gets taken by a man,” which The Post Millennial noted, was considered a violation of Twitter’s policy that users may not “promote violence against, threaten, or harass other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease.”
NEW: Twitter has censored @RepJimBanks for calling HHS’ Rachel Levine a man. He will be locked out of his account until he deletes the tweet, “The title of first female four-star officer gets taken by a man.” pic.twitter.com/6wdDqJ36kH
A notice under the tweet on Banks’ account reads “This tweet is no longer available.” However, another Twitter post commenting on Levine’s promotion Wednesday remains up, and gets the same point across.
Calling someone that was born and lived as a man for 54 years the first “female” four-star officer is an insult to every little girl who dreams of breaking glass ceilings one day. https://t.co/bHKmJbE6cA
The congresswoman was informed that her tweet “violated the Twitter Rules about hateful conduct. However, Twitter has determined that it may be in the public’s interest for the Tweet to remain accessible.”
Greene has not been suspended. The Post Millennial notes that the tweet remained up due to Twitter’s policy on accounts belonging to public officials.
However, her tweet had sharing restrictions placed on it, as Newsbusters reported. It’s a less severe form of censorship than Banks’ suspension, but it’s censorship nonetheless.
Let’s get down to brass tacks here — these elected members of Congress were censored because gender theory is predicated on a lie, and nothing is more dangerous to a fallacious philosophy than those who speak the truth.
Nothing about the leftists’ philosophy today makes sense. They claim to be the party of women, but they only seem to consider women’s empowerment to be empowering them to do anything men traditionally do — as though the traditional work of making a home and raising a family, one of the most important vocations in the world, is somehow inferior.
They claim to support feminism, but all the efforts over the last century to provide spaces for women in sports have gone completely out the window now that more men who claim to be women want to compete against women.
They claim to care about “equal rights” for all, yet don’t even protect the equal rights of humans in the womb and constantly clamor to force Americans into an intersectional caste system in which dissidents are inferior, second-class citizens.
The refrain of the fictional dictatorial regime in George Orwell’s 1984, “War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength,” has never been more representative of the real-life powers that be in today’s twisted world.
I earnestly sympathize with those who struggle with gender dysphoria, and I think it is an egregious failure on the part of society as a whole that these individuals have been weaponized in one of the most bizarre and twisted cultural movements the world has ever known, rather than presented with compassionate care that doesn’t involve dramatic medical alterations of the bodies God gave them.
This isn’t about them — this is about the very nature of truth and the ability to speak it.
It is significantly more dangerous to state a simple fact — “Rachel Levine is not female” — than it is to go along with the lie — that “Rachel Levine is a woman.”
It doesn’t matter if you believe that Levine is made in the image of God and deserving of his most fundamental human rights. If you believe that his most fundamental human rights don’t include the right to be regarded as something he’s not by all other members of society — no matter what their personal convictions are — you’re a thought criminal and must be silenced.
And that, ultimately, is the scariest part. It is one thing for others to dismiss us as bigots — it is quite another to insist we do not have a right to speak this dangerous truth.
President Joe Biden has just been hit with impeachment paper and, in the charges, he has been accused of “treason.”
The Articles of Impeachment were introduced on Friday by Republican Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene.
“I have introduced House Res. 57, these are Articles of Impeachment on President Biden,” the representative said. “For abuse of power in regards to his willingness to use his position of power to aid his son Hunter Biden in his business dealings.”
“I have also introduced another Article of Impeachment on President Biden, which is H. Res 597,” she said. “This has to do with the national security crisis that President Biden has created with regards to the extreme threat at the southern border.”
“I have introduced House Res. 598, Articles of Impeachment on President Biden in regards to the failure in Afghanistan,” the firebrand representative said. “And I have introduced House Res. 596, Articles of Impeachment on President Biden for the Covid eviction moratorium and his willingness to use his position to try to do what he shouldn’t be doing. We have three branches of power.”
“Joe Biden swore an oath, he said ‘I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States and I will to the best of my ability preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States’ and he is failing to uphold his oath,” she said.
“Joe Biden is failing the American people by refusing to uphold the law and the Constitution,” the representative said. “But Afghanistan is where it really hurt. You see, Article III, Section 3, Joe Biden could be guilty of treason.”
“Our law says that levying war against the U.S., adhering to the enemies of the U.S., and giving ‘aid and comfort’ is treason,” she said. “President Biden did that by arming the Taliban with our taxpayer-funded U.S. equipment and weapons. He abandoned Americans in Afghanistan and seems to have no interest in getting them back.”
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene: “I have introduced House Res. 57. These are articles of impeachment on President Joe Biden for abuse of power in regards to his willingness to use his position of power to aid his son Hunter Biden.” pic.twitter.com/KXQPAg3ayQ
In a House of Representatives controlled by Democrats and led by House Speaker and California Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the impeachment is not likely to go anywhere.
It is not the first time Articles of Impeachment were filed against Biden, as another Republican representative filed them for the crisis at the United States and Mexico Border in September.
Ohio Republican Rep. Bob Gibbs introduced articles of impeachment against President Joe Biden on Tuesday, citing his handling of the U.S.-Mexico border situation, attempt to expand the federal moratorium on evictions, and the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan.
Republican Reps. Andy Biggs of Arizona and Brian Babin and Randy Weber of Texas signed on as co-sponsors of the impeachment resolution.
“I take this seriously. I don’t think it’s haphazard. I’m not trying to get media attention for myself,” Gibbs told the Washington Examiner. “He’s done so much damage to this country in less than nine months, which is really scary.
“He’s not capable of being commander in chief, and that’s obvious by the actions since Day One when he took the presidency back in January,” Gibbs added. “Maybe something like this makes the White House think twice before they do some of this nonsense.”
Gibbs said that he and his colleagues began working on the articles of impeachment even before Biden’s rushed, manic, deadly withdrawal from Afghanistan.
“We actually started working before the Afghanistan debacle because I was so upset” about what is going on along the border, as well as the president ignoring the Supreme Court’s opposition to extending an eviction moratorium.
“Obviously, it’s not going to go anywhere with Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi,” Gibbs said, acknowledging the political reality that Democrats currently are in the majority in the House and Senate. Nevertheless, “it shows that there are some Republicans that think that this president needs to be impeached, he needs to be removed from office one way or another,” he added.
“At some point, they’re gonna be held accountable for their actions, and this is kind of putting them on notice,” Gibbs said.
Citigroup agreed to undergo an independent “racial equity audit,” the bank announced on Oct. 22.
“We believe that by advancing our commitments to help close the racial wealth gap in the United States we can have a meaningful impact on our colleagues, clients, and the communities we serve,” the bank said in a statement. “Measurement and transparency are important components of the work we are doing to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion, both at our bank and through our contributions to our communities and society more generally.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion training and jargon are closely associated with critical race theory, according to Legal Insurrection’s Criticalrace.org, which tracks critical race theory and the related “anti-racist” movement at schools across the United States. Critical race theory is an offshoot of the Marxist critical theory school of thought that first emerged in Germany in the early 20th century.
Some school districts have carried out “equity audits” to review data on race, which entails the hiring of so-called diversity and inclusion consultants to ensure a focus on race, according to Criticalrace.org
Citibank in September of last year announced that it would conduct an “Action for Racial Equality” (ARE) in the wake of riots, protests, and calls to “defund the police” last summer following the death of George Floyd.
That program, according to the Wall Street bank’s statement, is meant “to (1) provide greater access to banking and credit in communities of color, (2) increase investment in Black-owned businesses, (3) expand affordable housing and homeownership among Black Americans, and (4) advance anti-racist practices in our company and the financial services industry.”
It’s not clear if any other banks will follow suit. Global asset management firm BlackRock previously said it plans to conduct a “racial equity audit” next year.
The audit will be performed by lawyers at Covington & Burling LLP, “who have civil rights expertise and experience leading racial equity audits across various industries,” according to Citibank.
Meanwhile, the audit “will include input from a range of stakeholders, including colleagues involved in implementing ARE as well as civil rights organizations that we anticipate will share the views of the customers and communities ARE is designed to support. We look forward to releasing the results from the audit once it is completed,” the bank added.
Earlier this year, members of the House debated a bill from Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio) that would mandate financial companies to carry out racial audits every two years.
Not long before the pandemic, the Irish state television, RTE, contacted me to ask whether I was prepared to speak about a different kind of epidemic, that of gender dysphoria and sex-change. I was reluctant to do so because the subject, though undoubtedly socially important and very topical, was not one that interested me particularly. In fact, I tended to avert my mind from it.
The people from the RTE persuaded me that it was my public duty to appear on the programme that they were making. They had found many professors of paediatrics, medicine, psychiatry, and psychology who did not think that the Trans Movement was a force for good, to put it mildly, but none was willing to speak out in public against it. They did not want to ruin their own careers or be the object of mass obloquy: the thirst for martyrdom is not common.
I recognized that my reluctance was tinged with fear (and therefore also with cowardice). It was with trepidation that I agreed, and I was reasonably circumspect in what I said in front of the camera.
If you wanted to understand the sudden increase in the phenomenon, I said, you were better off studying the history of fashion—Chanel, say, or Balenciaga—than anything else.
There were fashions in psychiatric conditions that come and go. Hysterical paralyses of limbs were once very common but are now rare (though they still did occur).
In the 1990s, multiple personalities were fashionable, so much so that the fifth edition of the “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual” of the American Psychiatric Association quoted a survey suggesting that multiple personality affected up to 1.5 per cent of the population—a figure I found intrinsically absurd. As the Duke of Wellington said to the man who approached him and said “Mr Jones, I believe?”, “If you can believe that you can believe anything.”
The point is that patterns of behavior to which psychiatric labels are fixed wax and wane over time. I expected that the present craze would eventually evaporate—though it would probably be replaced by another.
I have no idea whether or not my contribution was used (I have sometimes given lengthy interviews only to find that they were not broadcast, or cut to ten seconds), but the most important or significant question about the whole episode, however, was not whether I was right or wrong in my characterization and prognosis of the Trans Movement, but the state of fear that the RTE people had described, which led to them scraping the barrel to find someone, in this case me, to say something even mildly critical of the movement. What they described, in effect, was the development of a totalitarian atmosphere in intellectual life.
Of course, we should not exaggerate. We do not yet fear the midnight knock on the door, and no one (as far as I know) has been killed for expressing unorthodox ideas on this subject.
People nevertheless fear for their careers and even their livelihoods. Followers of movements like the Trans Movement have no hesitation in calling for the dismissal of people who attract their wrath by disagreeing publicly with them. So-called transphobia is not irrational fear of people who want to change their sex, but fear of retribution by the movement that makes such people their cause (who may not be the same people).
Trans-sexualism is not the only subject on which it is now dangerous for one’s career or livelihood to express ideas that dissent from the current “progressive” moral orthodoxy. This explains the view of the journalist, Douglas Murray, that only those with no institutional affiliation, private or public, who are able independently to earn their livings, can now speak their minds on many subjects.
There are several asymmetrical wars currently going on in the intellectual sphere. On the one side are guerrilla monomaniacs with a cause, for whom the subject of their monomania is all-important, and the promotion of which is the meaning of their lives; on the other, normal people for whom that particular subject is merely one thing among many others.
In this situation, the monomaniacs have the advantage of fanaticism. Like Batista’s army in Cuba, normal people melt away in the face of fanatical attack, because they do not care enough, or are not prescient enough, to defend their position—though they may later come to regret not having done so.
What is particularly alarming about the totalitarian temper that is developing in western society is that it does not originate from the government but is a genuine expression of the thirst for power of a portion of the population, that part of it—the intelligentsia—that seemingly would have most to lose if the drive to totalitarianism were successful.
Individuals may have discovered to their cost that even merely intellectual revolutions tend to devour their young, today’s radicals often becoming tomorrow’s reactionaries hated in the eyes of a new generation of radicals that is ever on the lookout for new worlds to destroy, but young radicals never think that they will grow old: they always think that theirs is the last word in truth and justice.
Tolerance—a word that in the mouth of such radicals comes to mean the forced or coerced approval of what was formerly transgressive—is not natural to mankind. It is far more natural to want to suppress what one finds disgusting or does not want to hear. Our instinct is to turn away from views that are not our own, from evidence that might undermine our most cherished opinions, and even to dislike those who cite such evidence.
In other words, tolerance is an intellectual and moral achievement, an act of self-control rather than the expression of an instinct. No doubt some people by temperament find such self-control easier than others (I don’t find it easy myself), but there is a dictator lurking in many, perhaps most, of us, at least in those of us who take an interest in public affairs.
Suffice it to say that we are not living in a golden age of the kind of self-control necessary for a tolerant society in which diversity of opinion is taken in good spirit. And the so-called social media, which allow us to pour out our bile incontinently the moment we feel the inclination to do so, only compounds the problem.
When we were kids, our parents had to watch out to make sure we weren’t exposed to filth on television. Now, apparently, television has to ensure our parents aren’t exposed to the filth their kids are seeing in school.
That’s at least the situation in Virginia — ground zero for educational unpleasantness at the moment, where progressive educators are aghast that parents apparently think they have some say in what their kids are exposed to at school, no matter how objectionable or dissipated it might be.
The educators have an ally in Terry McAuliffe, the Democratic gubernatorial candidate this year and a former governor of the Old Dominion. During his time as governor, McAuliffe vetoed a bill that would have allowed parents to remove sexually explicit books from Virginia schools.
During the final gubernatorial debate last month with Republican Glenn Youngkin, McAuliffe vigorously defended his policies on education.
“I’m not gonna let parents come into schools and actually take books out and make their own decisions,” McAuliffe told Youngkin. “I stopped the bill that I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.”
Terry McAuliffe: “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.” pic.twitter.com/rs6pSWZw79
Most of the coverage regarding McAuliffe’s remark during the debate centered on the battles surrounding curricula that include elements of critical race theory, a controversial far-left school of thought that argues both the United States and Western civilization were founded on systemic racism.
That’s a rabbit hole for another day, but there’s a creepier side to McAuliffe’s remark, given another front in Virginia’s education battles: Pornographic materials that are either part of the curriculum or available to children.
Do parents deserve a greater voice in their kids’ education?
Take the book “Gender Queer” by Maia Kobabe. As a recent ad from conservative group Independent Women’s Voice noted, the material in the book is so graphic that “TV rules say adults can’t see this, but VA schools think it’s fine for kids.”
The scene from the graphic novel shows a character, who is apparently a girl who identifies as a boy, in a library exchanging sexual texts with someone. The text had to be redacted and the images blurred because even TV — home to “The Jerry Springer Show,” “Jersey Shore,” “The Real Housewives of [Insert City Here]” and “My Mother the Car” — still has some standards. An unexpurgated version of the ad is available IWV website — and, if you must know, the conversation revolves around a sex toy and several sex acts.
“This is the most turned on I’ve been in my life. I am DYING,” the girl says.
On the next page, one of the aforementioned sex acts is demonstrated — and needed to be blurred out, natch. Apparently, the girl doesn’t like it, saying that it “was MUCH HOTTER when it was only in my imagination.”
“Let’s try something else,” she says, to which her lover says, “Of course.”
This is all deliberately vague because, well, you’re not reading Teen Vogue. The ad — including the uncensored version — can be seen here. Be forewarned: You’ll likely wish this all remained vague.
However, it’s important because, when he was governor, McAuliffe vetoed a 2016 bill that would have allowed parents to block their children from accessing or being taught sexually explicit material.
“McAuliffe (D) said a state law is ‘unnecessary’ because the Virginia Board of Education is considering changing state policy to accommodate parents’ concerns,” The Washington Post reported at the time.
“School boards are best positioned to ensure that our students are exposed to those appropriate literary and artistic works that will expand students’ horizons and enrich their learning experiences,” McAuliffe said at the time.
This includes “Gender Queer,” which was one of two books a Virginia mom was able to check out of her kids’ high school in Fairfax, Virginia. She went viral after she confronted the school board about the availability of the material.
“Both of these books include pedophilia,” Stacy Langton told the board, according to a Fox News from Sept. 24. “Sex between men and boys … One book describes a fourth-grade boy performing oral sex on an adult male. The other book has detailed illustrations of a man having sex with a boy.”
When she began reading from the books, one of the school board members interrupted her with this immortal line: “There are children in the audience here.” I’d recommend laughing at the irony as opposed to crying over the rank depravity, if only because the latter is unbecoming.
WARNING: The following video contains graphic language that some viewers will find offensive.
So apparently, that “changing state policy to accommodate parents’ concerns” part turned out swimmingly in the intervening five years.
And now, the Democrats are looking to elect a man who says, “I’m not gonna let parents come into schools and actually take books out and make their own decisions.” This, presumably, includes “Gender Queer.”
This is why it would behoove parents to elect candidates who allow them to make the decision to take porn out of their child’s library.
According to the FCC, “Federal law prohibits obscene, indecent and profane content from being broadcast on the radio or TV.” The FCC acknowledges that what constitutes “obscene,” “indecent” or “profane” is subjective, but even in 2021, there are few sane adults who would argue that the scene depicted in the Kobabe work doesn’t fill the bill — and then some.
If they can’t show it on TV, schools shouldn’t be showing it to kids, either.
Two prominent national school library organizations have promoted the book as essential reading material for minors.
It is likely that school libraries across the country are purchasing the book based on these recommendations.
The first organization, the School Library Journal, is the self-described “premiere publication for librarians and information specialists who work with children and teens.”
The Journal describes “Gender Queer” as a memory that “will resonate with teens.”
Should public schools promote transgender ideology?
“It’s also a great resource for those who identify as nonbinary or asexual as well as those who know someone who identifies that way and wish to better understand,” the organization’s review reads.
The second organization to promote “Gender Queer” is the Young Adult Library Services Association (YALSA).
YALSA went as far as giving “Gender Queer” the “Alex Award,” an honor given to books that have “special appeal to young adults ages 12 through 18.”
“Kobabe’s path to understanding eir gender and sexuality comes into beautiful focus in this graphic memoir, expressively illustrated with retro colors and simple lines. Readers will recognize a kindred spirit in Kobabe and/or gain insight into what it’s like to identify outside of the cisgender/heterosexual ‘norm,’” YALSA said in its review.
During a school board meeting held that day in Fairfax County, Virginia, a mother — Stacy Langton — brought printouts of the book’s pornographic contents and read portions of the book out loud, shocking many of those present.
The Fairfax school board chair, Stella Pekarsky, defended the district’s inclusion of the book, saying it was only available to “high school students.”
Weeks later, another mother — Nicole Solas — found the book at Rhode Island’s North Kingstown High School.
On Oct. 2, Solas tweeted out a picture of the book showcased at the school’s library, along with pictures of its pornographic contents.
In a subsequent tweet, Solas added that she would be submitting the pictures to law enforcement officials.
Schools in Florida, Ohio and North Carolina have also reportedly included the pornographic book in their student libraries.
“There’s no reason anybody, anywhere in America should be telling children about transgenderism, homosexuality, any of that filth. Yes, I called it filth,” he said.
“As you look at these photos, I challenge you to describe them as anything other than filth.”
There are two ways to be subjected to the preposterous awkwardness of elementary sex education: sitting through it and then sitting through the school meetings at which it’s discussed.
I’ve managed to experience both. Between fifth and 12th grades, I wasted hours of my life watching laughable videos on human sexuality and listening to teachers preach the gospel of permissiveness: As long as it was consensual and legal, it was OK and you were perfectly fine. Seriously. Don’t judge and don’t consider yourself judged, either by your parents or by any higher power. You’re doing great, really.
Then, for a brief period in high school, I attended some of the meetings where this curriculum was discussed. Parents, you may not be surprised to learn, weren’t thrilled about this. On perhaps the most sensitive topic a parent has to deal with, liberal value judgments were being imparted by educators who decided they got to act in the place of parents because kids might not otherwise get this message at home. This being the pre-YouTube days, things didn’t get performatively shouty, but the mood was tense — for good reason.
Those were different times, though, and the permissiveness being discussed — the mechanics of the coital act, how to get birth control, homosexuality — seems positively quaint nowadays, at least by the standards of the school that podcaster and former Fox News host Megyn Kelly sends her kids to. There, 8-year-old boys get to discuss taking puberty blockers, getting castrated and becoming women.
On Wednesday’s show, Kelly had middle school teacher Ramona Bessinger on. The Providence, Rhode Island, teacher was suspended earlier this month over an alleged lapse in safety protocol on her part, according to Legal Insurrection.
However, given the fact Bessinger has been an ardent critic of critical race theory and other left-wing pedagogy in Providence’s curriculum, this seemed like little more than a flimsy pretext to remove a fly in the ointment.
During her interview with Kelly, Bessinger said Providence had gotten caught up in “this whole push to embrace any child who wants to be pansexual, transsexual, multisexual, who the heck knows?”
Do children need to be taught this in sex education programs?
“As a teacher, I’m not interested in talking to children about their sexual preference, especially at the age of 12,” Bessinger said, adding she felt the school was encouraging impressionable children to take on identities they wouldn’t otherwise consider.
“Developmentally, middle school children want to fit in — more so than probably elementary or secondary” school children, Bessinger said.
“And so they’re preying on that psychological phase that kids go through. They want to fit in, and if they feel it’s going to please an adult, they may even pick a pronoun so that that adult applauds them.”
If you think things are bad in Providence, though, wait until you hear what’s apparently happening in Kelly’s kids’ school — which she said “was one of the top all-boys schools … one of the top schools in the country” and which she chose “because it was … more traditional, it wasn’t this far left.”
Kelly said her third-graders were subjected to an “experimental transgender education program,” which they found out about after she and her husband “went to parent-teacher night.”
“And we were sitting there, and one of our fellow parents — a man — raised his hand and said, ‘Why did my son come home’ — these are third-graders, 8- and 9-year-olds — ‘my son come home and ask if it’s true that he can take a pill to prevent puberty, and then, when he turns 18, can have his penis chopped off if he wants to become a woman?’”
“We were all like, ‘What? Say what?’” Kelly said.
“Trust me, we were angry, and the teacher acknowledged it. She didn’t deny it. She said, ‘Because we take the conversation where the boys want to take it’ — and of course, we were like, that’s bull, no 8-year-old was asking that question.”
Kelly added that discussing these topics with children just hopelessly confuses them — and she’s right. Are we to be shocked, though? That’s not a bug in the system. It’s a feature.
We live in the era of Drag Queen Story Time. In Washington state, an elementary school featured a book for LGBT pride month this year in which an underage character who received “top surgery” — the removal of breast tissue from women who identify as men to appear more masculine — appeared on the cover.
And if your public school district doesn’t play along, expect to pay. In a back-to-school message in August, the Biden administration’s Kristen Clarke, the Department of Justice’s assistant attorney general for civil rights, told transgender students they could file a lawsuit if their school was (among other things) stopping them from “receiving the supportive and life-saving care you may need.”
Talking to 8-year-olds about castration is supposedly part of the new awkwardness students and parents have to navigate, all thanks to educators with an agenda who think their values are better than yours — and want to make a mark on impressionable children. If you don’t believe the slippery slope is real, wake up.
The National School Boards Association (NSBA) has apologized to its members on Friday for a letter that was previously sent to the Biden administration in which the school board group compared parents accused of trying to intimidate educators to domestic terrorists.
In a memo issued to NSBA members, the board said that “on behalf of NSBA, we regret and apologize for the letter,” which was sent on Sept. 29, urging President Joe Biden to take action to stop what it described as “threats and acts of violence” against school boards, teachers, and others involved in the public education sphere.
“There was no justification for some of the language included in the letter,” the NSBA wrote. “We should have had a better process in place to allow for consultation on a communication of this significance. We apologize also for the strain and stress this situation has caused you and your organizations.”
It added that the NSBA deeply values “not only the work of local school boards that make important contributions within our communities, but also the voices of parents, who should and must continue to be heard when it comes to decisions about their children’s education, health, and safety.”
The memo comes as school board organizations in at least 20 states distanced themselves from the NSBA, citing disagreement over the way it has characterized concerned parents. Some have quit or moved to leave the NSBA.
The NSBA’s initial controversial Sept. 29 letter (pdf) claimed that some clashes between school board members and parents over issues such as masking policies, the critical race theory, among others, should be equivalent to parents engaging in “a form of domestic terrorism.”
“As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes,” the organization wrote.
Emails (pdf) obtained by Parents Defending Education last week disclosed that the NSBA was in touch with the White House and others in the administration before the release of the letter.
“In talks over the last several weeks with White House staff, they requested additional information on some of the specific threats,” Chip Slaven, the NSBA’s interim executive director and CEO, wrote in an email to NSBA board members just hours after the letter was released to the public.
Most of the incidents the board included related to parents vigorously pushing back on controversial teachings or material and not incidents where any laws appeared to be broken.
Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memorandum several days after the NSBA’s letter, ordering federal officials to crack down on parents accused of threatening violence or trying to intimidate educators.
Attorney General Merrick Garland gives an opening statement during a House Judiciary Committee oversight hearing of the Department of Justice at Capitol Hill in Washington on Oct. 21, 2021. (Greg Nash/Pool via Reuters)
Garland, testifying to Congress in Washington, said he learned about the letter by reading about it in the news and had not been told by the White House to issue the memo. He said he was certain the White House communicated its concerns about the letter to his department and that that would be “perfectly appropriate.”
On Oct. 21, Garland denied claims that the U.S. Justice Department would label parents as domestic terrorists, and parents who take issue with school board policies will not be investigated.
“The Justice Department supports and defends the First Amendment right of parents to complain as vociferously as they wish about the education of their children, about the curriculum taught in the schools,” Garland said, the New York Post reported. “That is not what the memorandum is about at all, nor does it use the words ‘domestic terrorism’ or ‘Patriot Act.’”
Jim Green, the executive director of Oregon’s School Boards Association, said in a statement on social media the board appreciates NSBA’s apology over the controversial letter that was issued to the Biden administration.
“We appreciate NSBA’s apology over some of the languages in the organization’s appeal for protecting the safety of school board members,” Green wrote. “That doesn’t mean the underlying issue—keeping volunteer school board members safe from threats and violence—isn’t important. It is.”
“But NSBA recognized that the wording it used alienated many parents, our vital partners in public schools. It’s my hope with this apology that the national organization can learn from the experience and move on.”
In the United States, a sharp rise in the number of children identifying as transgender has alarmed some parents. As these numbers rapidly grow, three mothers share the warning signs of transgender indoctrination.
The Child Transgender Numbers Explosion
A study conducted by the American Academy of Pediatrics released in May 2020 showed nearly 10 percent of high school students in just one school district identified as gender-diverse. That 10 percent figure is far higher than past estimates, such as a 2017 government survey of U.S. high school students, in which only 1.8 percent said they identified as transgender. While some studies suggest the higher rate of suicide and attempted suicide among transgender children is related to non-affirmation, other research shows that the higher rate of suicide and attempted suicide among adolescents with gender dysphoria is more related to their know history of other psychiatric diagnoses and self-reported emotional and behavioral problems. While the study called The Trevor Project—widely cited by those who push the affirmation-only approach to avoid self-harm—does show that a significant number of transgender youth admit the heavy use of drugs and alcohol, the study did not explore or provide any statistics regarding the preexistence of other psychiatric diagnoses or self-reported emotional and behavioral problems among the participants.
The Social/Mental Vulnerabilities
While each of the three families in this story come from different backgrounds and live in different states, each of their newly self-identified transgender children have some things very much in common. They are all in the same age group, they are all socially awkward, and all have been diagnosed with some form of social or psychological disorder.
Vera Lindner of Los Angeles, California, told The Epoch Times “the trans bomb was dropped,” into her world a year ago when her daughter was 14 years old. Her daughter, now 15, had been diagnosed with Asperger’s Syndrome and Attention Deficit Disorder. She suffers from depression, anxiety, insulin resistance, and obesity. Her daughter was also diagnosed with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS).
Dee, of Clover, South Carolina has a 17-year-old daughter who was indoctrinated at the age of 15. Her daughter has been diagnosed with pre-adoption trauma.
A concerned mom in Augusta, Georgia, who is a single parent, spoke to The Epoch Times under the condition of anonymity using the pseudonym Mary. She said her son made his transgender announcement in November 2020. While not formally diagnosed with any specific disorder, she “had him tested when he was younger for being on the [autism] spectrum and he fell in the gray zone.”
“They could not say yes or no,” Mary added. “He has always been a bit socially awkward and quirky.”
How it Began
Another commonality is the way each child was drawn down the transgender path. It all began with online connections who introduced them to the transgender world through various social media groups.
The trans-transformation of Vera’s daughter started when she began identifying as a lesbian and started watching a lot of YouTube videos like “What do lesbians look like?” and “Who is the ‘most lesbian’ from among this line-up?” Then came the “unrequited love for a butch-lesbian girl who was the first one to self-identify as a ‘trans-boy.’”
“This individual was the ring-leader, very aggressive,” Vera explained. “Also, very tech-savvy.” The “trans-boy” set up multiple Discord groups for the group her daughter had been introduced to, with channels such as “vent,” “general,” “art,” “LGBT” and specifically, “NSFW” where they were posting male nudes and pornography for each other to watch.
According to the Urban Dictionary, “NSFW” is “internet slang” for “Not Safe For Work” or “Not Safe For Wife” and is “used for a fandom of some sort when people want to discuss and share the sexual and porno side of the fandom.”
“At the same time,” Vera added, “they all got into TikTok and Instagram and started watching trans-related content—vile, stupid narcissistic young adults posting rotten material on these platforms.”
The subject matter of these posts centered around such things as, “you are trans if you…,” “you have been playing a role of a girl all along but you are not a girl,” and posed questions like “do you feel like a girl?”
For Dee’s daughter, everything started when “a friend who had decided she was trans a year before took her down the proverbial hole and taught her what to wear” and exposed her to lesbian pornography.
Through the social media platforms Instagram, Tumblr, Reddit, Pinterest, YouTube, and TikTok, her daughter watched videos about “trans-men” and “how to get testosterone.”
As with Vera’s and Dee’s daughters, Mary’s son spent hours on social media sites consuming hard-core, graphic pornography sent to him by his new, online trans peer group that evades parental controls by classifying the content “cartoons.”
The Drastic Transformation
By the time Vera’s daughter was in eighth grade she “was so hyper-fixated on LGBT that she was incapable of speaking about anything else besides LGBT” and she “cycled through orientations of lesbian, pan, queer, until finally she dropped the trans bomb shortly after turning 14.” Soon after, she “cut her hair, started wearing boys’ clothes, bought men’s underwear” and “demanded a binder.” She also wanted to get a “supplement from Amazon for increasing testosterone,” which she refused to purchase for her, and to see a “gender doctor,” which she refused to take her to.
Where Dee’s daughter had once been a “happy, seemingly well-adjusted and mature,” child who “excelled academically, she quickly became “disobedient, contentious, contemptuous and untruthful.”
Where she once appeared as a normal teen-aged girl, she now “presents as a boy wearing dark colors, hoodies, and occasionally wears a binder” and she has “Cut off her beautiful hair and tries to pass with a man bun.”
Mary said she was shocked at her son’s trans declaration as there was “no prior behavior that would indicate any of this.”
As with Vera’s daughter, Mary’s son became “obsessed with talking about trans issues.” She said “all talks revolved around it,” and “he demanded puberty blockers and hormone replacement therapy.”
Mary said the transformation of her son started after he “found friends who were also declaring non-binary and transgender status and they began providing him with “their old girl clothes.” He quickly went from “cautiously” wearing a skirt to “full-on cross-dressing” and he “became noticeably irritable and rude,” a characteristic she said was “extremely out of character” for her son. During one manic episode, she said her son began screaming at her to look at him to recognize that he is “a girl now.”
“It was very disturbing and frightening,” she said.
The Fight to Reclaim Their Children
Because her daughter was “going through a mental breakdown upon dropping the trans bomb,” Vera and her husband decided not to take away her electronic devices. To mitigate the destructive influence of social media, they did purge her accounts of all transgendered contacts. They also stopped sending their daughter to her therapist, who had started “casually talking about testosterone and encouraging transition.”
Her daughter’s PCOS is being managed with meds and she has a daily regimen of light exercise. She has started tenth grade in a charter school and is making new friends. Still, the therapy that has had the most positive impact on her daughter has been volunteering on family farms.
“She adores animals,” Vera said, “so we adopted two kittens in addition to the dog we brought with us. Being around animals and kind people has helped her rebuild her self-esteem. We also go for walks daily. Her depression is much better, definitely in remission. So is the eating disorder. Here, she is connecting with real humans and hearing their real-life stories.”
For Dee—because “there’s too much being shared at high school at lunch and during breaks”—parental monitoring of her social media accounts, a summer job, increased volunteer work to get her off social media, and new social circles has had only marginal improvements on her daughter’s behavior. But she isn’t giving up.
Fearful and overwhelmed by the sudden changes in her son, the decision was made by Mary to send her son to stay with his father. During those next three weeks, she began to dig into his online history and many changes have been made. Since her son’s return from his father’s home, she has taken away his electronic devices and has three layers of parental control on his phone. She uses Circle and Bark apps to monitor the phone’s screen-time and frequently checks with her internet provider for controls they provide. Despite her efforts, she said her son still manages to find “a lot of gender-bending in obscure corners of the internet.”
“His attitude is slightly better,” she said. “I have taken him to a new therapist that is not affirming. I am not sure how much that has helped so far though. The previous therapist was terrible and made things go from bad to violent with the blind affirmation model.
Their Greatest Fears
Vera fears that her daughter will be taken by Child Protective Services because she is “not affirming,” She also fears that her daughter will be influenced by her friends to take hormones or worse, to have irrevocable surgeries. “She has made tremendous progress in healing her mental illnesses and I don’t want her to slip back,” Vera said.
Dee also fears that her daughter will “medicalize and embark on a course of surgery that will cause irreparable damage to her body.”
“And I fear she will latch onto her ‘glitter’ family and become estranged from us,” she confessed.
Mary in Georgia also fears that her son “will begin medicalization when he turns 18” and that “he will ruin his body and his life in search for happiness that is promised to him” but “will only result in his ruination mentally and physically.”
“He will become a forever patient of the pharmaceutical and medical industry and dwindle his dating pool down to nothing and he will be alone,” she grieved.
Who’s to Blame?
Although a self-described “lifelong” liberal Democrat, Vera blames former President Barack Obama “who got bought with the millionaire transvestites’ money” and the liberals “who parrot trans slogans” and “allowed this ideology to infiltrate so deeply the American society and families.”
She blames the “friends who dragged” her daughter into the trans world, and the school lockdowns that left home-bound, isolated children “hanging on their phones all day long to be immersed into this cult.”
“And I blame myself,” she confessed, “for not doing deep reading on this whole trans-thing years ago. I immersed myself only after she dropped on us the trans-bomb, unexpectedly.”
Dee also blames “the friend who dragged” her daughter into this, “and social media, which uses algorithms to shove the trans-agenda into her online world.” She also blames her daughter’s three therapists, “all of whom affirmed her and treated her like a special unicorn.”
Primarily, Mary blames the tech industry.
“They know the danger this technology poses to our mental health and the influence it has especially on young vulnerable people,” she said. “I blame them for not having stronger walls against pornography when kids can easily click an ‘over 18’ button.”
She also blames the pharmaceutical and medical industry who “blindly affirm this and push drugs and surgeries on kids” and therapists who use suicide statistics to pressure them into affirming their child’s irrational decisions yet give no thought to the idea that the child may deeply regret those choices and “take their life after the transition.”
New Paths Require Wise Feet
“To all despondent parents who just got blindsided by this,” two mothers offer some advice.
Vera: “Read as much literature as possible, both affirmative and also trans-critical. Be familiar with the propaganda and lies so you can rebuff them. Nothing substitutes for knowledge and information.”
Mary: “Cut off electronics/online activity, be vigilant about parental controls and monitoring. Be cautious and not confrontational and keep communication lines open and encourage critical thinking. Give them as much love as possible but also be firm as the parent. Get them outdoors and back in nature and into the world like through volunteering, extracurricular activities, if they’re old enough getting a job.”
Those who control our institutions and both parties, the commanding heights of the economy, politics, and culture, comprise an elite with shared values, beliefs, attitudes, and power. They dominate universities, media, education, big business, big sport, and Hollywood.
Some scholars such as Charles Murray and political commentators such as Ben Shapiro and Tucker Carlson have come to use the term “ruling class” or “new ruling class” of this pan-institutional and bipartisan elite. They define class as a matter of power and attitudes, differences in access to government and education, habits, and tastes. In contrast, Marxists saw the central divide as one between owners of capital and those who worked for them—capitalists and wage-workers or, in previous class societies, between slaves and slave-owners, or feudal lords and serfs.
America’s Ruling Class
The political philosopher, former senior intelligence official, and critic of the main schools of foreign policy Angelo Codevilla died in a traffic accident on Sept. 21, 2021. In addition to his books, articles, and speeches on statecraft and the foreign policy establishment, Codevilla provided an influential conservative analysis of the central class divide in the United States. He published a brilliant and prescient essay (and later book) in 2010 that laid out his view of America’s ruling class.
Codevilla emphasizes the power and attitude of the new ruling class—its conviction of its own moral and intellectual superiority and its utter contempt for the rest of society.
The ruling class, so understood, is not defined by its ownership of capital or wealth. “What really distinguishes these privileged people demographically is that whether in government directly or as officers in companies, their careers and fortunes depend on government,” he wrote. They vote Democrat and “draw their money and orientation from the same sources as the millions of teachers, consultants, and government employees in the middle ranks who aspire” to be members of the ruling class and identify with what they take to be the grievances of the oppressed.
Party and Class
Democrats are the party of the ruling class, Codevilla argues, and the Republicans are their junior partner. Writing in 2010, he sees the mass of voters as unrepresented and voiceless. Most Democrat voters see their party as representing them well, but that’s true of only a minority of Republican voters. There’s no party that represents and defends the views and values of the majority—patriotic, putting the United States first in global economic and political matters, avoiding unnecessary and unwinnable wars, with a foreign policy that strengthens our friends and weakens our adversaries rather than the reverse, and that’s consistently supportive of family, faith, and tradition.
As Codevilla put it in 2010: “In short, the ruling class has a party, the Democrats. But some two-thirds of Americans—a few Democratic voters, most Republican voters, and all independents—lack a vehicle in electoral politics.”
This divide and party difference persist in 2021, as reflected in the growing distrust of legacy media and other institutions. Only 6 percent of Republicans, and 16 percent of all Americans trust TV news, according to a July Gallup poll. About one in five trusts newspapers. Relentless and gratuitous hostility towards President Donald Trump contrasted with sycophantic coverage or suppression of negative news about his successor in the White House (as in the Hunter Biden laptop scandal) no doubt account for much of this suspicion by Republicans and independents. Except for high bipartisan trust in the military and small businesses, the parties differ markedly on other institutions. Republicans have much more trust in the church and police.
The election of Trump in 2016 suggested the possibility of weakening the Establishment Republicans and turning the party into one that puts the country’s national interests first (as other countries do) and is socially conservative.
Moving the party and country in a direction that reflected the views and values of most Americans ran, as expected, into fierce and unrelenting hostility within the administrative state, the media, the rest of the ruling class, and not least, from Establishment Republicans.
There are formidable obstacles to sustaining a third party in the American system, so conservative Republicans focus today on maintaining the support of working people, not least that of black and Latino families. Part of the task is to hold off attempts of the globalist and socially liberal old guard to regain control of the party. If those attempts fail, some former party leaders and Never Trumpers aim to sabotage the Republican Party’s electoral efforts, supporting the Democrats or a third party in order to teach ordinary people a lesson.
Attitude
The ruling class, Codevilla argues, “grew and set itself apart from the rest of us by connection with ever bigger government, and above all by a certain attitude.”
As he says, “Whether formally in government, out of it, or halfway, America’s ruling class speaks the language and has the tastes, habits, and tools of bureaucrats. It rules uneasily over the majority of Americans not oriented to government.”
In terms of education, cultural tastes, and disdain for ordinary people (the working class who, in Obama’s memorable phrase, “cling to guns or religion”), the “educated” class is less diverse than ever. It aims to improve society, not by empowering ordinary people, but by managing them in their own best interests. This typically requires ever more centralized control of the state, with new or expanded programs and regulations.
The recent threat by Attorney General Merrick Garland to use the FBI against concerned parents who challenge school boards is just one of several examples of recent abuse of federal power in ways not envisaged by the original legislation and that seem to contravene the Constitution.
The Potter and the Clay
In short, the attitude of the ruling class to those outside it is essentially that of potter to clay. But the potter in this case disdains and despises the clay even as it seeks to shape and control it to conform to its own desires.
This attitude, seeking to limit democracy and to enhance instead the rule of experts and professionals, was common to the Progressives in the last century. As Woodrow Wilson, president of Princeton and then of the United States, put it, “I have often said that the use of a university is to make young gentlemen as unlike their fathers as possible.”
The current administration’s method illustrates this attitude. By using regulations and massive programs of increased debt and spending, the ruling class reserves to itself control over the economy and increasingly over more and more areas of everyday life.
Police officials at Arizona State University have recommended to prosecutors that they charge four people over the harassment of Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) at the school earlier this month.
Activists, including some with a group called Living United for Change in Arizona (LUCHA), confronted Sinema in Tuscon on Oct. 3. They harassed her and illegally recorded her in a bathroom.
After an investigation, the Arizona State University Police Department submitted charges of disorderly conduct and disruption of an educational institution to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, a spokesman confirmed to The Epoch Times via email.
Both charges are misdemeanors that typically can land a wrongdoer up to six months in jail.
State law makes recording in a bathroom without another person’s consent a felony. A violator can land up to 2.5 years in prison.
The spokesman declined to say why there was no recommendation to charge anybody under the law.
Footage of Sinema in the bathroom was circulated widely by LUCHA and other groups, who are trying to pressure Sinema into backing President Joe Biden’s massive $3.5 trillion budget package. The moderate senator is negotiating for a lower budget, as is fellow moderate Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), upsetting some on the left.
Sinema denounced the harassment a day after it happened, calling it “unacceptable for activist organizations to instruct their members to jeopardize themselves by engaging in unlawful activities such as gaining entry to closed university buildings, disrupting learning environments, and filming students in a restroom.”
Sinema teaches at the university.
Sinema’s office did not return a request for comment, nor did LUCHA.
A spokesman for the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office said the office received the submission from the university police on Oct. 12.
“We have asked for additional information from the investigating agency and the case is considered under review by our office. There is no timeframe at this time as to when a formal charging decision might be made,” he said.
LUCHA has continued protesting against Sinema. It posted photographs on Facebook on Wednesday showing activists outside one of her offices.
Republican Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton introduced a bill on Thursday that would prevent schools from aiding and concealing a student’s “gender transition” from parents.
The bill, called the Empower Parents to Protect Their Kids Act, seeks to stop federally funded K-12 schools from facilitating a student’s “gender transition” without parental knowledge.
“Schools should never be allowed to impose radical, harmful ideologies on children — especially without parents’ knowledge and consent,” Cotton said in a news release announcing the legislation.
“My bill will protect students and ensure that parents are in control of their children’s education. Schools must remain institutions of education, not indoctrination camps where minors are manipulated and brainwashed,” he added.
Schools shouldn’t impose radical, harmful ideologies on children—especially without parents’ knowledge and consent. My bill will protect students and ensure that parents are in control of their children’s education.https://t.co/xfhbrTTiEz
“Without parental knowledge or consent, schools are facilitating ‘social gender transitions’ by changing the names and pronouns of children in school, or even allowing children to change which sex-segregated facilities they use, such as dormitories for overnight field trips,” the bill reads.
The legislation would require schools to receive parental consent before affirming a student’s “gender transition.”Should schools be allowed to conceal a student’s “gender transition” from parents?
In addition, schools could not “facilitate, encourage, or coerce students to withhold information from their parents regarding the student’s gender transition or the student’s purported gender identity, where the student’s purported gender identity is incongruous with biological sex.”
The bill would also make it illegal for schools to “pressure or coerce the parents of students, or students themselves, to proceed with any treatment or intervention to affirm the student’s purported gender identity.”
In New Jersey, state policy regarding students’ “gender identity” excludes parental consent.
“A school district shall accept a student’s asserted gender identity; parental consent is not required,” the state’s guidance on transgender students reads.
“Further, a student need not meet any threshold diagnosis or treatment requirements to have his or her gender identity recognized and respected by the district, school or school personnel.
“Nor is a legal or court-ordered name change required. There is no affirmative duty for any school district personnel to notify a student’s parent or guardian of the student’s gender identity or expression.”
A similar policy was enacted in Madison, Wisconsin, before being changed following a lawsuit.
“It should go without saying that school district staff should be honest with parents, especially when it comes to critical matters concerning their children, but we are pleased that the court has issued an order now requiring it,” Alliance Defending Freedom senior counsel Roger Brooks said in a statement last year.
“As this case moves forward, we will continue to argue for our clients’ legitimate concern over the Madison Metropolitan School District’s policy of deceiving parents and excluding them from profound decisions involving the wellbeing of their own children.”
PITTSBURGH—Twenty years ago, Paul Carson said he never would have hesitated to speak out at a school board meeting about any issue affecting his children’s education.
But one day, that changed. “I just don’t do it,” Carson told me. A physician who practices medicine in an urban Pittsburgh hospital, Carson said it has nothing to do with his being 20 years older. “It has everything to do with the culture we are navigating.”
Anyone, he said, can take a video of what you say, edit it to his or her advantage, then post it on social media. Or they can just simply claim on social media that you are racist or extremist because you express an opinion outside the sensitivities of the cultural curators who define what is acceptable and what is not in our country.
When Carson used a media platform in discussions about school district issues, as he did last year when the children in the Pittsburgh public schools went for months without in-person education, he said he had to be “profoundly cautious” in expressing his views.
School board meetings have been around forever, and they have always had the potential to become raucous. I remember attending them with my mother as a teenager, then as a mother myself when my children were young. I also had to attend a few as a reporter for the local newspaper I worked for at the time. Emotions often ran high, as they should when children’s welfare is involved. Good parents never lose sight of the fact that the people who educate their children spend more of the day with them in a classroom setting than parents themselves do. Emotions also ran high when new buildings were proposed, which always eventually meant higher taxes.
I have often told young reporters that if they want to see firsthand the most important political process in the U.S. system, they should turn off cable news, get off the iPhone, turn their eyes away from Washington and cover a local school board meeting.
No one should accept threats or physical violence at a school board meeting or anywhere else. But such conduct is fortunately rare. The question today is, can we trust our government to distinguish between the actual threat of violence and the passionate expression of viewpoints by parents?
That question became a reality this week when Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memo suggesting a nationwide federal crackdown on parents at school board meetings. And the answer from parents like Carson is, “Absolutely not.”
Garland made his decision under pressure from the National School Boards Association. Its interim director responded by saying Garland’s memo sends a “strong message to individuals with violent intent who are focused on causing chaos, disrupting our public schools, and driving wedges between school boards and the parents, students, and communities they serve.”
Freedom is messy. Our discussions about things that matter to us, such as our children, are chaotic, disruptive and, yes, divisive. They drive wedges—that’s a feature, not a bug.
In the past few months, parents across the country have become frustrated with extremist curriculum choices that their school boards are making. In response, they have done what Americans have done for generations—show up at school board meetings to voice their concerns.
In many cases, their concerns cross traditional political, racial, and socioeconomic lines and are at odds with the Biden administration.
Garland is now using the FBI against parents on the grounds that school board members feel threatened. But what does “threatened” look like? Is it someone yelling at you? Disagreeing with you? Holding an opposing opinion? Who is defining those threats?
This memo wasn’t just designed to target those who would commit violence. It was also clearly designed to stop regular people with real concerns from voicing those concerns because of the fear anything they say will deem them a domestic terrorist, which would destroy their personal, community, and professional lives.
It is downright chilling to think that there are parents out there who are worried that they are going to end up on a government list or under some type of government scrutiny if they decide to go into a school board meeting to give a public comment on an issue.
Eighty years ago, dairy farmer Jim Edgerton stood up at a town hall meeting in his hometown of Arlington, Vermont, to voice his disagreement with the town councilors’ decision to build a new school. Edgerton was the only person at the meeting or in town who objected to the proposed building.
His opposition was mostly unremarkable, but he held his ground, nonetheless. No one would have known about it had not Norman Rockwell, a newcomer in town, been there.
As he watched Edgerton exercise his freedom of speech, the famous illustrator of Americana could not stop thinking about the State of the Union address President Franklin D. Roosevelt had delivered on Jan. 6, 1941, in which he warned that the values and liberties the public took for granted were under attack. Rockwell would go on to illustrate that moment, making Roosevelt’s words relatable by depicting them in use in small-town America.
It is inconceivable that the federal government today wants to squash that freedom through vague rules and intimidation. Garland seems to be making the calculation that the Jim Edgertons of this world will cower under the concern the government is watching them.
In the beginning, maybe they will. But in the long run, the air of intimidation probably won’t last. There comes a point when those feeling the threat go from being on the fringe of society to being the majority.
Jennifer Granholm used her official capacity as gov’t official to promote Democratic candidates, according to complaint
Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm violated the Hatch Act, which prohibits government officials from leveraging their official duties to impact election results, according to an ethics watchdog complaint.
The Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust in a Tuesday letter called on the Department of Energy’s Office of Special Counsel to investigate Granholm, who during an interview carried out in her official capacity advocated for the election of progressive Democrats. The watchdog group said Granholm’s comments were an improper use of her position, according to FACT.
During the interview, which was hosted by beauty magazine Marie Claire and first reported on by the Free Beacon, Granholm was introduced as the secretary of energy and spoke about her responsibilities in the administration. But she quickly transitioned to political discussions about electing more progressive Democrats to office, and acknowledged the chance that she was violating the law.
“I’m subject to something called the Hatch Act, which means I can’t advocate for people to call their Members of Congress,” Granholm told interviewer Emily Tisch Sussman, a Democratic activist and daughter of a major Democratic donor. “If I weren’t subject to the Hatch Act, I’m sure you know I would be, but I am so I can’t do that.”
“Throughout the interview she stated that she was a Democrat, Democrats had a ‘bare majority’ in Congress, urged viewers to contact Members of Congress about policy issues she supported, and to elect more Democrats to Congress,” the group wrote. “In fact she essentially acknowledged that her statements were a violation of the Hatch Act, yet attempted to excuse her remarks with ‘If I wasn’t subject to the Hatch Act, this is what I would say.'”
The allegation comes just a week after White House press secretary Jen Psaki was accused of violating the Hatch Act when she endorsed Virginia Democrat Terry McAuliffe during a press briefing. Shortly after liberal watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed an ethics complaint against Psaki, she admitted to the infraction, saying on Saturday, “I’ll be more careful with my words next time.”
The Department of Energy publicly defended Granholm’s interview with Marie Claire, further establishing that the interview was part of her official duties, FACT said in the letter.
“The Department of Energy affirmed her statements were made in her official capacity, claiming that she shared how Americans ‘can participate in our democracy,'” the group wrote. “Granholm’s statements did more than that—she advocated for precisely how citizens should participate in our democracy and that was by supporting a particular political party and its policies.”
The Department of Energy did not respond to a request for comment.
The first-ever “female” four-star admiral in the public health corps is actually a man.
Yes, you heard that right.
In a statement released Tuesday, the Biden administration lauded the appointment of Rachel Levine to the aforementioned position, saying “Admiral Levine now serves as the highest ranking official in the USPHS Commissioned Corps and its first-ever female four-star admiral.”
The Biden administration announces that Rachel Levine, a biological man, is now the “first-ever female four-star admiral” in the public health corps pic.twitter.com/1JIa5Eh0vZ
This is the same group that claims to be the “party of science,” mind you.
The same party that is allowing men like Levine to take over women’s athletics and invade female-only spaces, all in the name of inclusivity.
It’s funny, really: The Democratic party has so many groups to please, so many “oppressed” peoples to rescue, that those groups are starting to come into conflict with one another.
Now, the left is sacrificing its commitment to women’s empowerment and feminism so that it can promote the transgender agenda.
Just think about this: What is so special about a woman, if any man can simply identify as a woman, take her place and be equally celebrated?
At that point, why are women special at all?
Conservatives know the answer to this — women, due to their biological and social differences, are incredibly unique and complement men perfectly, just as men complement them.
Women can create and nurture life, for example. It’s hard to name a male attribute that is equally powerful.
Nevertheless, the left is set on claiming that any biological man — if he feels like it — can be just as much of a woman as anyone else.
Dispatch records from the Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office suggest that a school administrator and school resource officer (SRO) did not act urgently to involve police specialists in a reported rape on May 28 at Stone Bridge High School.
At 1:33 pm, the SRO — who works full-time at the school handling routine matters but officially works for the sheriff’s office — radioed that he “was briefed by assistant principal of a student that has made allegations of being possibly raped or touched unwanted by another student a couple of hours ago. Investigating at this time and parents are and have been notified at this time by admin.”
It is unclear whether the assistant principal learned of the rape “a couple of hours ago,” or whether the alleged rape occurred then and the administrator did not learn of it until some later time period.
The SRO then “investigated” for nearly an hour without calling for outside police officers.
At 2:21, 2:28, and 2:30, three calls for police are finally placed — one requesting a supervisor, one requesting “another unit,” and one noted as “upset parent.” Given that these calls came in a nine-minute window well after officials first learned of the rape, it seems likely that the impetus for all three was the “upset parent.
That is, after all, what Principal Tim Flynn told the community in an email at 4:48 pm:
Good evening Stone Bridge families this [sic] is Stone Bridge Principal Tim Flynn. There was an incident in the main office area today that required the Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office to dispatch deputies to Stone Bridge. The incident was confined to the main office and the entrance area to the school. There was no threat to the safety of the student body. The incident was witnessed by a small number of students who were meeting with staff adjacent to the main office. Counseling services and the services of our Unified Mental Health Team are available for any student who may need to talk about today’s incident. Students might have noticed Sheriff’s Office personnel on campus and I wanted to let you know that something out of the ordinary happened at school today. The safety of our students and staff is the top priority of Loudoun County Public Schools.
Scott Smith, the parent of the victim, previously told The Daily Wire that he was aghast to find the incident being handled only by people who worked at the school full-time — with the SRO seeming to take direction from the principal — rather than a team of police officers one would expect to find processing a major crime scene. There were no outside police or medics at the scene when he arrived, he said. He became irate.
He said that police responded to deal with complaints about him making a scene in the office, not to the rape allegations. Once on the scene, he said, the team of police eventually became persuaded that what had occurred was a serious incident that required their attention, and escorted his family to the hospital where a rape kit was administered.
Smith said he did not believe a rape kit would have been administered based on the laid-back way administrators and the SRO appeared to be handling it on their own. The county’s prosecutor later said that the case relied on DNA evidence, suggesting that if a rape kit had not been conducted that day, no substantiated rape would have likely been added to Stone Bridge’s books.
Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office dispatch logs
In addition to Principal Flynn’s email which made no mention of a rape, Loudoun’s superintendent, Scott Zeigler, went on to tell the school board at a June 22 board meeting that he had no record of sexual assaults in bathrooms. The school system also reported on required statistics to the state of Virginia that it had zero sexual assault incidents in the school that year.
Zeigler later said he misunderstood the question in the school board meeting, and apologized for an “error” in reporting to the state.
The sheriff’s office previously told The Daily Wire there were no 911 calls from the school, but has now produced “dispatch” logs that include radio calls.
The calls also show that at 7:21 pm, the FBI called and “asked about the incident at Stone Bridge HS,” which was “found through prior calls.” Once the agent was advised that “it was a sexual assault investigation,” the agent said it “would not require their help.”
Smith was arrested at a June 22 school board meeting where he became angry again after Zeigler’s misleading statement. That arrest led to Smith being included in a letter, by the National School Boards Association, that talked about angry attendees at school board meetings, as well as a response by Attorney General Merrick Garland that suggested the FBI could have a hand in dealing with such matters.
The suspect in the alleged rape was transferred to a different school, where he was arrested for an alleged in-classroom sexual assault on another girl October 6.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a member.
On June 22, Scott Smith was charged with disorderly conduct at Loudoun County’s school board meeting. Smith had attended the meeting in hopes of sharing the story of his daughter’s alleged rape, which he said happened when a boy wearing a skirt entered the girls’ locker room in a Loudoun County school.
When an LGBT activist told Smith his daughter was a liar, a shouting match ensued. Then, an officer grabbed his shoulder, Smith pulled away and a physical altercation took place ending with the father’s arrest.
All of this happened before he could tell his daughter’s story to the school board as they deliberated over transgender inclusion in women’s bathrooms.
The motion was later passed.
Smith’s attorney wasn’t worried about the charges; she even told The Daily Wire (subscription required) she was “sure the charges would be dropped.”
Enter Loudoun County’s lead prosecutor, Buta Biberaj.
Despite the unremarkable nature of Smith’s case, Biberaj showed up personally to prosecute him. She sought jail time against Smith.
“It is incredibly unusual for a disorderly conduct case to even go forward. The idea that they would actually be seeking jail time, I’d guess in my 15 years the number of times I’ve seen that happen would be zero,” Smith’s attorney told The Daily Wire.
“It would be completely unheard of for the prosecutor to handle a misdemeanor.”
Is the left destroying America’s legal system?
In fact, Biberaj appears to be a member of what one Heritage Foundation report refers to as the “rogue prosecutors movement,” a campaign made up of progressive prosecutors across the country — funded by left-wing billionaire George Soros — aimed at “promoting the fundamental transformation of our criminal justice system.”
“They brazenly usurp the constitutional role of the legislative branch by refusing to prosecute entire categories of crime, abuse the role of the county prosecutor, fail to protect victims of crime, and ignore the rising crime rates that flow from their radical policies,” the authors of the report wrote.
The Loudoun County lead prosecutor has certainly received funding from Soros.
Biberaj won the office in a 2019 election, after she received $845,000 in campaign funds from Soros, according to The Daily Wire.
A coalition of 17 state attorneys general is demanding that the U.S. Department of Justice immediately rescind a recent memo they say would “chill lawful dissent by parents voiced during local school board meetings.”
The DOJ memo, which has been the center of much criticism since its Oct 4 release, directs the FBI to work with state and local governments to address an alleged “disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence” against teachers and school leaders. It came shortly after National School Boards Association (NSBA) urged the Biden administration to invoke counter-terrorism laws to handle “angry mobs” of parents seeking to hold school officials accountable for the teaching of the Marxist critical race theory and for imposing COVID-19 restrictions on their children.
In a letter (pdf) sent on Monday to President Joe Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland, the chief legal officers argued that the memo doesn’t appear to be based on facts, but on a flawed NSBA narrative, which described disruptions at school board meetings as violent threats akin to “domestic terrorism.”
“The vast majority of incidents that NSBA cites involved disruptive and disorderly conduct rather than threats,” the letter reads. “In fact, in no known instance, has there been anything like the burning, looting, police assaults, vandalism and other criminal activity that occurred in the summer of 2020.”
The letter was referring to riots involving anarcho-communist group Antifa and Marxist group Black Lives Matter.
“Actual threats and violence towards school administrators, board members, teachers, or staff are rare,” the attorneys general noted, adding that there are already sufficient criminal and civil remedies available, without the need for FBI to intervene in “what is a quintessential local issue.”
The attorneys general further stated that the DOJ memo “is likely intimidating to parents,” who in many cases are, for the first time, exercising their First Amendment right to speak in a public forum.
“We as a country should celebrate their participation in our system of self-government, not silence them by accusing them of ‘domestic terrorism’ and threaten them with the prospect of the FBI knocking on their door to investigate their activities,” they added.
The letter was written by Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita, and co-signed by the attorneys general of Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Utah.
The letter comes as school board organizations in at least a dozen states distance themselves from the NSBA, citing disagreement over the way it characterized concerned parents. School boards in Alabama, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia, have released statements opposing the NSBA letter to the Biden administration or Garland’s memo or both.
San Francisco has a poop problem. Between 2011 and 2019, reports of human feces on public sidewalks quintupled, rising from roughly 5,500 to more than 30,000. Incidents have been on the decline since the COVID pandemic began, but residents still reported an average of 76 turds per day in the first half of 2021.
The Golden Gate city’s intestinal troubles are not news—conservative commentators have made a joke, and a talking point, out of them for ages. But they are metonymic for a dysfunction increasingly apparent in America’s big cities, from the West Coast to the East. Many major municipalities are marred by violent crime, homelessness, uncontrolled mental illness, and general disorder. This all in spite of an ever-advancing cadre of progressive leaders, who promise their latest tax hike will finally target the “root causes” of the breakdown.
Why are these big, blue cities breaking down? Climate scientist and Berkeley, Calif., resident Michael Shellenberger tackles the question in his latest book, San Fransicko: Why Progressives Ruin Cities.
At core, Shellenberger’s answer is political. Though he takes pains to assure the reader of his liberal bona fides, Shellenberger insists that big cities, particularly San Francisco, have been captured by a too-progressive ideology. City leaders have begrudgingly embraced the priorities of the activist class that staffs the various NGOs providing key services, including support for the homeless, the mentally ill, and the drug addicted.
The result is urban disaster. Shellenberger covers the vogue for “housing first” policy, which emphasizes placing homeless people in housing without sobriety or medication requirements, and which he argues does not consistently reduce the pathologies that lead to homelessness. He discusses the “harm reduction” approach to drug policy, which can mean providing users with the materials to use without “coercing” them into treatment. And he outlines the rising skepticism of policing and public safety, alongside decarceral reforms, which have created an atmosphere supportive of criminal offending.
Of course, disentangling cause and effect in policymaking is hard. But California is one of just a handful of states to see dramatic increases in its homeless population over the past decade, and the state’s deliberate reduction in the punishment for minor property offending is associated with a spike in shoplifting. And the Golden State is proudly progressive—a progressivism doubtless even more common among the people who staff the NGOs that actually manage its big cities’ streets.
As far as a liberal’s case to liberals against the excesses of liberalism goes, San Fransicko is a useful contribution to the genre. It suffers from some of the usual flaws of popular nonfiction: Some chapters seem unnecessary, and one suspects the whole thing could have been slashed down to a 10,000-word essay. But the book does well the thing it is meant to do: set out the key contradictions in contemporary liberalism, as underscored by the governance failures of the places it is most common.
One of the peculiar features of American liberalism is the selectiveness of its paternalism. Liberals are happy to embrace coercive policies that affect the average citizen—vaccine mandates, say, or soda taxes. But when it comes to the least of us—the drug addicted, the mentally ill, the chronically homeless, the repeated victims of crime—it adopts an inexplicably laissez faire stance. This approach, sociologist Neil Gong has argued, is dramatically at odds with how those with means ask to be treated. While the mentally ill rich seek maximum paternalism, the mentally ill poor are afforded the freedom to be mad.
This tendency runs in apparent contradiction to the left’s usual statist bent. The anti-psychiatry movement, the push to deinstitutionalize and ban compulsory drug treatment, and of course the movement to defund the police, are all basically libertarian, inasmuch as they work to reduce the capacity of the state to regulate certain kinds of antisocial conduct. These regulations are considered per se illegitimate, because they fail to target the “root causes” of this behavior—racism, sexism, capitalism, etc.
Such “root causes” thinking is, of course, fallacious: Nothing about a cause’s proximity to an effect makes it more or less suited to policy intervention. But more important, it confuses the question of whom it is fair to manage—average citizens are fair game, whereas the oppressed are oppressed enough as is—with whom it benefits society to manage. The public dispute becomes over how to be compassionate to the schizophrenic (where compassion is always synonymous with license), wholly obviating discussion of the harms done to society by his camping out on the sidewalk, harms for which we increasingly lack moral language.
The sort of policies Shellenberger endorses at the end of the book—a statewide psych authority, expanded conservatorship, a more carrot-and-stick approach to mental health and drug abuse treatment—would probably benefit their objects. But they would also benefit the other members of society, who are entitled to be free of antisocial behavior. That entitlement, of the average American, has fallen out of fashion. But it is the entitlement at the core of the social contract, and governments of all sizes forget it at their peril.
San Fransicko: Why Progressives Ruin Cities by Michael Shellenberger Harper, 416 pp., $28.99
I am sure it is a totally unfounded rumor that the Central Intelligence Agency, the world’s most lavishly funded bastion of spooks, is about to shorten its name to “The Central Agency,” retiring the embarrassing and divisive word “intelligence.”
I don’t know how the rumor got started, but the news, reported Saturday by The Financial Times, that in August the Chinese had successfully tested a nuclear-capable hypersonic missile lit a fire under the rumor mill.
It was not so much the fact of the test as the ignorance of our so-called intelligence services that did the trick.
According to the FT, “The test has raised new questions about why the US often underestimated China’s military modernization.”
When it came to the Soviet Union, the CIA typically overestimated not only its military capabilities but also its economic strength. With China, the opposite seems to be the case.
“We have no idea how they did this,” said one spokesman quoted by the FT.
But why? Why didn’t we know?
The budget of the CIA is classified, but we know, thanks to Edward Snowden, that a few years ago it was somewhere north of $50 billion. But what do we get for all that dough?
This summer, we got a total misreading of the situation in Afghanistan.
Now we get a situation in which the deployment of a weapon designed to circumvent our missile defense capabilities catches the CIA “by surprise.”
As the FT reported, the United States and Russia are also developing hypersonic weapons, “including glide vehicles that are launched into space on a rocket but orbit the earth under their own momentum.”
These devices “fly at five times the speed of sound, slower than a ballistic missile. But they do not follow the fixed parabolic trajectory of a ballistic missile and are manoeuvrable, making them harder to track.”
So what are we paying for?
The Chinese launched a rocket that carried a hypersonic glide vehicle that, traveling at about Mach 5, circled the globe a couple of times in a low orbit before homing in on its target.
The device missed its target by more than twenty miles, but when you are talking about something capable of carrying a nuclear payload that is definitely too close for comfort.
Moreover, this was only a test. Presumably, succeeding missiles will be more accurate.
People familiar with the test said that it showed that China had made “astounding” progress on hypersonic weapons.
But again, the issue is not so much Chinese technical progress as U.S. ignorance.
Increasingly, it seems, the institutions we have relied on to protect us have degenerated into a state of politically correct rancidness.
The FBI seems to spend enormous resources infiltrating, egging on, and indeed fomenting the very plots they are supposed to be guarding against.
At least a dozen FBI agents were part of the plot to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitmer.
Were they there to protect the governor or to orchestrate the caper?
Julie Kelly has just shown that the Jan. 6 demonstration at the Capitol could well have been part of the FBI’s “Operation Cold Snap.”
(See also Darren Beattie’s story on possible FBI involvement in the events of Jan. 6 in Revolver News.)
Quoting a story from Buzzfeed, Kelly notes that the operation was a “‘far-reaching, multi-state domestic terrorism investigation’ to surveil—or more likely entrap, … people tied to the FBI’s hit list of right-wing militias.”
Meanwhile, the U.S. military seems more interested in combatting “white rage,” circumventing the chain of command to combat the Bad Orange Man, or complaining about the Army policy regarding fingernail polish, than actually protecting U.S. citizens and interests.
And the CIA? Besides missing threats (a habit that goes back at least to 9/11), they seem expert mostly to be creating their fair share.
Remember the story of that training exercise in Virginia at which they accidentally left some plastic explosive in the engine compartment of a school bus?
Yes, that’s right. “The CIA accidentally left a ‘putty-type’ battlefield explosive beneath the hood of a Loudon County, Virginia school bus after a training exercise . . . As a result, elementary and high school students spent two days riding the bus as the explosives bounced around under the hood.”
Instead, Superman will now be seeking “a better tomorrow” as “America” is wiped away by DC Comics, which announced the change in a statement on Saturday.
“Superman’s new motto of ‘Truth, Justice and a Better Tomorrow’ will better reflect the global storylines that we are telling across DC and to honor the character’s incredible legacy of over 80 years of building a better world,” said DC Chief Creative Officer and Publisher Jim Lee.
“Superman has long been a symbol of hope who inspires people from around the world, and it is that optimism and hope that powers him forward with this new mission statement.”
According to The Hollywood Reporter, the “American Way” phrase began in 1940, debuting on a radio series called “The Adventures of Superman.”
The motto continued in the TV version of Superman that was crafted in the 1950s, but it was not universally used in the various versions of the superhero that came in the 1960s, according to Yahoo.
When Superman hit the big screen in a 1978 movie starring Christopher Reeve, the motto returned.
Many objected to the change.
DC Comics decide it’s time for Superman’s motto to “evolve”, so they ditch “American” from it. His motto changes from “Truth, Justice, and the American Way” to “Truth, Justice, and a Better Tomorrow”. And just like that, we lose a little bit more of our childhood. pic.twitter.com/yEfA9xr0y3
DC Comics removing ‘the American way’ from Superman slogan: report, American Way is being canceled right before our eyes https://t.co/aZpaOJBVpQ
— Patriots United!!!🇺🇸🙏🏻🇨🇱!!! (@MichaelDilmore) October 17, 2021
First a token bi Superman and now DC completely abandons the ‘American Way’ for Superman’s motto.
Though lets be honest, modern woke comics stopped caring about ‘Truth and Justice’ a long time ago as well. They rather endorse riots and division instead. https://t.co/ADT8xr6P3A
LOL. No. No matter the amount of anti-American ideology that plagues @DCComics and @warnerbros, Superman will ALWAYS represent Truth, Justice, and the American Way. Shame on you @JimLeehttps://t.co/joqdA2OBR3
Are you tired of ‘woke’ changes that ruin everything?
D.C. Comics jolted Superman fandom earlier this month when it announced that Jon Kent, the son of Superman, would be portrayed as bisexual in a separate story line, according to The Hollywood Reporter.
Tom Taylor, who wrote the tale of the bisexual superhero, said the time was right for the character, according to Variety.
“I’ve always said everyone needs heroes and everyone deserves to see themselves in their heroes, and I’m very grateful DC and Warner Bros. share this idea,” Taylor said.
“Superman’s symbol has always stood for hope, for truth and for justice. Today, that symbol represents something more. Today, more people can see themselves in the most powerful superhero in comics,” he said.
Jussie Smollett will finally face a trial for his 2019 stunt in which he claimed he was the victim of a racist, homophobic attack in Chicago.
On Friday, Judge James Linn rejected arguments from the actor’s lawyer that the charges against him should be dismissed, according to Fox News.
The claim being made was that under a deal with Cook County prosecutors in which charges were dropped without a trial taking place, Smollett performed community service and forfeited a $10,000 bond.
However, amid a firestorm of controversy over the deal, a special prosecutor was appointed who levied additional charges of lying to police against Smollett. On Friday, Smollett’s attorney sought to wriggle out form under those.
To have Smollett “hauled back into court again” would violate Smollett’s due process rights, attorney Nenye Uche said, according to USA Today.
“There was no trial in this case, there was no jury empaneled, no witnesses were sworn, no evidence was heard, no guilty pleas were ever entered … nothing like that [ever] happened,” Linn said of the case, according to WGN-TV.
“There was no adjudication of this case,” he said then.
After saying there should be no trial, Uche later said that Smollett wants “nothing more than to go to a jury and clear his name.”
Smollett claimed two masked men approached him as he was walking home on Jan. 29, 2019, and “made racist and homophobic insults, beat him and looped a noose around his neck before fleeing,” Fox News reported. However, the account has since been discredited by the two men Smollett reportedly paid to conduct the “racist and homophobic” assault — Abel and Ola Osundario.
The two men alleged that Smollett transferred the sum of $3,500 to them in exchange for the jumping, hoping to “raise his profile,” according to Fox News.
The actor called the charges brought against him a “dog and pony show,” the outlet reported.
The superintendent of a Virginia school district on Friday appeared to admit the district violated state law in failing to properly report alleged sexual assaults, as a state official confirmed the matter is under review.
Loudoun County Public Schools Superintendent Scott Ziegler made the admission during a brief appearance before reporters, where he read a prepared statement and took no questions.
Ziegler said that the district made “errors in our state reporting regarding disciplinary incidents in schools,” adding that it “inadvertently omitted some information in the past.”
“That is extremely concerning, and we are taking steps to make sure that process is improved. I will say that I have no reason to believe at this time that any missing reports were due to an intent to hide any information from the Virginia Department of Education,” he said, blaming an alleged “lack of oversight” that was in place before he was appointed in June, even though he served as interim superintendent starting Jan. 1.
Ziegler appeared to be responding to a report by The Daily Wire that the district failed to record multiple instances of alleged sexual assault even though it’s required to by state law.
Ziegler said during a school board meeting on June 22 that he was unaware of any record of assaults happening in the district’s restrooms, nearly a month after a girl was allegedly raped by a male in a bathroom at Stone Bridge High School.
State law says that reports “shall be made” to school and district authorities regarding all assaults on school buses, on school grounds, or at a school-sponsored activity.
State law also directs district superintendents to annually report such incidents to the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). But a public database of reports showed at least one assault that was not reported to state authorities.
A Loudoun County Public Schools spokesperson declined to comment on Ziegler’s Friday remarks but did not dispute the characterization that Ziegler acknowledged state law was not complied with.
Superintendents who fail to comply or secure compliance with the reporting requirements are subject to sanctions.
A VDOE spokesman told The Epoch Times in an email that the agency has reviewed the submissions made by Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS) concerning discipline, crime, and violation “and is in communication with LCPS regarding the accuracy of their reports and whether the division is in compliance with state reporting requirements.
The spokesman confirmed that the submissions are required annually and that superintendents are required to certify their accuracy.
“This is a matter that VDOE takes very seriously and is actively investigating discrepancies in the LCPS reports,” he said.
Attendees are seen during a school board meeting in Loudoun County, Va., on June 22, 2021. (Terri Wu/The Epoch Times)
In his statement, Ziegler said he made misleading comments during the June meeting. He said his remarks came after wrongly interpreting a question about incidents in bathrooms as only involving transgender or “gender-fluid” students.
“I regret that my comments were misleading and I apologize for the distress that error caused families. I should have asked Board Member Barts clarifying questions to get to the root of her question, rather than assuming what she meant. I will do better in the future,” he said.
He also apologized for how the district handled two recent alleged assaults. “Let me say to the families and students involved: My heart aches for you, and I am sorry that we failed to provide the safe, welcoming and affirming environment that we aspire to provide,” he said.
A spokeswoman for father Scott Smith said in a statement to news outlets that Ziegler’s statement on behalf of LCPS “is the first acknowledgment that we have had that they are in fact responsible for their bad decision-making and policies that resulted in the two sexual assaults that happened in our high schools.”
“Today, Superintendent Ziegler said what we already knew: that the actions of the Loudoun County School Board and Administration ‘failed to provide the safe environment’ for the Smith’s daughter,” an attorney for the family added, before accusing LCPS of prioritizing “misguided policies of political correctness over student safety.”
Ziegler’s statement came as the county’s education leadership is under heightened scrutiny, in part because the board passed a policy that forces LCPS staffers to address students by any pronoun they choose, and lets students who claim to be another gender use that gender’s facilities.
The policy drew a fiery response at the June meeting, which was disbanded after Smith and another parent were arrested.
Smith recently revealed that his daughter was allegedly raped by a male inside a girl’s bathroom in her high school. He has described the male as utilizing the softness toward transgenderism to get inside the facility.
Smith has accused district leadership of covering up the assault.
The Loudon County Sheriff’s Office confirmed to The Epoch Times an incident took place in May at Stone Bridge High School but declined to provide more details, citing an ongoing investigation. It also declined to confirm reports that the same male was behind a sexual assault that took place at a different LCPS high school in October.
A Freedom of Information Act request seeking more details on the incidents and the arrest of Smith was sent.
LCPS told The Epoch Times earlier in the week via email that school board members “are typically not given details of disciplinary matters” and were not aware of the alleged rape until it was reported on in media outlets.
A member of the school board facing a recall petition resigned from the board on Friday, and attorneys for the Smith family filed a lawsuit this week against the district.
All student athletes in Texas public schools would be required to compete on teams that match their sex assigned at birth, under a bill that cleared the state House on Thursday.
House Bill 25, which was approved in a party-line 76–54 vote, would restrict public school students to playing on sports teams matching the biological sex listed on their birth certificates received at or near the time of their birth. It now heads to the state Senate, where it is expected to pass.
The text of the bill says it is intended to ensure that “sufficient interscholastic athletic opportunities remain available for girls to remedy past discrimination on the basis of sex.”
“The bill I’m bringing before you today protects girls’ safety and their right to equal access to athletic opportunities,” state Rep. Valoree Swanson, the Republican who introduced the bill, said on the House floor. “This is a right guaranteed to our girls under Title IX.”
The current version of the bill allows legally modified birth certificates to be accepted, but only if the changes were made to correct “scrivener or clerical error,” according to the bill’s text.
State Rep. Mary E. González, a Democrat who chairs the Texas House LGBTQ Caucus, argued that the measure could cause mental harm to transgender students.
“If you care about mental health, and I know you do, then do this simple thing and not advance this piece of harmful legislation,” González said. “We actually also know that this is a nonissue, that there is no issue with transgender and intersex students playing sports.”
House Bill 25 also faced criticism from pro-transgender advocacy groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, which called the bill “cruel” and “unconstitutional.” It also alleged the bill would “deny transgender youth the right to play sports,” although the bill allows any student to play on sports teams that correspond with the sex listed on their birth certificates.
Earlier this year, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said he would sign into law Senate Bill 29 if it cleared the state legislature. The bill, the language of which was identical to that of House Bill 25, was killed by House Democrats who avoided debating it until it missed a midnight deadline.
“For five years the University Interscholastic League (UIL) in Texas has had a rule in place prohibiting boys from playing girls in girls’ sports,” Abbott said at that time on Fox News Town Hall with several other Republican governors. “But the Texas Legislature is working on a bill to codify that, which I will sign.”
New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu (R) failed to garner a single supporting vote from the four Republicans who make up the state’s five-member Executive Council in his bid for $27 million in funding to promote the CCP virus vaccine in the Granite State.
The only supporting vote came from the sole Democrat who serves on the council.
Republican Councilor Dave Wheeler, who has been a supporter of Sununu on other issues, raised the question of acquired natural immunity in his dissent to the funding bill to promote the COVID-19 shot.
“We talk about science all the time, but we ignore the fact that people have natural immunity from already having COVID,” Wheeler said.
COVID-19 is the disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, commonly known as the novel coronavirus.
Sununu was quick to respond.
“The vote showed a reckless disregard for the lives we are losing while they turn away the tools our state needs to fight and win this battle against COVID,” the governor said.
Sununu charged that the concerns voiced by opponents to the funding initiative were “based on fantasy.”
Sununu was also taken to task by executive councilors for not following suit with other Republican governors who have outlawed the use of vaccine mandates to deny employment.
“Will you stand up like the governor of Texas and tell private [businesses] they can’t fire people?” Wheeler asked Sununu.
“You want the government to tell private businesses who to hire and fire?”Sununu responded. “That isn’t even socialist. That is completely un-American, sir.”
In 2018, Sununu signed a state law banning discrimination based on gender identity including in the workplace. Sununu remarked at the time that “Discrimination–in any form–is unacceptable and runs contrary to New Hampshire’s Live Free or Die Spirit.”
During the meeting, nine people in the audience were arrested and charged with disorderly conduct including a mother holding a young child, her husband, and a 70-year old woman from Nashua who was charged with resisting arrest. A video of the arrest posted on Facebook shows she was sitting when state police approached her and forcibly led her away. People in the background can be heard yelling “fascists” at the NH troopers while others around the room can be heard shouting “they weren’t doing anything wrong.”
Terese Grinnell, a registered nurse and also among those arrested at Wednesday’s meeting, believes Sununu is trying to backdoor his way into creating a means to trace residents who are not vaccinated. The governor’s proposal includes $10 million for a digital database of each COVID-19 vaccination administered in the state.
“Goliath fell with a stone,” said Grinnell, “we have to keep just doing what’s right, keep showing up and coming together and deciding what we the people we want for our children and being tenacious about that.”
Bussiere has been a lead organizer against COVID-19 mandates in New Hampshire.
The NH Executive Council was slated to take a vote on Sununu’s $27 million proposal earlier in the month. However, a well-attended protest Bussiere and others organized in opposition to the funding along with mask mandates prompted the council to cancel the meeting last minute.
The meeting held on Wednesday was held at the NH police training facility. Normally, NH Executive Council meetings are held at the statehouse in Concord.
A month earlier in September, a large crowd bearing signs like “Stop The Tyranny” gathered outside the statehouse in protest of COVID mandates.
They voiced their criticism of Gov. Sununu for not taking a more aggressive position against Biden’s COVID vaccine mandate like Republican cohorts Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and Texas Governor Greg Abbot have done.
Time and geographical distance have a way of making ugly history seem like an impossibility in our own world.
While few can imagine themselves as complacent Germans or obedient Nazis during the Holocaust, the truth is that many simply don’t read the writing on the wall — except those who have been through it.
Xi Van Fleet, a Chinese immigrant who fled Mao Zedong’s Cultural Revolution, is seeing it happen all over again with the way concerned parents who speak up at school board meetings are being bullied, silenced and painted as domestic terrorists.
“When I was in China, I spent my entire school years in the Chinese Cultural Revolution, so I’m very, very familiar with the communist tactics of how to divide people, how they canceled the Chinese traditional culture and destroyed our heritage,” Van Fleet told Fox News in a recent interview.
Indeed it is. In recent months, the Loudoun County School Board in Virginia has become ground zero in the culture war being waged for the hearts and minds of children in public schools.
Parents spoke out about the destructive critical race theory curriculum, but things came to a head in early summer after two parents were arrested at a meeting about gender-confused children using their preferred bathrooms.
The authorities ultimately shut it down as an unlawful assembly, and video of the arrest went viral and became the impetus for a memo issued by Attorney General Merrick Garland.
In it, he said that federal law enforcement “takes these incidents seriously and is committed to using its authority and resources to discourage these threats, identify them when they occur, and prosecute them when appropriate.”
BREAKING: Attorney General Merrick Garland has instructed the FBI to mobilize against parents who oppose critical race theory in public schools, citing “threats.”
The letter follows the National School Board Association’s request to classify protests as “domestic terrorism.” pic.twitter.com/NhPU03YOYq
As it would turn out, one of those parents arrested at that meeting was not an agitator; rather, he was Scott Smith, a father whose daughter was allegedly brutally raped in the girls’ bathroom by a boy in a skirt, The Daily Wire reported.
The school board was trying to cover up his daughter’s plight so as not to jeopardize their preferred agenda, and they got an added bonus in Smith’s arrest that supplied the convenient scapegoat needed to shut down all outside debate from parents.
This is precisely what Van Fleet, whose son graduated from Loudoun County High School in 2015, is sounding the alarm as she sees tactics being used that are right out of the communists’ playbook.
“I have to say, this will backfire. If intimidation works, America has fallen a long time ago,” Van Fleet said. Let’s hope so.
Intimidation has been always popular and effective in implementing authoritarian rule, but social media has turned it into an easy go-to for political enemies, who can now use footage like the video of Smith’s arrest to make their point.
If the footage and the arrest taken out of context are enough to mobilize the Department of Justice, there’s no telling where this will end.
“I do have a question: What’s [the] next step? Is the Tiananmen Square crackdown the next, or the parents who one day risked their lives just to speak out for the children? That’s why I’m here,” Van Fleet said.
Totalitarian takeovers don’t happen overnight, and many people don’t bother to connect the dots that come along slowly.
Like victims on the Titanic who let near-empty lifeboats go by as they stood on the deck of their “unsinkable” ship, so many people sit on the sidelines thinking totalitarian regimes can’t take over America.
But these brutal regimes don’t start with re-education camps or gas chambers; they start with social pressure and silencing the opposition before moving on to officially outlawing dissent.
So-called progressive ideas are crammed down and take hold, even if they may not be popular at first, because opposing them comes at too high of a social price. Then they’re codified and opposition is criminalized.
The last stop is the authoritarian takeover that always ends in bloodshed and misery, but by then the people are too powerless and broken to put up a strong resistance.
There will eventually be a point of no return if Americans aren’t careful, and Van Fleet is using her firsthand knowledge to warn us. Our choice is to listen to her now and push back, or there will be no choice left at all.
YouTube suspended Steven Crowder’s channel for one week on Wednesday, claiming the conservative pundit and comedian violated the platform’s rules against hate speech.
YouTube’s counsel sent an email to Crowder’s attorney, William Richmond, informing him of the strike against Crowder’s account and explaining that a September 30 video uploaded to Crowder’s channel “targets the transgender community in an offensive manner,” according to a copy of the email. YouTube has blocked Crowder from posting videos to his main and auxiliary accounts for one week. The email said in part:
We write again on YouTube’s behalf regarding your client, Steven Crowder. YouTube has repeatedly instructed Mr. Crowder regarding its hate speech policy and warned him against continuing violations of that policy through content he uploaded to YouTube. YouTube specifically warned Mr. Crowder that videos he uploaded showed a pattern of recklessly targeting the LGBTQ+ community for abuse and insults. It warned that further uploading of content that targets, insults, and/or abuses the LGBTQ+ community would result in additional penalties.
On September 30, Mr. Crowder uploaded another video that YouTube has determined continues his prior conduct. The video entitled ““Special Guest ALEX JONES on ‘Great Reset’ & Joe Rogan TRIGGERS Leftists AGAIN!” contains a segment that targets the transgender community in an offensive manner, for example, by indicating that trans people pose a rape threat to women. Consistent with the recklessness provisions of its hate speech policy, YouTube has removed this video from the service and assessed a strike against the Steven Crowder channel. Per YouTube’s strikes policy, this results in a one-week upload freeze for the channel. Further violation of YouTube’s hate speech policy will result in additional penalties.
Crowder’s team is unsure of the exact reason for the strike and has requested time stamps from YouTube on the September 30 video earning the channel another strike. According to Crowder’s website:
YouTube told The Daily Wire in a statement: “We removed content from and issued a strike to the StevenCrowder channel for violating our hate speech policy, through repeated targeting of the LGBTQ+ community. Hate speech is not allowed on YouTube, and in some cases, we remove content or issue other penalties–such as a strike–when a creator repeatedly targets, insults and abuses a protected group based on attributes such as sexual orientation or gender identity and expression across multiple uploads.”
Crowder responded on Twitter Wednesday: “A hard strike from YouTube and Wow… this is terrifying. We covered SPECIFIC, documented instances of rape. @YouTube says not allowed. All parents should take note. If you believe in the insane notion of biological sex, you will be silenced.”
YouTube’s latest strike against Crowder is at least the third of this year. In response to YouTube cracking down on his content, Crowder sued the platform in May. As The Daily Wire reported:
“As of last Thursday, May 14, my lawyer Bill Richmond and I have filed a notice of a lawsuit against YouTube and are seeking an injunction to prevent them, to stop them from currently deplatforming us,” Crowder said. “We’ve officially sent a notice of a lawsuit. Very different level – this is the big one, boys and girls.”
Crowder’s account was locked, demonetized, and given a strike warning in March for allegedly spreading misinformation about the 2020 election. Crowder denied ever making any false claims on Monday’s show and noted that YouTube’s justification lacked a specific charge against Crowder.
Crowder said the first and second hard strikes against his channel were similarly vague, leaving the host and his attorney guessing at what could have triggered YouTube’s actions. The first strike came over an anniversary video of “15 days to slow the spread.” YouTube claimed that Crowder violated its policy against spreading COVID misinformation.
This article has been updated with comments from a YouTube spokesperson.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a member.
Two books containing sexually explicit material that were removed from a school system in Virginia last month were part of an effort to sexualize children, a parent who led the effort to draw attention to them says.
Fairfax County Public Schools pulled “Gender Queer” and “Lawn Boy” after Stacy Langton spoke out against the books at a school board meeting.
Both books contain explicit material, a review of them shows.
“I think at the end of the day, it’s about grooming our children, because it’s an assault on their psyche,” Langton said on NTD’s “Capitol Report.”
“And it’s sexualizing children and sort of normalizing pedophilia, which is what the images are.”
In a surreal moment during the Sept. 23 meeting, Langton began quoting from the books, drawing admonishment from school board members. “There are children here,” one said.
Staffers also stopped showing Langton on a large screen situated above the members, and the period of time when Langton read the quotes is muted in the official version of the meeting due to “sexually explicit language,” according to a note on its YouTube channel.
The books were pulled by the district “while we carry out a review of suitability,” a spokeswoman told The Epoch Times via email. Two panels made up of staff, students, and parents are conducting the review to see if the books are appropriate for children, and they’ll make a recommendation to the assistant superintendent of instructional services, who will make the final decision on them.
The spokeswoman didn’t know who initially approved the books.
Maia Kobabe, the author of “Gender Queer,” declined to comment. Her publisher, Oni Press, said in an email that the book “is an important, timely piece of work that serves as an invaluable resource for not only those that identify as nonbinary or genderqueer, but for people looking to understand what that means,” adding that “limiting its availability is short-sighted and reactionary.”
Jonathan Evison, the author of “Lawn Boy,” didn’t respond to a request for comment.
He wrote on Facebook that nobody among those decrying his book has actually read it. “At this point, I’m just wearing all these challenges as a badge of honor. … The hardest single audience for a writer to reach these days is a young audience, and these people are literally just begging young people to go read ‘Lawn Boy.’”
The insertion of the books into the system is part of “a greater attempt to undermine morality,” Langton said, noting that the books have also been included in districts in other states.
“The unique thing about what happened to me as a result of the meeting was that I joined social media,” she said.
“I joined Twitter so that I would have the ability to interface with the public. And I’m getting material sent to me by parents all over the country who have now been woken up, and they’re going and looking at their kids’ backpacks, and they’re looking at their kids’ books, and they’re going to their kids’ libraries, and they’re sending me material that is very similar and equally disgusting. And it’s pornography, and it’s pedophilia, and it’s happening nationwide.”
Langton first heard about the books from a mother in Texas, and parents in multiple states have spoken out about them. North Carolina Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, a Republican, has also highlighted some of the images and said they’re inappropriate for children.
Langton urged parents to mobilize for their children even after the recent announcement by Attorney General Merrick Garland that federal officials will get involved in situations deemed harassment or threats of violence against school board members and others involved in education.
“I think the purpose of Merrick Garland’s letter was to discourage parents from even going and participating in the process, because it seems like a scary thing, right? I don’t think it’s ever happened, actually, that our government has come out against ordinary citizens and parents in this manner,” she said.
“And it is a scary thing, but I tell everybody, don’t be afraid, and you know, you’re not doing anything wrong. I don’t advocate violence. I would never say to do anything of any violence or harm to anyone or to any school board member. We’re here to talk and say we need this problem fixed because it must stop.”
Rep. Lisa McClain (R-Mich.) was one of the many lawmakers pushing back against the Department of Justice over the announcement. She sent a letter demanding answers.
McClain told NTD that the agency appears to be targeting parents “for going to the school board and demanding answers about what’s being taught in the classroom.”
“I can’t understand why the school board, why the DOJ, and why the FBI wants to silence parents’ voices,” she said. “That sounds a little communistic and Marxist to me.”
Loudoun County parents used the public comment portion of Tuesday’s school board meeting to call for the resignation of the district’s superintendent over an alleged sexual assault cover-up.
Angry parents demanded Superintendent Scott Ziegler and other school board members resign over allegations that the Loudoun County School District and leadership covered up two sexual assaults on two separate school campuses, the Daily Wire originally reported.
Over 60 concerned parents spoke at the meeting, including many who carried signs encouraging Ziegler’s resignation.
“This is not China, this is the United States of America, and we will not be silenced,” one mother said, according to Fox News.
“Remove the superintendent immediately and then resign for your negligence and duplicity. End this nightmare!”
The father of the first alleged sexual assault victim was arrested at a Loudoun County school board meeting on June 22 for “unlawful assembly” after attending the meeting to oppose a transgender student policy that allowed students to use the bathroom of the gender they identify with.
Smith said his ninth-grade daughter was sexually assaulted by a boy wearing a skirt who entered a girls’ bathroom at Stone Bridge High School on May 28.
At the same board meeting where Scott was arrested, during the hearing on the transgender student policy, Beth Barts, a school board member, said “our students do not need to be protected, and they are not in danger.”
Barts continued, asking Ziegler, “do we have assaults in our bathrooms or locker rooms regularly?”
“To my knowledge, we don’t have any record of assaults occurring in our restrooms,” Ziegler responded.
“Have we had any issues involving transgender students in our bathrooms or locker rooms?” school board Chairwoman Brenda Sheridan asked.
“I think it’s important to keep our perspective on this, we’ve heard it several times tonight from our public speakers, but the predator transgender student or person simply does not exist,” Ziegler responded.
Juvenile court prosecutors told Smith that the suspect was under house arrest at his mother’s townhouse, but on Oct. 6, a 15-year-old boy was charged with sexual battery and abduction for forcing a girl into a classroom, where he inappropriately touched her, according to the Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office.
Smith’s attorney said the suspect is the same boy who attacked Smith’s daughter at a different school months earlier, the Daily Wire reported.
On Aug. 11, the school board voted on and approved Policy 8040, which requires teachers to call students by their “chosen name and gender pronouns that reflect their gender identity without any substantiating evidence” and allows transgender students to participate in sports and use bathrooms that correspond to their chosen gender identity.
“The 8040 policy was rushed through to a vote without consideration for the safety of all students, simply to satisfy a liberal agenda — a policy that you knew full well would allow our children to be abused inside our schools,” one mother said at the Tuesday school board meeting, Fox News reported.
“At least two young women are recent victims of sexual assaults in our high schools, one of them in a restroom.”
“What is worse than a child being raped at school? The coverup by those who are trusted with the safety and well-being of children,” another mother said.
“Today, Scott Ziegler must resign for the unconscionable act of allowing an alleged rapist back into school to rape again, and for that coverup.”
One 14-year-old LCPS student, Katie Young, said “8040 and many policies that are being proposed are not to make people more comfortable or to accept others but instead to change the way my peers and I think, so that we will become the next generation of social justice warriors.”
“I am 14 years old, the fact that I have to be here defending my rights to not have your radical agenda shoved down my throat in school is not only concerning, it’s upsetting,” she added.
“My peers and I are not tools to further your political agenda.”
Content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of the DCNF’s original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
School used to be the place where you would send your children to get a proper education.
It was a place where they could learn basic sciences and critical thinking skills.
Today, however, public schools are nothing more than propaganda centers indoctrinating children into the latest far-left ideologies.
Nowhere has this been made more evident than in the sexual education standards currently being disseminated to schools nationwide.
Developed by a coalition of left-wing nonprofit groups, the second edition of the National Sex Education Standards aspires to teach school children about various ideas many parents would likely object to, according to The Federalist.
For instance, the standards require kindergarteners through second graders to learn about ideas related to transgenderism, including “gender” and “gender identity.”
Third graders are taught about “the role of hormone blockers” for transgender minors, an often irreversible procedure many consider to be tantamount to child abuse.
Starting in sixth grade — an age group of 11 and 12-year-olds — and by the end of eighth grade at age 13, students “should be able to” define oral, anal and vaginal sex.
This age group is also required to learn about the withdrawal method as a form of contraception.
What is quite possibly the worst aspect of these standards is their promotion of killing unborn children.
Starting in sixth grade, students are taught about abortion — not as the horror that it is, but rather as a common option when faced with pregnancy.
Even worse, teachers are forced to provide information about local abortion clinics to students in ninth grade and up.
When it comes to standards on gender identity, the standards go as far as to subvert parental authority.
“No one else is qualified to label or judge another person’s sexual identity, including their sexual orientation or gender identity, and it is important that the language and terms young people use to identify themselves is respected by the adults in their lives,” the standards state.
These ideas may soon be taught at a public school near you — that is, if they aren’t being taught there already.
The group’s previous standards — the National Sexuality Education Standards — were used by roughly 41.3 percent of school districts, according to a 2016 report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
If these new standards are followed by a similar percentage of schools, it may be time to pull your child out of public school.
When Scott Smith went to the Loudoun County school board meeting on June 22, he says he had one intention — to tell the story of his daughter’s rape.
One of the items to be discussed at the meeting was a proposed school district policy that would allow students to enter their bathroom of choice based on their “gender identity.”
A number of protesting parents had gathered to voice their opinions. Others supported the policy, denouncing their more conservative peers as bigots.
School superintendent Scott Ziegler assured parents that there is no reason to be concerned over the inclusion of transgender students in bathrooms and locker rooms.
When Beth Barts, a member of the school board, asked at the meeting if the school district had “assaults in our bathrooms or locker rooms regularly,” Ziegler said that wasn’t a problem.
“To my knowledge, we don’t have any record of assaults occurring in our restrooms,” he said, according to The Daily Wire (subscription required).
“Have we had any issues involving transgender students in our bathrooms or locker rooms?” Barts asked, according to The Daily Wire.
Ziegler was unequivocal.
“Time Magazine in 2016 called that a red herring, that the data was simply not playing out that transgender students were more likely to assault cisgender students in restrooms than were other students,” he said, according to The Daily Wire. “In fact, regardless of the gender identity of the student, if a crime or violation of the rules were committed, that would be investigated and dealt with to the full extent of the rules or the law …”
“I think it’s important to keep our perspective on this, we’ve heard it several times tonight from our public speakers, but the predator transgender student or person simply does not exist.”
But, according to The Daily Wire, Smith knew these words to be beside the point. He said his child, a ninth-grade girl, had been raped in a girls’ bathroom by a “bisexual” boy.
“The point is kids are using it as an advantage to get into the bathrooms,” he told the outlet.
As Smith was getting ready to say his piece at the meeting, he told The Daily Wire, a left-wing community activist approached and told him that she did not believe his daughter. Strange how quickly the left’s “believe all women” motto has turned into “believe only the women who further our political agenda.”
A shouting match between the two then ensued. This led to a police officer pulling on Smith’s arm. He yanked away, was then hit in the face, handcuffed and dragged out of the meeting, The Daily Wire reported.
Video of the arrest was posted to YouTube by WTTG-TV, Fox 5 in Washington:
On Aug. 11, the school board finalized its vote to approve the new transgender policy without having heard Smith’s testimony. Following his arrest, Smith had been banned from entering the school board building, according to The Daily Wire.
So, the school board never heard the following account:
On May 28, Smith maintains, a boy wearing a skirt entered a girls’ bathroom at Stone Bridge High School, where he assaulted Smith’s daughter. Smith’s attorney, Elizabeth Lancaster, told The Daily Wire that the boy had been charged with two counts of forcible sodomy, one count of anal sodomy and one county of forcible fellatio, all in regards to the incident.
When Smith was called to the school that day, he’d just been told that his daughter had been assaulted. But after he arrived, The Daily Wire reported, “he determined that what had happened was not a case of his daughter being beaten up: It was far more serious.”
However, the school told Smith it was going to handle the incident “in-house,” apparently meaning without involving law enforcement. Smith said he lost his temper.
“Deputies from the sheriff’s office ultimately responded to the school — not to investigate the alleged rape of a child, Smith said, but because school administrators called them on him for making a scene about it,” The Daily Wire reported.
Still, Smith said at least some good came of his arrest that day. Because of it, he told The Daily Wire, his daughter was taken to the hospital, where swabs were taken for a rape kit that would strengthen a prosecution in the case.
Although juvenile records are sealed, the Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office responded to a Daily Wire public records request by confirming that a report with “Offense: Forcible Sodomy [and] Sexual Battery” matching the date and location of Smith’s claim does, indeed, exist.
Smith said he’d been assured by prosecutors that the suspect in his daughter’s case was being held responsible and was expected to plead guilty to a lesser sexual assault charge at a hearing scheduled for Oct. 14.
However, on Oct. 6, a 15-year-old was charged with sexual battery and abduction after he allegedly forced a young girl into an empty classroom and assaulted her, according to a release from the Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office.
And, as it turns out, this is the same boy as the suspect in Smith’s daughter’s case, various sources confirmed to Smith’s attorney and The Daily Wire.
Smith doesn’t come off like a vengeful father — The Daily Wire reported that he was even amenable to the suspect receiving the lesser charge in his daughter’s case.
He merely attended the school board meeting on June 22 to make sure what he said happened to his daughter never happens to another girl in Loudoun County.
But after being provoked by a pro-LGBT activist who accused his daughter of being a liar, Smith faced possible jail time for disorderly conduct, even though such cases are almost universally dropped, according to Lancaster.
The lead prosecutor in Loudoun County, Buta Biberaj, took it upon herself to personally prosecute Smith’s case, The Daily Wire reported, a decision the outlet attributed to Biberaj’s close relationship with the progressive members of the Loudoun County school board.
Smith was convicted Aug. 17 of disorderly conduct and resisting arrest, according to LoudounNow, a local online news outlet.
Biberaj won the office in a 2019 election, after she received $845,000 in campaign funds from billionaire George Soros, according to The Daily Wire. Her Republican opponent spent a total of $113,000, The Daily Wire reported.
Despite a soft-on-criminals philosophy, Biberaj sought jail time for Smith. He was sentenced to 10 days behind bars, but it was suspended as long as he stays out of trouble for a year, according to LoudounNow.
Given Biberaj’s radical political leanings, her push for a harsher sentence should come as no surprise.
To progressives like her, Smith is nothing more than a domestic terrorist.
One extremely explicit book with pornographic material keeps popping up in American schools.
The book, “Gender Queer: A Memoir” by Maia Kobabe, was reportedly found in a display case at Rhode Island’s North Kingstown High School, where it has purportedly been available to minors.
Nicole Solas, the mother of a kindergartner, posted a picture of the book on Twitter and highlighted some of the pornographic images found within it.
Given the incredibly graphic nature of the comic-style pornographic images, The Western Journal has decided not to embed the tweet within this story.
However, if you do wish to know exactly what kind of content has reportedly been made available to students at North Kingstown, you can view Solas’ tweet here.
In a follow-up tweet, Solas said she was “submitting” these images to the police.
This isn’t the first time the book has reportedly popped up in an American school.
Last month, a Virginia mother spoke out at a local Fairfax County school board meeting, alleging that she had found multiple pornographic books — including “Gender Queer” — in both a high school library and a secondary school library.
Stella Pekarsky, the school board chair, attempted to defend the books’ inclusion, claiming they were only made available to “high school students.”
Obviously, most high school students are still minors who shouldn’t be exposed to such content.
It isn’t an accident that this book continues to be made available to minors across the country.
The sharing of books such as this one is key in the left’s goal to sexualize children.
According to The Federalist, the School Library Journal, which calls itself “the largest reviewer of kid & [young adult] content,” has thrown its support behind the book as well, claiming the pornographic book is a “great resource.”
The left’s sexual agenda has infected the public school system with this insanity.
If you’ve enrolled your own children in public school, be on the lookout.
Otherwise, your child may be seeing pornography at school.
Cleta Mitchell, senior legal fellow counsel for election integrity with the Conservative Partnership Institute, said in all her years working as an election law attorney, she’s never witnessed all the abnormalities that happened last November, particularly in Fulton County, Georgia.
She also gave a report on the ongoing lawsuit to gain access to the county’s absentee ballots.
“The system that we witnessed in 2020 was not right,” Mitchell said in her newly launched podcast, “Who’s Counting With Cleta Mitchell.”
“I have been an election attorney for many, many years. I’ve done a lot of time at county election boards. I will tell you that I’ve spent many wee hours in the morning counting ballots, waiting for ballots to come in.”
“I’ve never seen what happened in 2020 happen before Nov. 3 of 2020 where the counting stopped before it was finished,” she continued. “I’ve never seen an actual halting of the counting of the ballots.”
Mitchell, who served on former President Donald Trump’s legal team challenging the Georgia election results, said the state was riddled with illegal conduct in last fall’s general election.
She recounted that the first morning after she arrived in Atlanta, a “God thing” occurred when she met Alex Kaufman, the general counsel for the Fulton County Republican Party.
Kaufman was able to give her an overview of some of the issues in the county they had been working to identify over the previous year, including an unsuccessful effort to remove a number of illegal voters from the rolls prior to the election.
That feedback focused the Trump legal team’s efforts to look to the data to see how many ineligible voters may have cast ballots.
She noted that President Joe Biden only won the entire state of Georgia by 11,779 votes, with Fulton County being one of his major bastions of support. He carried the county by approximately 244,000 more votes.
Mitchell explained that if their team could determine there were enough irregularities, including ineligible voters, in Fulton County to potentially impact the outcome, the remedy, by Georgia law, would be to conduct a new election.
Trump’s lawyers filed their suit on Dec. 4 officially contesting the results.
However, the chief judge for Fulton County never assigned a judge from another county to hear the case, as is required by law, Mitchell said.
“So that’s what happened in Georgia. We never got our day in court,” she said.
“There was never an adjudication of the actual claims made in the lawsuit.”
Instead, the Georgia attorney general, on behalf of Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, threatened Trump’s legal team if they did not dismiss the case.
He claimed the state would seek damages “in the multimillions of dollars against President Trump, against David Shafer, who was one of our plaintiffs. He’s the state party chair, and he was a Trump elector. And against the lawyers who brought the lawsuit.”
Mitchell directed some of her sharpest criticism at Raffensperger, calling his handling of the election a “complete disaster.”
He made a series of bad decisions, she contended, that began with his consent decree he entered into with Georgia Democrats, including 2018 gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, which greatly impacted the signature matching requirements for mail-in ballots.
Additionally, contrary to Georgia law, Raffensperger unilaterally directed that absentee ballot applications be sent to every registered voter in the spring of 2020, Mitchell said.
The law states that voters must ask for the application and then fill it out and mail it in, she stated.
“We all know that the voter registration lists are a mess,” she said, meaning many applications likely went out to people no longer living at the address listed.
Besides requesting a ballot for the 2020 primary, applicants were also able to check a box if they also wanted their general election ballots mailed, in violation of state law, which requires voters to request an absentee ballot no more than 180 days from an election, Mitchell added.
“The point is election laws are determined by the state legislatures. That is one of the things our founding fathers wrote into the Constitution,” she said.
Mitchell highlighted that all the changes were made by judges and those in the executive branch.
Despite Trump’s lawsuit not going forward, the lawyer noted there is one still ongoing, brought by election integrity advocate and Fulton County resident Garland Favorito with VoterGa — seeking a review of the actual ballots cast in the county for irregularities.
He has cited the incident at State Farm Arena on election night when party observers and the media were told counting had stopped, only for it to resume for nearly two more hours soon thereafter.
Video captured of the incident showed what appeared to be ballots being feed through counting machines multiple times, according to Mitchell.
BREAKING! 🚨🚨🚨
Fulton County, GA!: A judge has granted @VoterGA conditional approval to inspect Fulton County mail-in ballots and metadata! This includes the ballots seen in the controversial State Farm Arena video being scanned in after hours. Watch @RealAmVoice for updates! pic.twitter.com/psFUexjKle
— Heather Mullins – Real America’s Voice (RAV-TV) (@TalkMullins) March 16, 2021
There are also several affidavits from poll workers saying they witnessed “pristine” mail-in ballots with no folds that may have been filled out by machines.
“Under Georgia law to be a legal ballot, it has to be put into an envelope and returned,” Mitchell said.
Favorito’s team also gained access to the images of the ballots earlier this year and discovered, “There are 153 batches of ballots (of 100) that are listed on the custodian report that they cannot find,” according to Mitchell.
“They have no idea where the ballots are. That’s over 15,000 ballots missing. There are another 3,700 ballots that are clearly duplicates. You can tell that by just looking at the images,” she said.
An independent report contracted by the Georgia State Election Board and released on Jan. 12 determined that there were many abnormalities in Fulton County’s November election.
“There were persistent chain of custody issues throughout the entire absentee ballot processing system,” the report said.
It added that “the fact that ballots were delivered to State Farm Arena in unsecured mail carts is very concerning.”
“Protocol for securing ballots exists not only in securing the ballots themselves but also ensuring no ballot stuffing occurred,” according to the report.
The election review also concluded that “the truth about what happened on the night of November 3rd between 10:30 PM and 11:52 PM [at State Farm Arena] continues to be elusive … but if the poll watchers are correct, then there is a serious problem.”
North Carolina’s Republican lieutenant governor says he will not back down after earning liberal scorn by calling a book of LGBTQ sexual fantasies targeted at children “filth.”
Mark Robinson earned his place as a target of liberal venom during a speech in which he talked about a book called “Gender Queer” that he said was in North Carolina school libraries that includes images of what are either the characters’ gay fantasies or actual acts.
“There’s no reason anybody, anywhere in America should be telling children about transgenderism, homosexuality, any of that filth. Yes, I called it filth,” he said, according to The News and Observer of Raleigh.
“As you look at these photos, I challenge you to describe them as anything other than filth.”
The video of his comments from June was posted by the leftist activist group Right Wing Watch.
“We are calling on Lieutenant Governor Mark Robinson to resign for his disgraceful, hateful statements directed at LGBTQ+ people,” Human Rights Campaign Interim President Joni Madison said in a statement, according to WTVD-TV.
The White House called Robinson’s words “repugnant and offensive.”
Robinson spelled out exactly what he meant in a Facebook video in which he said liberals and the media “have tried to change the focus from education to the LGBT community.”
Given the incredibly pornographic nature of the images shown in that video (comic-style pictures showing individuals performing sex acts on one another), we will not embed it in this story. If you do wish to see how truly horrific the content is, you can view it here.
“I will fight for and protect the rights of all citizens, including those in the LGBTQ community, to express themselves however they want. That is their right as Americans, and I don’t think that government has any role in telling them otherwise,” he said.
“However, the idea that our children should be taught about concepts of transgenderism and be exposed to sexually explicit materials in the classroom is abhorrent.”
After showing a series of images from books he said were used in schools, he asked rhetorically, “Does forcing these on children represent your values? Do you really believe that these images should be shown in the classroom?”
Robinson said he will not cave in amid the attacks against him.
“I will not back down,” he said. “I will not be silenced. And I will not be bullied into submission. I will continue to fight for the rights of our children to receive an education that is free from sexual concepts that do not belong in the classroom. And I don’t care who doesn’t like it.”
John Waugh, a spokesperson for Robinson, told WWAY-TV the “Gender Queer” book “came to our office’s attention from Cedar Ridge High School in Hillsborough, North Carolina (Orange County). However, we have found this book in other counties across the state as well, including Wake and Buncombe counties.”
Robinson has been outspoken about his beliefs.
“There is material out there that is pushing these issues and teaching our children about these issues,” he told WTVD.
In December 2016, after National Geographic put an image on its cover showing a 9-year-old transgender child, he wrote, “The sick, deranged, sexual degenerates who promote this type of demonic behavior are the ones who will take the next step in our continuing moral decline toward total depravity. Free love, then homosexuality.”
Lesson plans included teaching transgender hormone therapy to kids as young as 10
The Nebraska Department of Education (NDE) lied to parents when it claimed no outside activist groups helped draft controversial sex education guidelines, according to internal documents obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.
A Nebraska Board of Education official successfully lobbied to appoint Friends of Planned Parenthood board member Lisa Schulze to work on the 28-member advisory team that assisted in shaping the curriculum. Schulze is deeply connected to advocacy groups that stood to benefit from the agency’s initial statewide sex-ed curriculum, which included lesson plans on transgender hormone therapy for kids as young as 10 years old. Schulze’s job at the Women’s Fund of Omaha, which has doled out more than $8 million to Planned Parenthood and local transgender clinics, was seen as a qualification, rather than a conflict of interest, to draft education policies for the state’s nearly 360,000 students.
“I want to make sure that Lisa Schulze is selected to help write the NDE Health Standards,” Deborah Neary, a state board of education member, wrote in an email to an agency employee. The agency rejected Schulze’s bid for the writing team but attached her to a 28-member advisory board. In March, the agency released standards that would have mandated that students would be taught about gender identity in 1st grade, transgender hormone therapy in 5th grade, transgenderism and sexual orientation in 6th grade, oral and anal sex in 7th grade, and “reproductive care”—a common euphemism for abortion—in 8th grade.
Officials rejected that draft following public outcry and criticism from Gov. Pete Ricketts (R., Neb.), but NDE pushed back against the notion the standards were shaped by outsiders. In a May fact sheet, titled “Points of Clarification,” NDE insisted the curriculum “was not written by activists” and that “Planned Parenthood is not funding or helping to write the Nebraska Health Education Standards.” Internal communications, obtained by the Free Beacon from a concerned parent, paint a very different picture. Emails and text messages from elected board of education representatives, NDE employees, and advisory board members show that activists were not only closely involved but disparaged parents and froze out teachers who were supposed to write the curriculum.
NDE is now minimizing the role of the advisory board. “The individuals being identified as ‘activists’ were not members of the writing team, nor did they have an opportunity to write any of the standards,” a spokesman said in an email. “Subject matter experts had an opportunity to provide input on the proposed content as the advisory team, but that input was provided to the writing team.”
At least one member of the writing team said she had no prior knowledge of the standards that the agency later attributed to it, according to internal documents. Middle school physical education teacher Kayla Makovicka emailed the NDE to voice concerns that her team was not made aware of it, nor did she feel it was age-appropriate. “I don’t recall ever talking about these in any of our meetings or getting a clear look at what was going to be involved,” she said in a March email, noting she did not think the curriculum was “age appropriate.” Makovicka told the Free Beacon in an email she felt “blindsided” by NDE’s standards, as well as the agency’s attempt to blame the writing team for its contents.
“It is pretty clear what are my thoughts in that email, and I still stand by those today,” she said. “As for the relationship between some of the parties involved, it [led] me to feel blindsided.”
The original draft of the curriculum was nearly Identical to the 2020 National Sex Education Standards, which was written by three deep-pocketed progressive advocacy groups: the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), Advocates for Youth, and Answer. Makovicka may have felt left in the dark, but Schulze and Neary—neither of whom returned requests for comment—remained in close contact throughout the process and helped arrange meetings between activists and NDE staffers. Emails show Neary scheduled a meeting between NDE members and SIECUS. Schulze also made sure to run the curriculum and NDE talking points by unnamed national activists before publication.
“I have Natl experts ready to review them,” Schulze texted Neary. “Our creative director is driving to office to finish final edits on the fact sheet and we have talking points prepared that can go to the board. High level. Will have it to you in the next few hours.”
Schulze spent 15 years working for Planned Parenthood before joining the Women’s Fund of Omaha, a nonprofit that provides millions of dollars in annual grants to feminist groups, which they claim include “transgender and gender expansive people.” The organization was founded in 1990 through a joint grant from two of the largest global charities: the Ford Foundation and MacArthur Foundation—both of which fund abortion and LGBTQ+ advocacy groups. It has given nearly $4 million to Planned Parenthood and nearly $5 million to a clinic specializing in transgender hormone therapy.
Parents and officials were shocked when NDE debuted its proposal in the spring. Ricketts led the effort to torpedo the curriculum through a series of town halls. He said the emails revealed in the FOIA only confirmed his suspicions that education bureaucrats placed special interests above those of students and parents.
“These advocacy groups definitely have an agenda they are pushing—and it is one that sexualizes children,” Ricketts told the Free Beacon. “This was never about the parents—it was about the advocates.”
Neary complained in a series of emails that parents promoted “hate speech” in their criticisms. She asked NDE members to consider ways to ensure parental feedback had less influence on the standards drafting process. “I am very disappointed that [two members of the NDE] see this as a ‘both sides’ need to be presented,” Neary emailed an employee of the Women’s Fund of Omaha. “It is irresponsible in my opinion when one of the sides is based in science and fact and the other is based in religion.”
The drafting body may have favored activist input at the outset, but it backtracked in the face of public criticism. NDE released a second draft of the health standards in July that dropped specific mentions of transgenderism, hormone therapy, reproductive care, and oral and anal sex, but retained language about gender identity. Those edits were not enough to satisfy concerned parents who flooded school board meetings throughout the summer.
In September, the board of education voted 5-1—with Neary abstaining—to suspend the health standard approval process, saying COVID-19 was to blame. Joni Albrecht, a Republican state senator in Nebraska, said parents know better than to accept that explanation.
“They, the activists on the other side, are so darn mad they cannot stop us from protecting the culture in Nebraska,” Albrecht told the Free Beacon. “We are going to protect the children. We are going to let the parents know this is happening.”
President Joe Biden visited Michigan this week, but Michigan didn’t seem to be all too happy to have him there.
Biden was in the city of Howell stumping for his hotly contested infrastructure bill currently being negotiated by Congress back in Washington, D.C., and footage of the vehement protesters who lined up to greet him upon his arrival with “f*** Joe Biden” signs have been spreading around the internet like wildfire.
However, according to one viral clip, it appears that he got the same message before he even stepped onto Michigan soil.
One Twitter user shared a clip of a massive sign that someone had made and displayed on their lawn which read in huge white letters, “F*** JOE BIDEN,” and seems to have been placed right in plain view as Marine One flew overhead.
WARNING: The following images and videos contain vulgar language that some viewers will find offensive.
The man topped his message off by flipping the bird at the presidential helicopter overhead.
“The most popular President when flying over Michigan yesterday got a warm Let’s go Brandon welcome,” the Twitter user who shared the clip wrote with several laughing emojis.
“F*** Joe Biden” chants have become almost commonplace at sporting events as of late, and when a reporter at a NASCAR event mistook the crowd to be innocently chanting “Let’s Go Brandon” after driver Brandon Brown had a successful race, an instant euphemism for the explicative trend was born.
It was certainly nice for conservative Christians who dislike our president to have a euphemism for “f*** Joe Biden,” I have to say, because while I don’t condone the vulgarity, I certainly understand the sentiment of the chant, and this massive Biden “welcome” sign all the same.
Here was a bit of a taste of what else Biden had in store for him on the ground in Howell:
Now, if you are a former President Donald Trump supporter, as relatable as it is to hear the, ahem, “Let’s Go Brandon” chants and see the enthusiastic anti-Biden protesters line the streets of Howell, it’s important to bear in mind that being hated doesn’t necessarily make a president a bad president, and four years of Trump most certainly proved that to be true.
We can even generously pretend for a moment that the pro-Trump Michiganders who lined the streets ahead of the president’s visit to their community are doing the exact same thing as the balaclava-sporting, black-clad anarchists who enjoy terrorizing random members of the public to express their distaste for current leaders (which is really, really generous).
Here’s the thing: the fact that “f*** Joe Biden” chants have become routine at sporting events and that vitriol against him is getting just this pronounced completely destroys whatever semblance was left of the vision Biden has portrayed of himself as a “unifying” president.
Trump was many things, but a man who promised to bring an end to the fierce cultural division, he simply was not. He was divisive, and he kind of owned that. Biden, on the other hand, was touted as the guy to end the raging culture wars.
For years, we were told that sure, Trump is great for the economy, he’s standing up to our enemies, and he’s, well, making America great again, but he’s just so divisive!
The ideological terrorists who opposed his presidency managed to traumatize a lot of voters into believing that, with Trump out of office, we could at the very least, end a period of history in which it seemed like everyone was at one another’s throats, and he was always the perceived catalyst.
Clearly, this has simply not been the case — far from it. Say whatever you will about Trump. Biden is hated.
Passionately.
And, unlike Trump, he’s simply not hated by the people who would burn the entire system down if they had a chance.
He’s hated by regular, everyday Americans who watched our disgraceful withdrawal from Afghanistan in disgust; who are feeling the pain as they watch their grocery bills and the number at the gas pump climb every month; who are being told they’re domestic terrorists for not wanting pornographic material in their kids’ health class; and who are facing ostracization from society and even unemployment for deciding to stand up for their freedom and bodily autonomy.
Trump was hated by the radicals who hate our country; Biden is hated by the normies who simply want their country back. So yeah, there’s a pretty big difference.
For all the starry-eyed, rose-colored spin that his supporters desperately try to put on the Biden presidency, you simply can’t deny the prevalence of his vehement opponents.
Biden is, undeniably, incredibly divisive, and the nation that is being torn apart by his policies is most certainly not going to heal with him in the White House.
So yeah. This is why they’re chanting, “Let’s Go Brandon.”
Attorney General Merrick Garland has a conflict of interest in his order to federal officials to target parents who are suspected of intimidating, harassing, or being violent toward school staffers, activists say.
Garland in an Oct. 4 memorandum directed FBI agents and U.S. attorneys to address what he described as “a disturbing spike” in such behavior in recent months. He said a series of measures will be announced soon “to address the rise in criminal conduct directed toward school personnel.”
Parents have increasingly protested against the rise of critical race theory teachings in schools, but few incidents have turned violent.
Some activists say Garland’s order constitutes a conflict of interest, pointing to contracts that his son-in-law’s company, Panorama Education, has signed with school districts across the country.
In one case, Asra Nomani of Parents Defending Education said, the company signed a $1.8 million contract with Fairfax County Public Schools in Virginia that will see Panorama collect information on students with surveys including questions about whether they feel “gender fluid.” There are also portions allocated for “equity” professional development, a word often used by critical race theorists.
“Panorama Education staff gets status as ‘school officials’ so they have the right to private student data under federal law, according to an email just sent by a Fairfax County school district official. This is federal law that Garland would have to enforce and Big Tech is now circumventing,” Nomani wrote in a blog post.
“The Attorney General is instructing the FBI to investigate parents who might pose a financial threat to the business of his daughter’s husband,” she wrote in another blog, under the moniker Sundance.
Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) said he’s been reviewing notes on Garland’s connections.
“The allegations that Attorney General Garland’s family is potentially profiting off his recent decision to use federal law enforcement to shut down debate at school board meetings is deeply troubling. If this turns out to be true, Congress must hold oversight hearings now to investigate potential corruption,” he told The Epoch Times via email.
Panorama and the Department of Justice (DOJ) didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment by The Epoch Times.
A Panorama spokesperson told news outlets that the company “only uses student data for the purpose of helping schools and districts better serve their students.”
The company isn’t linked with “any particular academic philosophy, including critical race theory,” the spokesperson said. “The only relationship between Panorama Education and Attorney General Merrick Garland is that Panorama’s co-founder Xan Tanner is AG Garland’s son-in-law.”
Lisa Monaco, a top DOJ official, defended the order before Congress this week, arguing that “spirited debate” was welcome at school board meetings but that “violence is not appropriate.”
Most of the incidents were merely parents growing “rowdy or disruptive,” writer Zaid Jilani said.
The National School Boards Association urged the Biden administration to deal with “angry mobs” of parents just days before the order was issued, listing a number of incidents it deemed over the line. “The classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate crimes,” the association wrote.
The association welcomed the new order, saying it sent “a strong message to individuals with violent intent who are focused on causing chaos, disrupting our public schools, and driving wedges between school boards and the parents, students, and communities they serve.”
The 1989 film “When Harry Met Sally,” starring Billy Crystal and Meg Ryan, was a box office smash and remains a modern-day icon in the romantic comedy cinematic genre.
In 2019, “When Harry Became Sally,” an exposé of the transgender movement by Ryan T. Anderson, was published. And in February of this year, Amazon, the world’s largest retailer, decided to ban that book.
Accordingly, 2021 became the year when Jeff (Bezos, Amazon’s founder and executive chairman) censored Ryan (Anderson).
In 2016, less than 1 percent of the American population identified as transgender, which essentially means self-identifying as a different gender than the one biologically classified at birth.
In the grand scheme of things, I don’t particularly care very much about what gender my neighbor chooses to proclaim himself/herself/itself/theirself.
Granted, I’m concerned with some of the consequences, such as the disastrous notion of constructing multi-stall gender-neutral bathrooms in elementary, middle and high schools, but if my coworker, my cousin or a person next to me on the bus chooses to identify as a man, woman or aardvark, I really have more important things to complain about.
Some of these are our perpetual keeping our eye off the ball as the world’s foremost superpower and instead allowing bush-league nations to give us a run for our money; our pathetically porous borders under the current administration; an outright mockery of fiscal responsibility; political overcorrectness run amok; and the deterioration of American journalism to the point that far too many media outlets have devolved into feeding troughs doling out comfort food to their ideological bases.
In light of all of that, if my longtime mailman Bob has a sex-change operation, trades in his beard and mustache for eyeliner and lipstick and now goes by Roberta, as long as the mail gets delivered on time, I really don’t care.
Accordingly, under normal circumstances, I never would have purchased and read “When Harry Became Sally.” My schedule is quite busy, and I have to be judicious in what I read given my limited time. No offense, but the transgender movement simply doesn’t make it into my top 20 issues that pique my interest.
All of that changed when Jeff censored Ryan. Nothing will get me to purchase a book — even if it’s about staring at a piece of Scotch tape dangling from a ceiling fan — more than learning that it’s been banned here in the beacon of liberty founded by Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Hamilton and Franklin and preserved by, most notably, Lincoln, then two Roosevelts, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Reagan and Trump.
Anderson’s book focuses a great deal on “detransitioners”: those who spent time physically and emotionally transitioning to the opposite gender only to realize it was a terrible mistake — not what they really wanted, after all — and are currently in, or have completed, the process of transitioning back to their original classified gender.
In February, U.S. Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida, Mike Braun of Indiana, Mike Lee of Utah and Josh Hawley of Missouri wrote a letter to Bezos describing “When Harry Became Sally” as “one of the most rigorously researched and compassionately argued books” on transgenderism and concluding that by banning it, “Amazon has unabashedly wielded its outsized market share to silence an important voice merely for the crime of violating woke groupthink.”
The senators also underscored that “Amazon’s shortsighted censorship of this well-researched and thoughtful contribution to modern American discourse is not just a decision made in poor taste, but an assault on free speech that carries weighty implications for the future of open discourse in the digital age.”
In response, Brian Huseman, Amazon’s vice president for public policy, wrote that while the company strives to provide its customers with “access to the widest and most diverse cross-section of written and spoken word in retail today,” Amazon reserves the right not to sell certain content and in exercising that right chose “not to sell books that frame LGBTQ+ identity as a mental illness.”
Anderson, in turn, tweeted that “Amazon appears to have never read my book, but relied on hit pieces. As I pointed out before: ‘Please quote the passage where I “call them mentally ill.” You can’t quote that passage because it doesn’t exist.’”
I agree with the four senators that “When Harry Became Sally” is a rigorously researched, compassionately argued, important book on transgenderism, but most of all, I’m happy I was able to access a copy. I bought mine from Barnes & Noble, a bookseller that’s been in business 108 years longer than Amazon, and it shows.
Clearly, Barnes & Noble understands far better than Amazon that selling books means providing the world with a marketplace full of diverse ideas and vigorous debate.
The confirmation hearings for Justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2018 took Democrats to a new low for childish, irresponsible behavior, but the current harassment of a fellow Democrat, Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, is showing them to be full-out wacko. I’m not sure it’s possible to be any more wacko than they are at this point, but the year isn’t over and we shall see.
Speaking of Kavanaugh, there happens to be a link between the harassment of then-Sen. Jeff Flake — also from Arizona — over his vote to confirm Kavanaugh, and that of Sen. Sinema now, over the insane spending bills currently on the table. As reported by Jordan Davidson at The Federalist, both of these agitator groups were funded by the same organization, which in turn gets money from George Soros.
Recall that Sen. Flake, after he announced that he’d be supporting Kavanaugh’s nomination, was ambushed in an elevator in the U.S. Capitol by two extremely confrontational women, one of whom offered a frenzied condemnation of Kavanaugh based mostly, it seemed, on what had happened to her personally and to other victims of assault.
A week after that incident, an email from the Center for Popular Democracy took credit for it, along with “the Women’s March … and other groups.”
Fast-forward to 2021, and a group called Living United for Change in Arizona has taken credit for the ambush, complete with video cameras, of Sen. Sinema in a women’s restroom at Arizona State University, where she was on a break from teaching a class. It turns out that this group is a close partner of the Center for Popular Democracy.
The report in The Federalist gives details on the funding for both, but I’ll just say that leftist-globalist billionaire and would-be Bond villain George Soros funded LUCHA to the tune of at least $250,000 in 2017 and at least $1.5 million in 2019 and is the group’s largest donor.
I don’t know what these protesters think they’re getting for behaving this way. Do they think this relentless bullying is persuasive? Sadly, in some cases, it has been, but by now the strategy has been used so much that for many, it’s just getting tiresome.
In a statement, Sinema said this was not a legitimate protest. “It is unacceptable,” she said, “for activist organizations to instruct their members to jeopardize themselves by engaging in unlawful activities such as gaining entry to close university buildings, disrupting learning environments, and filming students in a restroom.”
But these people on the left aren’t just bullies; they’re highly organized bullies, and the more we find out about their network of “nonprofit” organizations, the more we see that at the center of the massive spider web is the same little group of poisonous spiders.
So, what about those who use social media to encourage agitators to bully lawmakers?
So-called “feminists” are doing exactly this. For example, Jezebel writer Ashley Reese used Twitter to distribute a piece originally headlined “Absolutely Bully Kyrsten Sinema Outside Of Her Bathroom Stall.”
The piece mocks those who would hesitate to follow a woman into a restroom with their video cameras. It serves Sinema right, Reese says, for hiding from the voters “like a coward.” Oh, and she adds that President Biden was right to dismiss what was done to the senator as just “part of the process.”
Twitter’s own rules state: “We prohibit behavior that encourages others to harass or target specific individuals or groups with abusive behavior.” Texas Rep. Dan Crenshaw called out Twitter on this, asking “Hey, just wondering if you’re going to enforce this bullying rule? Or does it not count when the victim isn’t liberal enough?”
I wonder how Ms. Reese would react if some conservatives followed her into the restroom and made videos while verbally harassing her. I would imagine she’d press charges, with good reason. But it’s not likely we’ll ever find out what she’d do, because no real conservative I know would ever do a thing like that.
“For all the pearl-clutching,” Reese had written of the restroom incident, “few are providing a more effective and safe alternative to what these activists did.” But Vespa says it’s not effective, because Sinema doesn’t care; they apparently can yell in her face all day and she’d just walk away before she’d kowtow. Good for her.
And what about the media double standard? When Sen. John McCain went against his party and stopped the effort to repeal Obamacare, The New York Times knelt to worship him. “It was a stunning moment,” the paper wrote, “a flash of the maverick John McCain, unafraid of going his own way despite the pleas of his fellow Republicans.”
But for going her own way despite the continuing harassment from her fellow Democrats, Sinema is vilified in the media. The Times ran an Op-Ed headlined “What’s Wrong With Kyrsten Sinema?” Here’s a gem that ran in The Nation in March: “How Kyrsten Sinema Sold Out: the origin story of the Senate’s newest super villain.”
Byron York at Townhall cites the portrayal of Sinema on “Saturday Night Live,” which he says “often functions as a sort of televised, in-kind campaign contribution to the Democratic Party.” (As do most of the media, I would add.) On SNL, she’s played as “a weirdo who just wants to do bad things,” he says. If you (like us) rarely see SNL anymore because it’s just not funny, York includes a description of the sketch.
Steven Kruiser at PJ Media has an explanation for the Democrats’ bizarre bullying behavior: “What we are witnessing now from the Democrats is a very public and ongoing nervous breakdown brought on by too many years of lying to the American people and themselves. Public incivility towards anyone who disagrees with them is not only forgiven but encouraged, even by the President.”
I can’t outdo his description of CNN, which he says was once actually respected but is now “a human zoo packed with frothing, rabid psychopaths who were so damaged by Trump’s defeat of Hillary Clinton that they’ve lost all of their humanity.” And more: “What we are witnessing with the 2021 Democrats is a collective mass delusion that presents itself as a psychotic break from reality.”
I don’t think that’s too harsh a diagnosis; that’s exactly what we’re seeing. And I’d add that it’s not just the media — it happened within the government, inside the Justice Department, State Department, FBI, CIA. Trump’s election (or even just the threat of it), in their fevered minds, excused anything they wanted to do. And we’re still finding out what that encompassed.
Comedian Dave Chappelle has once again enraged supporters of the LGBT agenda, this time by proclaiming “gender is a fact” in his newly released standup special.
Chappelle, the former host of Comedy Central’s hit sketch show “Chappelle’s Show,” hasn’t shied away from taking it to establishment ideologues.
Despite criticism, he has never backed down from making the transgender agenda fodder for comedy.
In past standup sets, Chappelle has unapologetically made jokes at the expense of those who claim that gender is a social construct — and that one’s gender can be changed through surgical procedures and hormone treatments.
In his latest special, which is called “The Closer” and dropped on Tuesday, Chapelle again fired up his progressive opponents.
“Gender is a fact,” he said, according to the Daily Beast.
“Every human being in this room, every human being on earth, had to pass through the legs of a woman to be on earth. That is a fact.
“Now, I am not saying that to say trans women aren’t women. I am just saying that those pu****s that they got — you know what I mean? I’m not saying it’s not p***y, but it’s ‘beyond p***y’ or ‘impossible p***y,’” he said in reference to popular substitutes for real meat.
Earlier in the special, Chappelle defended author J.K. Rowling, who has been attacked for taking on the transgender agenda, and referred to himself as a “TERF” — a trans-exclusionary radical feminist.
Chappelle added that he was done telling jokes about LGBT people “until we are both sure that we are laughing together.”
But immediately after the standup set hit Netflix, Chappelle took a beating from leftists online.
Just to let ya know, I have ZERO space for this loser anywhere on my timeline, in my home or anywhere else.
Dave Chappelle is a transphobic POS. Always has been, always will be.
As a trans woman, I have usually defended Dave Chappelle’s specials because I think they’re hilarious and his jokes about trans women never felt intentionally malicious.
The Closer changed my mind on that. That special felt so lazy and disingenuous and I’m really disappointed.
Nothing Dave Chappelle says changes the facts that trans women are women, trans men are men, non-binary people are non-binary, that LGBTQ+ people should live free of harm and discrimination. He is wrong. And Netflix has empowered him to be wrong loudly.
In his review of the special, NPR’s Eric Deggans noted that Chappelle at one point joked, “In our country, you can shoot and kill a n****r. … But you better not hurt a gay person’s feelings.”
Deggans opined, “Too often in ‘The Closer,’ it just sounds like Chappelle is using white privilege to excuse his own homophobia and transphobia.”
I understand that people think harassing politicians and cornering them in bathrooms and elevators is an effective way to pursue change, but what if they’re wrong?
There should be enough to sink this strategy from an a priori standpoint. But if you want to enter into the a posteriori realm of judgment, consider the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings. Republicans were ambushed all over the Capitol grounds by activists screaming at them and demanding they vote against then-President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court pick.
It generated quite a few clips for the establishment media to applaud — and no substantive change in the final vote.
Three years later, however, the technique has made a comeback.
Since Democratic Sen. Kyrsten Sinema won’t support the $3.5 trillion “Build Back Better” spending blowout at its current price tag — and won’t support Democrats’ attempt to ram amnesty for illegal immigrants through the Senate — activists decided to confront her in a bathroom and on a plane in separate incidents.
The bathroom incident over the weekend was far from a grassroots effort. Instead, according to The Washington Free Beacon, it was carried out by a group supported by progressive moneybags George Soros.
In case you’ve managed to miss it, here was the scene as activists harassed Sinema in a restroom on the campus of Arizona State University.
Protesters followed Sen. Sinema into the bathroom at Arizona State University to confront her on Build Back Better and immigration pic.twitter.com/NDSmeu0h2M
The activists told Sinema “we need a ‘Build Back Better’ plan right now.”
“We knocked on doors for you to get you elected,” one individual said. “We need to hold you accountable.”
Sinema said the incident was “not legitimate protest” and “wholly inappropriate.”
“It is unacceptable for activist organizations to instruct their members to jeopardize themselves by engaging in unlawful activities such as gaining entry to closed university buildings, disrupting learning environments, and filming students in a restroom,” she said in a statement.
There wasn’t a whole lot of media condemnation of the incident, nor were there many denunciations of the activists’ behavior from Sinema’s fellow Democrats. In fact, President Joe Biden called the bathroom harassment “part of the process.”
WOW. Biden just dismissed Senator @kyrstensinema being harassed and cornered into a bathroom this weekend, saying “it happens to everybody… it’s part of the process.”
The stunt was orchestrated by a group called Living United for Change in Arizona — or LUCHA, the Spanish word for fight. LUCHA said it “wouldn’t have to resort to confronting [Sinema] around [Phoenix] if she took meetings with the communities that elected her.” In other words, do what we say or we’ll harass you.
We wouldn’t have to resort to confronting @senatorsinema around Phx if she took meetings with the communities that elected her. She’s been completely inaccessible. We’re sick of the political games, stop playing with our lives. “Build back better, back the bill!” pic.twitter.com/3OA5t6e6Fl
Like many a progressive activist organization, its lawn has been pretty heavily astroturfed with money from George Soros’ Open Society Foundations. In fact, Open Society is LUCHA’s biggest donor, the Free Beacon reported.
“The group gave $1.5 million to Living United in 2019 and $250,000 in 2017, according to the philanthropy’s grants database. Living United reported around $1.7 million in revenue in 2019 and $328,000 in 2017.”
Other contributors include Mark Zuckerberg’s immigration charity, a Democratic PAC and the National Education Association, the largest teachers union in the country.
It’s worth noting that this isn’t the first time a Soros-backed group has been involved in one of these viral confrontations. Remember this?
Jeff Flake announced he would vote YES on Kavanaugh and now he’s being screamed at and cornered in an elevator. pic.twitter.com/UjnsKaC4uR
Ana Maria Archila, who yelled at Sen. Jeff Flake and blocked him in an elevator during the Kavanaugh confirmation saga, was the executive director of the Center for Popular Democracy.
You’ll never believe this, but the CPD has received plenty of cash from Soros as well: “Soros provided the CPD with $130,000 from the Foundation to Promote Open Society in 2014 and $1,164,500 in 2015,” The Washington Free Beacon reported in 2017. “Soros provided an additional $705,000 from the Open Society Policy Center in 2016.”
Imagine the hue and cry if Sinema were popular on the left. She would be able to claim the incident brought on flashbacks of Jan. 6. If she said she thought she was going to die there in the bathroom stall, who would challenge her?
But, instead, the cause these activists were supporting is media-approved and Soros-funded. Thus, it’s merely “part of the process.” What a shocker.
Intrusive harassment of Democratic Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona continues as she becomes the focal point for activists who want to bully her into supporting a mammoth spending bill and providing a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants.
On Sunday, Sinema was harangued by activists who followed her into a bathroom and filmed one of their members raging at Sinema while the senator was in a stall.
The high-pressure tactics continued Monday amid relative shrugs from President Joe Biden and liberal commentator Ana Navarro.
Biden said the non-stop confrontation Sinema is experiencing “happens to everybody,” according to Fox News.
Sinema and fellow senator Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., recently have been accosted by protesters for not supporting Biden’s massive $3.5 trillion spending bill.
Navarro, meanwhile, tweeted that Sinema basically invited her own haranguing, even if it did go over the line.
Chasing anybody -public or private- into a bathroom, to me is beyond the pail.
Maybe if @kyrstensinema spent less time in fundraisers with corporate donors and held town-halls to listen to constituents and answer their questions, they wouldn’t chase her into the damn 🚽. https://t.co/ICsloYkt1l
The stalking of the senator continued Monday when Green New Deal Network Chief of Staff Kunoor Ojha and others filmed themselves jabbing at Sinema at Reagan National Airport in Washington, D.C.
“Hi, Senator Sinema? I want to ask if you can explain to the American people what you’re planning on cutting from Joe Biden’s ‘Build Back Better’ plan?” Ojha asked while Sinema was on her phone.
NEW: Watch as Kyrsten Sinema dodges even more questions from @kunoorojha about why she’s purposefully killing major investments in clean energy, affordable childcare, housing and more: pic.twitter.com/MCZj9ma99c
A woman labeled as a Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals recipient named Karina approached Sinema about ensuring that illegal immigrants could have a pathway to citizenship.
A DACA recipient named Karina tried to ask Kyrsten Sinema if she’d support a pathway to citizenship for immigrants and Sinema refused to answer.
If Karina was a corporation and held a giant fundraiser for Sinema, maybe she’d get an answer. pic.twitter.com/DPbPuUe8yl
“I just want to know if you can commit, as my Senator, if you can commit to passing a reconciliation that could provide a pathway to citizenship for immigrants who have been waiting for this for too long. … Can you commit to that, Senator?” Karina said.
“I don’t want disturb you, but at the same time I just want see if I can get a commitment from you, Senator,” the woman said to Sinema. “This is my life and the life of millions in the line. I just need to hear from you. Can we get a commitment from you to get a pathway to citizenship?”
After realizing Sinema would not be baited, the woman ended the encounter.
“All right, Senator, I can see that you don’t want to respond to me. Thanks for your time,” she said.
In a shift from years of rhetorical posturing, liberal journalists and other Democrats endorsed the harassment of LGBTQ women after Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D., Ariz.), who is proudly bisexual, was followed into a bathroom in Phoenix and accosted by radical activists who violated state law by recording the encounter on video.
“I don’t think they’re appropriate tactics, but it happens to everybody,” President Joe Biden said Monday. “It’s part of the process.” Several hours after Biden’s remarks, White House press secretary Jen Psaki refused to comment on whether the administration condemned the taped harassment of a U.S. senator.
The president wasn’t the only lib who defended Sinema’s harassers, who belong to an activist organization bankrolled by left-wing billionaire George Soros. “Sinema’s constituents feel this is the only way to reach her,” wrote Democratic strategist Max Burns. “Don’t run for office if you’re just going to hide.”
Kyle Kulinski, cofounder of Justice Democrats, agreed. “If you don’t wanna get followed in the bathroom maybe support the bill,” he said in reference to the controversial $3.5 trillion spending bill crafted by radical House Democrats.
“Which is worse: your grandparents being deported or being followed into a bathroom (bc you refused to stop and listen) by ppl desperate for your help? This is not a trick question,” wrote Kirsten Powers, a senior political analyst for CNN.
A number of Sinema’s colleagues—Sens. Ben Ray Luján (D., N.M.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D., Nev.), Alex Padilla (D., Calif.), and Robert Menendez (D., N.J.)—belong to the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, which has donated money to Living United for Change in Arizona, the activist group whose members harassed the bisexual woman in the bathroom. None of them returned the Washington Free Beacon‘s requests for comment on the group’s questionable tactics.
One would think Steve Schmidt, co-founder of the anti-Trump political action committee the Lincoln Project, would be keeping a low profile these days.
The former Republican strategist-turned-professional NeverTrumper got what he wanted; Donald Trump is no longer president.
While the impact the Lincoln Project’s multitude of viral advertisements smearing Trump had on the election can be debated — one study found they were hilariously ineffective at doing anything but making a handful of squishy former GOP power brokers momentarily beloved on the left — the spots will remain a bit of overheated ephemera emblematic of the 2020 campaign.
The post-election period was never going to be kind to the Lincoln Project, given that it had no overarching principles other than returning the ossified country-club establishment to pre-eminence in the Republican Party.
It’s been more unkind than one might have originally thought, given the majority of headlines the group has generated since last November have come from co-founder John Weaver, who was alleged to have sexually harassed scores of young men and behaved like a predator, sending his targets provocative text messages and enticing them with promises of employment.
What’s worse, reports alleged that the Lincoln Project was informed of accusations against Weaver as early as June 2020, despite a statement from the group saying it was “shocked” by the revelations.
As for the veracity behind the accusations, Weaver pulled a Kevin Spacey and said in a statement that he had “tried to live a life that wasn’t completely true” and that “[t]he truth is that I’m gay.”
Of course, no one was accusing him of homosexuality; they were accusing him of sexual harassment and using his power to procure assignations with much younger men. Given the situation, one might have thought a rebrand into the “Epstein Project” might have been in order.
Add into that another report from female-centric publication The 19th that chronicled a culture at the Lincoln Project “where women in key positions were sidelined and where sexist and homophobic language was used by those in leadership posts,” and you would have thought every one of the group’s principals would have consciously withdrawn from the spotlight.
Schmidt, in fact, resigned from the Lincoln Project board of directors in February, saying he was “incandescently angry” about the allegations.
But having been “incandescently angry” about his own group’s failures apparently hasn’t instilled a whit of humility when it comes to lecturing others.
Schmidt has persisted — telling MSNBC that right-wing anger “is very quickly metastasizing into violent extremism.”
He made the claim during an appearance Thursday on “Deadline,” telling host Nicolle Wallace that a suspect who is alleged to have thrown a Molotov cocktail into the Travis County Democratic Party headquarters in Texas on Wednesday at 2 a.m. was “radicalized like a young man drawn to the lies of ISIS.”
“We have an autocratic movement teeming with violence and the intimations of violence in this country. And it’s a threat to democracy,” Schmidt said.
“So let’s look at that domestic terrorist, that criminal who desecrated the American flag by wrapping it around his head, who committed violence in the name of right-wing extremism. What is it that he has heard?” he continued. “He has heard that he lives in an occupied country with an illegitimate president who lost the election, who was put into power by millions of fraudulent votes, mostly black and brown votes out of the inner cities.
“He turns on [Fox News host] Tucker Carlson, and he hears that he’s going to be replaced in a great plot where the Democratic Party is importing people from the third world to strip him of his franchise, of his rights. He has been stoked. He has been instigated. He has been radicalized like a young man drawn to the lies of ISIS in a different part of the world, and we will have more of it.
“Since the beginning of time, all right-wing political movements try to create chaos, including violence. And out of that chaos and out of that violence that they have caused, they then claim that they can bring order, that only they can bring order, and it is with that order that we will lose our democracy.”
For whatever reason, I don’t remember Schmidt going on MSNBC and sounding the alarm about liberals being “radicalized like a young man drawn to the lies of ISIS” when the Orange County Republican Party headquarters in North Carolina was attacked with a Molotov cocktail during the run-up to the 2016 presidential election, along with spray-painted graffiti that said “Nazi Republicans” on the side of the building. I’m sure I just missed it.
Or apparently Schmidt just missed the entirety of the 2016 election, since he went on to say that “there is a fundamental difference between these political parties in two big ways. And those two big differences exceed every other difference. One party will abide by election results. They’re called the Democratic Party. The other political party no longer will.”
“Since the beginning of time, all right wing political movements tried to create chaos… out of that chaos… that they have caused, they then claim that they can bring order… and it is with that order that we will lose our democracy” – @SteveSchmidtSES w/ @NicolleDWallacepic.twitter.com/CwKO9fjSLn
The Democratic Party, you might remember, spent four years prattling on about how the 2016 election was suspect, with some openly saying it was stolen. Then, with whiplash speed, anyone who didn’t just accept but enthusiastically embrace the results of the 2020 race was party to the “big lie.”
And now, according to Schmidt, Republicans and conservatives are essentially on par with bloodthirsty terrorists — and they’re responsible for what happened at the Travis County Democratic Party headquarters.
“Historically, we know, when you put all of that fuel on the ground, and you start throwing sparks at it, that you can ignite a conflagration, and when you dehumanize people the way that this man and this movement has, in the end, it kills people,” Schmidt said.
“And historically, this type of politics has wound up, in its worst excesses, killing tens of millions of people,” he said. “That’s why it’s such a frightening moment, and that’s why it’s time to wake up and understand that we don’t have a shortage-of-panic-buttons problem. We have a political extremism problem that is very quickly metastasizing into a violent extremism that we’ll be dealing with for a generation because of what happened over the last five years.”
Oh please.
We may have a political extremism problem, but the agents of it won’t be found where Schmidt thinks they will be. Instead, you’d be better off looking at the Lincoln Project, a group that injected content-free vitriol into the 2020 electoral race and, in the immediate aftermath of Biden’s inauguration, promised to build “a database of Trump officials & staff that will detail their roles in the Trump administration & track where they are now. No personal info, only professional. But they will be held accountable & not allowed to pretend they were not involved.”
If that sounds a lot like a witch hunt, that’s because it is.
The Lincoln Project also targets other Republicans it finds distastefully close to Trump, such as Trump-endorsed Virginia gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin. As Fox News reported last week, the group issued a public warning to Youngkin that it was “coming for him” in his attempt to defeat Democrat Terry McAuliffe, the former Virginia governor and Clinton family ally.
And yet, the Lincoln Project, with or without Schmidt on board, is arguably the least effective vehicle for fist-shaking moral indignation that there is. Weaver remains the most prominent example of the group’s hypocrisy, but it was always little more than an outrage machine designed to stoke fear for the benefit of its principals.
Amazingly, long after that should have become apparent to everyone, the group is still stoking baseless anxiety.
Now, Steve Schmidt is putting forth the ludicrous notion that a random guy who threw a Molotov cocktail into a local Democratic Party headquarters represents a vanguard of men indoctrinated like Islamic State group terrorists — but instead of being radicalized by a video of an infidel being beheaded in the name of Allah, they’re being radicalized by “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”
If this fatuous notion won’t convince MSNBC that Schmidt and his Lincoln Project cohort are fundamentally unserious grifters who are noxious to democracy, nothing will.
A Bravo network TV personality is under fire from the left after she shared her shock over a bizarre story in which she said small girls were exposed to a so-called transgender girl’s penis this past summer at a camp.
Only in today’s depraved society could a mother who is bothered by the thought of young girls being exposed to male genitalia become the villain. But that is what has happened to former “The Real Housewives of New York City” star Bethenny Frankel when she took on the transgender lobby this week.
The TV personality recently spoke on her “Just B” podcast about an incident she’d heard about from a friend which she said had happened recently at an all-girls camp.
“It’s an all-girls camp and a person with a penis, who identifies as being a girl, went to the camp and was in the bunk with the girls,” Frankel told her listeners. “And the girls saw her — because it’s her, because it’s a male anatomy but identifying as a woman — so the other girls saw a penis.”
“They’re like 9, 10 years old, so the parents … obviously weren’t that happy,” she added.
Frankel also commented she’d heard that this “trans girl” at the camp had been “making out with a lot of the different girls at the camp.”
Frankel further angered the pronoun warriors during the podcast by sharing a story about her 11-year-old daughter’s experiences in school with gender hysteria.
“We have to go into the fact that I did a Zoom for my daughter’s school and [had] the pronouns conversation with each teacher, each parent, each child,” she complained. “And my daughter says in school, too, that everybody has to say their pronouns.”
“And my daughter didn’t even know what hers were,” she added. “[She said], ‘I know what I am or what I think I am, but I never have said it out loud. It hasn’t come up for me.’ So she didn’t know.”
Naturally, Frankel was attacked and accused of being a bigot.
Your comments promote anti-trans rhetoric and the idea that #trans people aren’t welcome in spaces with cis people. That’s hateful and wrong.
Hi Beth! I was going to quote the transphobic language you used in the horrific intro to this episode, but it’s too hurtful to even put it in writing. Maybe do the bare minimum of research before you speak to your audience? https://t.co/x56eMpCOMH
After Page Six got involved, Frankel resounded and made it clear she wouldn’t be walking the comments back in the face of potential cancelation.
Listen to the podcast. Then comment. I was absolutely not wrong. And I’m going to discuss this again this week. Thankfully I have a platform to clarify what the media loves to distort. @justbpodcast ps. I’m not afraid of cancelation so not afraid of charged discussions. https://t.co/FDVsKUCWan
Ok I’m going to attempt sleep. My new book cover shoot is in the am & @PageSix says I’m transphobic so it must be true…or listen to @justbpodcast & decide for yourself. Gotta sell papers. #donthatetheplayerhatethegame 😘
Not apologizing….so don’t hold your breath. I didn’t do a single thing wrong. People need to be able to have discussions without fearing the cancelation citations you get excited to give. Wrong celeb. Find someone afraid to troll.
How sick is our culture? A mother to a young girl shared a normal reaction upon hearing that girls near her daughter’s age were exposed to a penis at camp. Many of those who responded painted her as a villain — and not a well-adjusted adult with a sound moral compass.
For now, it doesn’t look like she’ll be backing down. You never apologize to the cancel mob, and it looks like Frankel knows that.
LOUDOUN COUNTY, Va.—Hundreds of protesters rallied in Loudoun County to voice their objection over a recently adopted pro-transgender policy. The event occurred outside the Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS) administration building on Sept. 28, an hour before the school board meeting.
The policy, also known as policy 8040 (pdf), requires LCPS staff to address students with their preferred pronouns and allows transgender students access to bathrooms and locker rooms according to their self-identified gender. It also requires all LCPS staff to “complete training on topics relating to LGBTQ+ students” and schools to create more single-user restrooms within the next five years. It was adopted on Aug. 11, before the start of the current school year.
For the county parents, the pro-transgender policy was just one out of many issues they had with the Loudoun County School Board (LCSB). “Trust,” or instead, the loss of trust, was often mentioned in rally speeches and during public comment at LCSB meetings since June 22, at which two LCPS residents were arrested after the superintendent Scott Ziegler declared the meeting an “unlawful assembly.”
“I’m even thinking about sending my kids to school with a body cam. When they get into the class, start recording. Because we’re not in the classroom,” said an LCPS parent at the rally. Another LCPS parent said during public comment of the LCSB meeting, “The parents of Loudoun trusted that the members of the board would have our children’s best interests in mind when making decisions; that trust is lost.”
Ian Prior, executive director of Fight for Schools, said that the LCSB needed to act like elected officials and “stop acting like a politburo” that wants to take away parents’ responsibility of raising their children. “If you want to take that responsibility from me, you’re going to have to pry it from my cold, dead hands,” warned Prior. On Aug. 25, Fight for Schools filed a petition in the Loudoun County Circuit Court to recall LCSB member Beth Barts. The next court hearing is scheduled for Oct. 5.
A woman holding a sign at a rally outside the Loudoun County Public Schools administration building in Ashburn, Va., on Sept. 28, 2021. (Terri Wu/The Epoch Times)
On Sept. 23, the LCPS changed the rules of public participation at LCSB meetings, again. It asked registered speakers to show proof of residence in the county, following changes that took away public viewing during public comment in August. Public participation didn’t dwindle as a result. Instead, the number of registered in-person speakers at the Sept. 28 meeting was 82, more than the 70 at the previous session on Sept. 14.
Andrea Weiskopf, an LCPS teacher, was the only in-person speaker supporting the LCSB. “Will you fight so that it will be pretty clear that they will benefit, that all children of Loudoun will feel like they belong? Cui bono [for whom it benefits]?” she asked. She wrote in a tweet about her plan to “incorporate critical race theory into my lessons” during the summer. On Aug. 24, Weiskopf posted another tweet asking for lesson plans “designed to indoctrinate students.” The LCPS has repeatedly said that it doesn’t teach critical race theory.
If the Democrats in Washington, D.C., have their way, Sen. Rand Paul is going to be a busy man this holiday season.
The Kentucky Republican is famous for his “Festivus Report” every December in which the spending hawk airs his grievances regarding the most ridiculous items the federal government spent money on that year. Last year’s report included lizards on treadmills, studies on whether hot tubs lower stress and yacht subsidies.
Unfortunately, this year will find us with a Democratic president as well as Democratic majorities in both the House and Senate. We’ve already burned through trillions in spending and, if moderate Democrats don’t derail it, we’re about to sign on for $3.5 trillion more via this year’s bloated budget.
And, believe you me, there are some whopping grievances in there that need to be aired, at least if the bill passes in its current form.
It’d be difficult to go through all of the waste in the budget. Paste each sheet of paper from the 2,465-page bill on a wall, throw a dart at it and you’re more likely than not to hit some item of proposed governmental profligacy.
However, if you want some of the most ridiculous provisions of the bill, there are four preposterous uses of taxpayer money hidden in the budget that need to be seen to be believed.
1. “Tree equity”: $3 billion
Equity is every liberal’s favorite word these days. It’s a way of saying “equality of outcome” without the stigma attached to the concept. Any spending item with the term attached should raise a red flag, particularly if it involves trees.
According to Fox Business, the Agriculture Committee earmarked $3 billion to plant trees — but not just anywhere. Instead, the program promises “a priority for projects that increase tree equity.”
The term “tree equity” isn’t defined in the bill, because of course it isn’t. However, Fox Business noted the definition from conservation group American Forests, which says the concept “identifies the cities that can gain the most significant health, economic and climate benefits by increasing tree canopy in places of high need.”
Spending $3B on “tree equity” is the perfect encapsulation of Democrats in 2021. https://t.co/FWPDbd6z8F
There’s plenty of other wasteful environmental spending where that came from; for instance, there’s also a “Civilian Climate Corps” ($7.5 billion) and money for “climate justice” block grants ($5 billion). However, “tree equity” is a fair representation of how much woke spending we can expect.
2. Bias training in health care: $25 million
While not necessarily up there with “tree equity” in terms of the amount of money spent, the $25 million for “anti-discrimination and bias training” in health care is another sign of how misplaced the bill’s priorities are.
According to the New York Post, the budget calls for the Treasury to give the money to nonprofits in order “to develop, disseminate, review, research, and evaluate training for health professionals and all staff who interact with patients to reduce discrimination and bias in the provision of health care, with a focus on maternal health care.”
Wait, maternal? Maternity sounds like a loaded concept when it comes to gender. After all, not all mothers are women, according to the left. Shouldn’t it have been “a focus on health care for birthing persons?” Check your privilege, Democrats. Maybe you can cut off another $25 million to spend on bias training for members of the House of Representatives, because you clearly need it.
3. “High-performance green buildings”: $1 billion
When I first read reports about the budget and the pork that was squeezed into it, I had a strange image in my head of what constituted a “high-performance green building.” I was picturing a house with a huge biodiesel-powered V-8 out back. This, unsurprisingly, turned out to be incorrect.
A so-called high-performance green building is what it sounds like — a building designed to reduce energy consumption. The General Services Administration is getting $1 billion to convert its facilities to this standard, according to the U.K.’s Daily Mail. The process will reportedly take 10 years.
4. Tax enforcement: $78.94 billion
But remember, this whole thing is supposed to cost us nothing. President Joe Biden told us so, after all:
My Build Back Better Agenda costs zero dollars.
Instead of wasting money on tax breaks, loopholes, and tax evasion for big corporations and the wealthy, we can make a once-in-a-generation investment in working America.
So, how’s he going to do this? Not only does it involve raising taxes, it involves giving the Internal Revenue Service $78.94 billion to shake American taxpayers down.
According to Fox Business, among the most controversial outlays would be the nearly $80 billion the IRS would receive for tax enforcement. Because what every American said was that we needed the IRS to be more aggressive when it came to taking our tax dollars.
“Tree equity” is already a cinch for Paul’s Festivus list, assuming it becomes law. Everything else deserves to be, particularly the nearly $80 billion for America’s least-loved federal agency in order to make itself even less lovable. And these are just the worst offenders we’ve found so far. Considering the size of this bill, who knows what else is lurking in there?
The progressive left has, for too long, dismissed conservative claims that the LGBT agenda normalizes the sexualization of children as “homophobic” or “bigoted.”
Yeah … about that.
An NBC contributor and vocal proponent of the LGBT movement has been slated as the spokesman for an organization with uncomfortably close ties to the sexualization of children.
Activist Noah Berlatsky is an ideal choice for this organization, as it happens, as he himself also has a long history of promoting the very same thing.
What’s incredibly stunning, however, is that he isn’t just some fringe liberal arts college academic no one’s ever heard of. He’s a contributor to one of the nation’s major news outlets as well as several other huge platforms, and his appointment to this position will no doubt only further legitimize the faction of LGBT Americans who vocally support the acceptance of pedophilia, child prostitution, child pornography and child sexuality.
And yes — Berlatsky and the organization, Prostasia, appear to be supportive of all of these things, however shrouded with seemingly conflicting claims to be interested in protecting children from sexual abuse.
Berlatsky is a writer and editor who, according to his LinkedIn profile, has contributed to, among other outlets, The Atlantic, The Guardian, NPR, The Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, Salon, Slate, Media Matters, and of course, NBC News.
It appears that he is now the communications director for the non-profit organization Prostasia, which as The Post Millennial recently detailed at length, gives off the very conspicuous impression of working to normalize pedophilia.
This is fitting — he seems to have worked with the organization for some time and has shared tweets from one Dr. James Cantor, also affiliated with Prostasia, who, in a now-deleted tweet captured in a screenshot by Post Millenial, argued that a “P” for pedophiles should be included under the extensive LGBT+ banner.
Prostasia has a support group for “Minor Attracted Persons” for adults and teens over the age of 13, which is described as a “peer support chat for minor attracted people who are fundamentally against child sexual abuse and committed to never harm children, and is a safe space to have peer support in times of trouble.”
“Prostasia bills itself as ‘a new kind of child protection organization’ that has a different approach to protecting children than the current methods of social work and law enforcement, saying that these approaches ‘are less effective than they should be, because they are driven by emotion rather than evidence,’” the Post Millennial explains.
One of these novel approaches is validating the desires of “minor attracted persons” who they believe can be “committed to never offending.”
Despite this apparent commitment to supporting those who are attracted to children but do not want to harm them or view child pornography, however, Anna Slatz recently wrote for the feminist website 4W that they nonetheless “have dedicated themselves to crusades against child pornography bans, letter-writing campaigns to state representatives demanding child-likeness sex dolls be kept legal, and funding research into ‘fantasy sexual outlets‘ for pedophiles.”
“In Prostasia’s blog entries, ‘child protection’ routinely ends up in the same sentences as ‘free speech,’ ‘kink,’ or ‘sex positivity.’ The topics of age play, furries, hentai [anime or manga pornography], and prostitution are spoken about no differently as, and often with no barrier between, child sexuality and child sexual abuse,” Slatz noted.
You can see for yourself by visiting the organization’s website — but you have most certainly been warned … it’s nauseating, horrifying and infuriating.
One stunning example of Prostatsia and Berlatsky’s openness to accepting and promoting child sexuality is an interview he conducted for the group with a porn star who glowingly promoted the idea of exposing children to pornography, recalling a wonderful experience she had as a child discovering nude photographs and developing an insatiable appetite for smut — at the age of 8.
“The anti-porn crusaders fear that children being exposed to sex is going to lead them to some kind of ultimate demoralization,” Mireille Miller-Young told an apparently entirely supportive Berlatsky in a July interview for Prostatsia.
“And, of course, the socialization that pornographic materials can provide at that age can be interpreted in different ways. And my experience was of it being joyful and fun. It was an image of beauty and sexiness that influenced my ideas about sexuality through life,” she declared.
Another example is an article he wrote for The New Republic in 2016 headlined, “Child Sex Workers’ Biggest Threat: The Police,” which sympathetically president a professor arguing for the decriminalization of minors engaging in sex work.
(Cops and the criminal justice system are worse for the kids than their pimps, the article essentially argues.)
So, Belatsky is full of empathy — though it might not be a surprise that there’s one group he has no empathy for: supporters of former President Donald Trump.
In a YouTube video from 2019, in fact, he spent the better part of an hour bashing any idea of trying to understand Trump’s backers. https://www.youtube.com/embed/5_sdX3uzsp8?feature=oembed
Referring to trafficked children as “young people trading in sex,” according to Twitter posts captured in screenshots by the Post Millennial, he has argued that child sex trafficking laws somehow victimize children rather than help them escape a sick and disgusting cycle of abuse and exploitation.
He’s also written that “Pedophiles are essentially a stigmatized group” and that people “love accusing people of pedophilia” as it’s apparently “an explosive accusation linked historically to queer people and Jewish people and sex workers.” (The quotes are again from Twitter posts captured in screenshots by the Post Millennial.)
Or perhaps people accuse people of pedophilia when they actively oppose laws restricting the production of child pornographic images, fight to get pedophiles recognized under the banner of LGBT, and support the idea of exposing children to pornography.
As far as such outrageous ideas go, Berlatsky is in good (well, abhorrently immoral) company in today’s “sex-positive” culture that seems to serve only as a very, very thinly veiled push to normalize child sexuality.
There was the Manhattan prep school teacher who taught kindergartners about masturbation and gave high school students a “porn literacy” seminar.
There was the blue-check writer Flora Gill, who has been published by GQ, The Telegraph, Evening Standard, The Sunday Times, among other outlets, who wrote in a since-deleted tweet earlier this year that “Someone needs to create porn for children.”
“Young teens are already watching porn but they’re finding hardcore, aggressive videos that give a terrible view of sex. They need entry level porn! A soft core site where everyone asks for consent and no one gets choked,” she argued.
Maybe Prostasia has an opening for Gill, too.
There is also the trans activist Alok Vaid-Menon, himself a blue checkmark on Twitter, who once wrote that fears that transgender bathroom laws could little girls being sexually assaulted by adult men were misplaced as there are “no innocent victims” because “little girls are also kinky.”
Vaid-Menon also appeared on self-identified non-binary pop star Demi Lovato’s YouTube channel earlier this year and was the subject of an HBO Max documentary in 2020:
Meanwhile, across the nation, schools have been using sex-ed curricula under the umbrella of so-called “Comprehensive Sexuality Education” backed by the abortion provider Planned Parenthood and entirely centered around the ideology of “sex-positive” yet is more accurately described as “Grooming 101.”
The push to normalize child sexuality has been burgeoning over the last few decades, but only in the last few years has it gotten this far into legitimacy, and suddenly we find it is at the heart of mainstream media and parts of public education.
There is no longer any basis whatsoever to dismiss the opposition to this dangerous and disgusting ideology as hysterical, homophobic, or bigoted.
It’s never been more clear that, as the San Francisco Gay Men’s Choir so gleefully celebrated earlier this year, they are, indeed, coming for our children.
For a guy with the support of billionaires, millionaires, China, Mainstream Media, and Social Media, his numbers are WAY worse than Trump ever [US Patriot]
President Joe Biden’s approval rating has hit a new record low at just 40 percent, according to a poll released on Monday by Rasmussen Reports.
The poll of likely U.S. voters also revealed 58 percent of likely voters disapprove of the president’s job performance.
Among those, 50 percent selected “Strongly Disapproved.”
In contrast, only 21 percent selected “Strongly Approve.”
The current approval rating places him below former President Donald Trump, who was at 43 percent approval at this point in his presidency, according to Rasmussen.
The daily poll has followed Biden’s approval rating since his first day in office.
He ranked as high as 55 percent approval on May 26. Since then, his approval has dropped by 15 percent.
According to a Rasmussen Reports Twitter post Monday, the majority of Americans oppose Biden’s $3.5 trillion spending bill, his plan to raise the debt ceiling and his pandemic restrictions.
Coming Up Today:@JoeBiden daily presidential job approval % is – now at a new record low.
– Majority Oppose $3.5 Trillion Spending Bill – Majority Against Raising Debt Ceiling – Majority Now Believe Pandemic A Trojan Horse For Permanent Socialism pic.twitter.com/XB2r7zFGQF
The Democratic spending bill will be a central focus this week as Speaker Nancy Pelosi seeks a House vote on Thursday. The California Democrat has claimed to have the votes to pass the bill, but some House members remain uncertain.
Biden’s recently announced vaccine mandates for federal workers and companies with 100 employees or more has also led to widespread frustration with many Americans. Several states have opposed the measure through letters and across social media.
Georgia Republican Gov. Brian Kemp and South Dakota Republican Gov. Kristi Noem have both vowed to sue the Biden administration over the issue.
Daily tracking results for the daily poll are collected via telephone surveys of 500 likely voters per night and reported on a three-day rolling average basis, according to Rasmussen Reports.
The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 1,500 Likely Voters is plus or minus 2.5 percentage points with a 95 percent level of confidence.
A poll from Fox News last week showed Biden’s approval rating with independent voters had experienced a strong drop. Since January, his approval rating plummeted 24 points.
WATCH: Joe Biden’s approval rating collapses 24 points among independent voters. pic.twitter.com/a8YxNMmyQJ
There are days when one wonders why the Republican Party thinks they deserve the support of conservatives.
The Reagan revolution turned 40 this year. What do we have to show for it? Roe v. Wade hasn’t been overturned, although there’s a glimmer of hope on that front. There’s no hope on spending; Republican presidents and Congresses might slow the deluge a bit, but they’ve never managed to successfully turn off the debt spigot and have proved especially useless during the last three presidencies.
Our debt now stands at almost $29 trillion — but now the GOP is really putting their foot down on the debt ceiling. Seriously, guys, they mean it this time. It’s not like all of the other times where the Republican establishment has performatively held up passing a debt ceiling increase, only to capitulate shortly thereafter.
And, yes, anti-establishment conservatives have made inroads since 2016 and Donald Trump’s election. The establishment still remains standing, though, and it’s so thoroughly rotten that 134 GOP representatives voted to approve a defense spending bill that all but ensures women will be subject to the draft.
In fact, more Republicans voted for it than against it. The $778 billion National Defense Authorization Act for 2022 passed by a 316-113 vote on Thursday night, according to The Hill. Only 75 Republicans voted against it.
In fact, the only thing stopping the NDAA from passing smoothly was the House Freedom Caucus. The Washington Examiner noted that GOP Freedom Caucus member Rep. Chip Roy of Texas was the most vocal opponent of the bill, making a motion to adjourn the House during the debate in protest of Democratic leadership not allowing a vote on a proposed amendment to remove the draft provision. The motion forced the entire House to vote and delayed business in the lower chamber.
“I will always vote against any bill that permits the government to draft my daughter and I will not support any Republican who votes in favor of its final passage, regardless of excuse,” Roy said.
While we haven’t had a draft since the Vietnam War days, 18-year-old men still have to register with the Selective Service System. The NDAA removes the language specifying “male citizen” or “male person” when it comes to who needs to register, replacing it with “citizen” and “person,” respectively.
(2/9)
First, this bill forces young women to register for the draft, which Rep. Roy has been against from the start.
That wasn’t the only woke provision of the NDAA, however. Roy’s office cataloged some of the other unpleasant changes wrought by the Democrats, including red-flag laws for summarily seizing the firearms of service members and a proposed Office of Countering Extremism which sounds every bit as Orwellian as the name implies.
(4/9)
It also creates an “Office of Countering Extremism” which could expel troops who engage in so-called “extremist activities” or belong to an “extremist organization”
Given the rampant wokeism we’ve seen in Biden’s Pentagon, you know EXACTLY how this will be used. pic.twitter.com/8p84rkhE0k
There’s also language that stipulates “any new non-tactical Federal vehicle purchased by the Department of Defense for use outside of combat should, to the greatest extent practicable, be an electric or zero-emission vehicle.”
“Not later than September 30, 2022, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a plan to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions of the Department of Defense, including Department of Defense functions that are performed by contractors, in line with science-based emissions targets,” the NDAA reads.
It also contains a “plant-based protein pilot program” which stipulates that the term indicates “edible products made to approximate the taste and texture of livestock-based protein, or vegan or vegetarian meat alternative product made using plant and other non-livestock-based proteins that are consistent with the nutritional properties of meat products.”
(6/9)
And if electric military vehicles aren’t your thing, maybe we can interest you in some fake meat?
The NDAA directs the Navy to spend time on a pilot program to offer plant-based protein options at forward operating bases. pic.twitter.com/b3MO445bJS
A woke military that drafts our daughters, wastes resources on Green New Deal garbage, holds no one accountable for Afghanistan disaster, and prioritizes playing leftist politics over destroying our enemies.
If you want to find out if your representative voted for the NDAA, you can the roll call here. Keep in mind that it’s not just the list of the usual GOP disappointments who voted yea on this one. House Minority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy of California voted for it, as did House Minority Whip Rep. Steve Scalise of Louisiana and Reps. Jim Banks of Indiana, Dan Crenshaw of Texas and Elise Stefanik of New York — usually names one would hope to see on the opposite side of the ledger.
Banks defended his position to the Washington Examiner by saying he didn’t want his daughters drafted either, but, you know, we’re going to keep on debating whether or not that happens.
“The NDAA is never perfect, and this is the case where the good far outweighs the bad,” Banks said. “I have daughters, I don’t want them drafted into the military. I want our military to be a volunteer force. But I think those debates are going to continue to occur even after the NDAA goes into effect.”
Not really, Rep. Banks. You just voted for an NDAA that ends that debate entirely. And, if your GOP brethren in the upper chamber have the same attitude, they’ll pass it, too.
GOP Rep. Brad Wenstrup of Ohio, meanwhile, said just because a woman is drafted doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll be on the front lines.
“There are still physical requirements for certain jobs that you have to be able to perform and fulfill,” said Wenstrup, a former Army surgeon, to the Examiner. “It doesn’t mean that, you know, if there is a draft, a woman necessarily has to go be in the infantry.”
A draft implies a lack of choice in the matter, however — and whether or not a woman wants to serve in the military or whether they want to serve on the front lines has always been a choice.
For that matter, it’s been a voluntary matter for men since the Vietnam War, as well. However, the Selective Service requirements have always reflected a bedrock cultural value: that, if military conscription is required due to the exigencies of warfare, it’s a uniquely male responsibility to answer the call.
On Thursday, the House of Representatives voted to throw that shared value out the window.
It’s no surprise Democrats voted that way; the left currently seeks to eliminate any difference between male and female, no matter how glaringly biological or natural that difference may be. Protecting the right of women to stay out of the draft is less important than protecting the right to soy meat, as far as the Democrats are concerned. That 134 Republicans joined them in their delusions is a disgrace, however.
Congress is better in Republican hands than in Democrats, but there are days you wonder how much better.
Has the GOP earned your vote through their actions? Ask your daughter when she fills out her Selective Service card.
The woke corporate mob has struck again. In First Liberty’s most recent case, we witnessed Alaska Airlines bowing a knee to woke ideology when they decided to fire Lacey Smith and another client who wishes to remain anonymous for questioning the “Equality” Act based on their religious beliefs. Here’s a quick recap of what happened.
On its employees’ message board, Alaska Airlines announced its support for the “Equality” Act. The company encouraged employees to comment and ask questions about the company’s policy.
As a Christian, Lacey has concerns about the ramifications the “Equality” Act would have for people of faith in the workplace—as do millions of Americans. Lacey, in keeping with her religious beliefs, posted a simple question: “As a company, do you think it’s possible to regulate morality?” In the same forum, First Liberty’s second client asked, “Does Alaska support: endangering the Church, encouraging suppression of religious freedom, obliterating women rights and parental rights?…”
But for Alaska Airlines, so-called “diversity” doesn’t factor in religious views. The company’s leadership swiftly took action to terminate both flight attendants, claiming that “defining gender identity or sexual orientation as a moral issue…is…a discriminatory statement” and the questions they asked were “hateful” and “offensive.”
By firing Lacey and our other client, Alaska Airlines sent a chilling message: If you’re not woke, you’re not welcome. But although today the airline punishes and targets those with a religious point of view, this wasn’t always the case. Even a brief glimpse into Alaska’s history shows it was a company that once embraced people of faith.
Woke Ideologues Cancel Alaska Airlines’ History of Religious Inclusion
Alaska Airlines surely isn’t the only company that’s caved to woke ideology. A quick scan of headlines today reveals countless American companies going “woke” and allegedly promoting values of diversity and accommodation, yet they almost always exclude religious people. But the woke transformation of Alaska Airlines is unique, considering its rich history of religious inclusion.
At one point, Alaska Airlines promoted a culture that affirmed religious liberty. With each meal it handed out to passengers, the airline included a card with a Psalm as a gesture of thanksgiving. This was an exceptional practice by the airline that lasted thirty years and differentiated them from the rest of the industry. However, it discontinued this tradition in 2012.
What’s more, at the end of World War II, Alaska Airlines considered it a humanitarian obligation to help relocate persecuted religious minorities. In 1949, the airline launched operation “On Eagles Wings,” which helped transport 49,000 Yemenite Jews to Israel.
But that was then, and this is now. The same airline that once helped Yemenite Jews escape from persecution is now firing people of faith who express their beliefs.
For the woke ideologues who’ve infiltrated the leadership of Alaska Airlines and other American companies, even a rich heritage of religious inclusion apparently doesn’t matter all that much. Because in their quest to impose a radical agenda, there’s simply no room for dissent or tolerance for anyone expressing a religious perspective.
No One Is Safe from “Wokeism”
The case of our two Alaska Airlines flight attendants shows the threat woke corporations pose to the freedom and the rights of religious Americans. And if you think what happened to Lacey won’t happen to you, think again.
Corporate “wokeism” will continue to spread unless we step up now and make it clear that it is illegal to discriminate against Americans because of their religious beliefs. At First Liberty, we will not stand for brazen attacks on our First Freedom. Defending these flight attendants is about much more than changing the “cancel culture” of Alaska Airlines. We’re taking a stand against injustice to hold corporate America to our country’s historic commitment to religious freedom.
Would you consider supporting First Liberty’s ongoing defense of Lacey and all religious employees to stop this growing trend? Americans should NOT fear being fired from their jobs because of their faith. Stand up for your constitutional rights and tell the woke corporate mob enough is enough.
How to protect yourself and your kids from the harmful effects of technology
Every generation worries about the upcoming youth, but does the age of smartphones and digital addiction pose a more serious threat than ever before? In an episode of NTD’s “The Nation Speaks,” host Cindy Drukier interviews teacher and author Jeremy Adams, as well as psychologist Hilarie Cash, to answer this question.
It has only been 14 years since we’ve had computers in our pockets that are available every moment of our lives. In his book “Hallowed Out: A Warning about America’s Next Generation,” Jeremy Adams, a civics teacher of 24 years, brings awareness to what he is seeing in the classroom and how he believes the younger generation is negatively affected by technology.
Adams says when you work in the classroom, you get to know kids and you notice if there are troubling trends. He believes the most disturbing thing about kids today is the value system they are embracing. The way they look at their country, the way they spend their time, and the values they hold are not helping them live purposeful and meaningful lives. In fact, they are hindering them.
Being a civics teacher, Adams says he worries about the American experiment.
“America is not like other countries. We can’t have a single lost generation that doesn’t understand what it means to be an American and what those values are and how you perpetuate the American experiment,” he says.
He is worried about the values that have emerged in young people over the past 10 years. These include the extent to which young Americans live their lives completely untethered to adult values, influences, or role models.
Adams says that although it doesn’t matter to him whether the youth are religious or not, he is bothered that young people don’t seem to know anything about religion.
Other troubling trends are that the younger generation is extremely unpatriotic, they don’t have the desire for relationships, marriage, or family, and they are radically individualistic.
He says that when you think about the things that make life enchanting and grand, you think of friendships, love, learning, and going out and seeing and doing things. Yet today’s youth are lonely and isolated.
Adams stresses how unhappy this generation is, citing rising suicide rates.
“It is shocking,” he says.
He was worried about these things prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, but now these problems have been amplified and accelerated.
Kids today don’t go out and socialize, they don’t have meals with their parents, and they often spend 9 to 10 hours a day on their phone.
Adams says kids post-COVID-19 are zombies in the classroom and don’t know how to engage in academic and social environments.
Adams believes the reason for much of this falls on the adult generation. He says that we have given young people freedom but haven’t stepped forward and given them the values, knowledge, or insight needed to use that freedom well. If adults give youth the freedom to do whatever they want, we have to also teach them that freedom allows them to commit to what is important and meaningful. When we fail to do that, we are left with a generation that sees freedom as tantamount to indulgence or licentiousness, and doesn’t connect it to important things.
Being a parent, spouse, teacher, or person of faith, is hard. It may be the hardest thing a person does, but it will also likely be the most meaningful. Youth today often aren’t able to make the connection between struggle and purpose.
Acknowledging that high expectations usually come from adults, Adams points out that the parent generation, in our zeal to be compassionate and empathetic, have actually let our youth down. Being kind is a good thing, but it should help students feel secure so they can achieve good things.
Now in schools, teachers are also friends, counselors, and often act as parents to their students.
Teachers today need to understand that compassion and empathy should serve youth in a way that prepares them to show up, study, work hard, and have success. Adams says many teachers think they’re being compassionate by giving students a diploma without making them learn anything.
Any form of success requires diligence, knowledge, and skill. Robbing young people of what they need to stand tall in the world and achieve what they want in their lives is not kind.
Thankfully, Adams does believe there is still time to turn the situation around. He says we all want to do better. Young people know they are addicted to their phones and need to live life more. The adults know better and know they need to do things like insist on family time, church, and community. He says parents and teachers need to start “adulting” again, which means putting ourselves in the physical, intellectual, and moral spaces of young people. Awareness is the key to breaking the phone addiction, because once we are aware, we can intervene.
Teacher Warns of Troubled Next Generation; Tackling Digital Addiction | The Nation Speaks [Full Episode]Play Video
To learn more about how bad the digital addiction in our youth is and what can be done about it, Drukier interviews psychologist Hilarie Cash, co-founder of reSTART: Internet Addiction Recovery Program.
Cash, who has been seeing addicted patients for over 25 years, says the addiction problem has been growing steadily as technology has entered everyone’s lives. The software is designed to be addictive, and kids are now exposed to technology from early ages, which affects their development.
Cash says there are tell-tale signs if there is an addiction problem. One of the disorders is called “Gaming Disorder,” which often happens to people who become addicted to video games. It can be recognized when gaming begins to take over a person’s life: they no longer have control over how much they use it, they lose interest in other things, and they continue with their behavior despite negative consequences.
Cash says that grades going down, not getting enough sleep or exercise, not having many friends or offline activities, or fighting with family about technology-use rules, are all indicators that there is a problem.
Cash says technology affects brain development in young children. Today, many parents are handing devices to their babies, which has never been the case in past generations. This impacts social development substantially, because a person doesn’t develop good social skills unless they are actually interacting socially with other people.
Cash also explains the attachment issues that result from being exposed to too much technology. A child needs to be attached to their caregivers, but if the caregivers are on their devices too much, or putting the kids on devices to keep them distracted, this affects the attachment a child develops with their caregiver, which in turn affects mental health later on down the road.
She says that from ages 13 to 20, many have intimacy disorders, not having the skills and confidence to initiate, develop, and maintain emotionally intimate relationships.
Sexuality is also impacted because there is a blending of activities online, with many users looking at pornography, gambling, gaming, and social media all at the same time.
On top of this, there are physical problems, such as sleep deprivation, inadequate exercise, and poor diet.
In regards to social development, there is a lack of skill in communication, as well as attention problems.
Technology gives us immediate gratification, which negatively affects academic work by not having the ability to stay focused, persevere to get projects done, and look forward to getting a good grade.
So what can we do? Cash says there are apps that help at least monitor phone use, and these can be helpful if a person is actually motivated to make changes.
She recommends that parents don’t give smartphones to their children before high school. The software parents can put on phones to monitor kids is easy for smart kids to get around. She says to make sure kids don’t have smartphones until they have developed a well-rounded life and can sustain that once they get a smartphone.
Cash also says it is wise to have boundaries around phone and screen time, such as checking your phone at certain times and otherwise leaving it off, and making sure times at home are intentional and not surrounded by screen time and devices. Make sure kids are getting time outdoors, exercising, doing their chores, having down time, and in-person social time.
Cash says the key is to focus on giving your kids the proper rules and guidance so they can live a well-rounded life.
There are many ways in which to divide humanity—the decent and the indecent, the happy and the unhappy, the cowardly and the courageous, those who lead and those who follow, etc.
Two major divisions that are less often noted but highly consequential are between those who want to control others and those who have little interest in controlling others, and between the related categories of those who are comfortable with being controlled by others and those who detest being controlled by others.
Those who seek to control others and those who seek to be controlled by others would seem to be on opposite ends of the political spectrum. But they are not. Both groups are overwhelmingly populated by individuals on the Left.
They currently dominate four of the five English-speaking countries (the United Kingdom may be the one exception). The ease with which Australians, Canadians, and New Zealanders have accepted the loss of liberty in their respective countries has been the saddest and most frightening development since the rise of totalitarianism in the early 20th century.
Even sadder and more frightening has been the acceptance of authoritarianism by half of the American people. America has been the beacon of liberty in the world. America was the country to which France gave the Statue of Liberty. America has been, as President Abraham Lincoln characterized it, “the last best hope of Earth.” America’s self-image has been that of a “sweet land of liberty” and of “the land of the free and home of the brave.”
Then came a new virus (one with a survival rate in the 99 percent range for nearly all age groups except older adults who are also very sick), and suddenly, in the name of “public health,” no amount of suppression of liberty, no matter how irrational, has been resisted by the majority of Americans or almost any citizens of the other English-speaking countries.
The citizens of Australia’s biggest states are not allowed to leave their homes for more than a few hours a day, not allowed to congregate with other citizens even outdoors, not allowed even to speak with one another outdoors. For more than a year and a half, Australians have not been allowed to leave their country without the express permission of their government, which will decide whether they have a good enough reason. And, of course, church services are forbidden. Australians, Canadians, and New Zealanders, most of whom are thoroughly secular, have only contempt for their compatriots who wish to attend religious services.
In many arenas of life, most Australians have fewer rights than most Soviet citizens did. Like Australians, Soviet citizens could not leave their country without permission, but they were allowed to leave their homes, to speak with people in the street, and to visit dying relatives in hospitals.
Meanwhile, a large percentage of Americans support a president of the United States who offers government and an enormous number of private-entity workers a choice between getting vaccinated—no matter how young they are, and whether they already had COVID-19—or losing their job. In other words, many Americans support firing any unvaccinated fellow citizens who work for the government, the medical professions, or privately owned companies with 100 or more employees.
Half of America supports a president who portrays the other half of America as an enemy, their fellow Americans as people for whom they should have hatred. No American president has ever given as divisive a speech as the one in which President Joe Biden announced his vaccine mandates (something he denied wanting to impose only nine months ago, in December of 2020). Lincoln, despite the Civil War, a war in which more Americans were killed than in all other American wars combined, called on Americans to have “malice toward none.” Biden, as mean-spirited a president as this country has ever had, has called for malice toward 100 million Americans, declaring, “our patience is wearing thin.”
There is a three-pronged left-wing assault on liberty: in the name of public health (COVID-19); in the name of “anti-racism”; and in the name of saving the planet (climate change). By ratcheting up fear and hysteria, the Left is using each to end individual liberty, including freedom of speech, for the first time in American history.
Will the Left succeed?
Unless Americans fight the Left as hard as the Union fought the slave states, the answer is yes.
Interview with the Antichrist is a must-see film, especially for Christians. In the movie, the Antichrist interviewee made a warning that soon he would take all lukewarm Christians to Hell, instead of being saved by God. Who is this guy? And who are the lukewarm? Could this happen in the real world, and how to prevent it? You will get an answer to these questions after watching this feature.
Director Timothy A. Chey shared he was an atheist until in his 30s. Since then, he has become very spiritual and committed to making faith-based films. Chey does not think the movies he made are merely fictional or for entertainment. “My one and only goal is to bring people true salvation in Christ in these very last days,” Chey said, “the Lord is coming sooner than we think.” And what he is most interested to illustrate is the battle of Armageddon described in the book of Revelations—the destruction of humanity by the Antichrist before God returns and how mankind would go through this great tribulation.
“I believe the Antichrist is alive right now,” Chey stated, “so it intrigued me to show a live broadcast with the Antichrist to ask him every question under the sun.” That is why, in the film, the Antichrist is peppered with stark questions including media domination, the battle between pastor John MacArthur and the California governor, the ACLU, Netflix and couch potatoes, the 9/11 terrorist attack, mass shootings, radical left movements, communist China, the evils of political correctness, pandemic lockdowns, and other mandates.
In the movie, the Antichrist mocks Pope Francis’ Interfaith Unity movement and lukewarm Christians spending more hours watching food channels than reading the Bible. Is even the Pope lukewarm? Some churchgoers may be shocked.
Lukewarm is neither hot nor cold. Lukewarm Christians are people who claim they have faith in Lord, but in the real world, are on and off. Are you lukewarm? Maybe you’re thinking, “No, I’m a devout believer of God.” That is remarkable. But wait for a minute. Is this your resolution or actual daily practice?
When the apostles worried about their clothes and bread, and when frightened by the storm, they were called “ones of little faith.” Peter denied his identity three times, even though he was the first disciple to acknowledge the Messiah.
Like water being cooked, every molecule of water in the pot is lukewarm until it boils. So lukewarm might not be name-calling, but a description of certain status or phase in the spiritual journey. And a person’s spiritual level is not static throughout one’s life; shifts in both directions are possible.
Viewer Joan Enderman agrees this movie is a wake-up call because she has found herself “slipping,” “being a Christian and sealed by the Holy Spirit does not give us immunity from sin and slipping backward.” Another viewer Christine Kenyon notes, “it now becomes harder and more of a spiritual battle because our eyes and hearts have been opened.” The movie talked about people being deceived or attached to worldly desires. For example, the lure of pornography is everywhere, from movies to TV shows, from advertisements on the street to the internet.
The Antichrist in the film is an anthropomorphized character. Through the dialogue between host Alex Carter and the Antichrist, the film conveys that the Antichrist is alive and is everywhere, as many politicians and influential figures believe more in the power of man than in God. This is exactly the spirit of the Antichrist.
Undoubtedly, communism or Marxism has been a collective representation of the Antichrist for the last hundred years. Opposing capitalism and preaching common prosperity through violence are just the political slogans of communists. But anti-God and anti-humanity are their hidden intentions.
The communist regimes have killed hundreds of millions of innocent people simply because of their spiritual beliefs. Affirmed by the China Tribunal, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) regime has committed forced organ harvesting for years on a significant scale, “an unprecedented evil on this planet.” The reason the communists denigrate and eliminate all traditional beliefs and values is that they want humans to worship them as god or savior.
If you were thinking the Antichrist would only appear in the Western world, that might be a mistake. Revelation 14:9 reads that the worshippers of the beast will receive “the mark on his forehead or on his hand.” Think about the communist posture of raising their hands to take the oath, and then you may understand the verses better.
Likewise, Revelation 17:1-2 says, “The great whore… With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.” Who better to be called the great whore than the CCP that has lured the leaders on earth with money and coaxed the inhabitants of the earth with poor quality and low-priced goods?
Stressed in the movie, the Antichrist and his secular agents are most adept at creating and exploiting various forms of crisis to panic people into ceding their rights to the government and totalitarians. Hence, many people fear that America might become like a communist country.
If you are someone who wants to take your faith seriously, or is concerned about the future of America, or cares about the health and well-being of yourself and your family, I suggest you watch this film. It is available on EpochTV, a streaming platform for exclusive programming that includes investigative news analysis, in-depth interviews, and award-winning documentaries and films.
A couple of weeks before the completion of the catastrophe of the American presence in Afghanistan—or, if you believe President Joe Biden, the “extraordinary success” of the American evacuation—a Russo-British comedian named Konstantin Kisin published a brilliantly funny thread on Twitter headed: “You’re struggling to understand why some people are vaccine hesitant. Let me help you.”
The “let me help you” megathread, as he called it, consisted of example after example of so-called “expert” opinions that have turned out to be completely wrong—beginning with the British vote for Brexit and the American vote for President Donald Trump in 2016, both of which elections the top experts at the time confidently assured us would go the other way.
Actually, Kisin’s spiel could be considered as a belated gloss on one of the most famous quotations to come out of the Brexit referendum, that of the Brexiteer and veteran government minister Michael Gove who said: “I think the people of this country have had enough of experts.”
I think that Trump was striking the same responsive chord with Americans when he disparaged what he called “political correctness”—still ravaging the county after four years of his administration—which was also the product of that breed of experts who call themselves “intellectuals.”
If people were fed up with experts in 2016, think how much more reason they have to be so five years later! Kisin does, and he goes ruthlessly through the whole catalog of errors from Russian collusion to “systemic racism” and “white supremacy” to “toxic masculinity” and the abolition of sex in favor of the nebulous idea of “gender.”
And of course we mustn’t leave out the conflicting and often mendacious pronunciamentos of “the Science” on the coronavirus, which have culminated in the distrust, not so much of the vaccines themselves, but of “the experts’” attempts to demonize those who remain skeptical about them.
And all this was before the collapse of the Afghan government and army under the onslaught of the Taliban gave us what may be the best reason ever for thinking that we, too, have had enough of experts in this country.
“Afghanistan: the graveyard of experts,” wrote Tim Black at Spiked Online.
“US ‘experts’ who created Afghanistan mess should be fired for malpractice,” wrote Rebekah Koffler for The New York Post—though of course they won’t be. They never are. They’re the experts.
A writer on Substack named Richard Hanania compared the galaxy of American Ph.D.’s (including the now-deposed president of Afghanistan himself, Ashraf Ghani, who has a Ph.D. in anthropology from Columbia) who got us into Afghanistan with the madrassa-educated Taliban and wrote that, “It’s as if Wernher von Braun had been given all the resources in the world to run a space program and had been beaten to the moon by an African witch doctor.”
Unsurprisingly, there were a great many negative comments appended to Kisin’s bonfire of the experts, most of them to the effect that, just because some people have been wrong about some things it doesn’t mean that other people are going to be wrong about other things—especially when those things include vaccines which, as there are sound scientific reasons for believing, can be life-saving.
Nor should we neglect to consider that the lives saved are not only of those who receive the vaccines but also those of the immunosuppressed and other vulnerable people who come in contact with them.
They have a point. But so has Kisin. The latter is certainly right in thinking that the experts, particularly those who write for the partisan media, have taken too little care of their own credibility in the past, instead expecting to be trusted and believed as right, just because of who they are. When they then turn out to be wrong, they have no one but themselves to blame if people don’t believe them the next time.
Some people are always going to be wrong about almost everything, but the case is altered when the people who are wrong have set themselves up in the profession of being right. These are the people we call “experts” solely because they have the recognized credentials of experts—advanced degrees from top universities or awards for their expertise from other experts—whether or not they have any real-world experience or expertise.
Their authority is what the anthropologists call “positional”—like that of the parent who answers a child’s question of why? by replying: “Because I said so!” or “Because I’m your mother.”
The experts treat us all like those children—and then they wonder why they are resented and distrusted.
They are the people who identify themselves with their beliefs to the extent that they can never admit it—and so never learn from their mistakes—when those beliefs turn out to be wrong.
That’s how you get to Biden’s calling an obvious disaster of the first water an “extraordinary success”—with no more than an occasional raised eyebrow from the compliant media.
Much publicity in the last week or so was given to a Reuters report of a conversation between Biden and Ghani in the dying days of the latter’s government, as the Taliban were closing in. What he had to worry about, said the American president to the Afghan one, was the “perception” that he was losing the war, not the fact that he actually was losing it.
All he had to do to get American help, said Biden, was change this perception, “whether it is true or not.”
I think a lot of the criticism of this extraordinary conversation was misdirected. The problem wasn’t that Biden told Ghani to lie. Lying to the enemy has a long and honorable tradition in the history of warfare.
No, the problem was that he was foolish enough to think he could lie in that situation: that he (or Ghani) could get away with spinning the enemy as he himself was used to spinning the American media—as, of course, he would go on to do again with the claim of an “extraordinary success.”
A man whose self-assurance and self-absorption is such that he believes reality can make no claim against him that he can’t pay off with the experts’ counterfeit currency of interpretive ingenuity and rhetorical sleight-of-hand is a man who can only lead his country and himself into more disasters.
Republican gubernatorial candidate Larry Elder on Wednesday vowed to “save California” shortly after he was forced to prematurely end a walk-through of his planned campaign stop at Venice Beach, when over 10 hecklers harassed him, throwing projectiles.
Elder, who is vying to replace California Gov. Gavin Newsom if he is recalled this month, was touring Venice Beach’s homeless encampments with campaign team members when he was harassed.
Footage of the incident uploaded to social media shows two hecklers repeatedly shouting racial slurs at Elder. A lady in a pink gorilla mask, riding a bike, appeared on video throwing an egg that appeared to narrowly miss Elder’s head.
One of Elder’s security staff attempted to separate the woman from the crowd, to keep her from continuing to throw projectiles.
In videos surfacing on Twitter, the woman slapped the security staff in the face. Another protester hit the same security staff member seconds later.
A white SUV drove up to the crowd, which was walking down Hampton Drive towards Sunset Avenue.
Elder’s team escorted him to his vehicle and drove away.
“Today I kicked off the Recall Express bus tour. Before we even left Los Angeles, my security detail was physically assaulted, shot with a pellet gun, and hit with projectiles. The intolerant left will not stop us. We will recall Gavin Newsom. We will save California,” Elder said in a statement on Twitter late Wednesday, responding to the attacks.
Elder, 69, is an Epoch Times contributor and host of “Larry Elder with Epoch Times” on EpochTV.
The conservative talk radio host first announced in July that he will run in California’s recall election of Democratic Gov. Newsom, which has been set for Sept. 14.
He said in a statement on his campaign website that he’s running for governor “because the decline of California isn’t the fault of its people,” adding: “Our government is what’s ruining the Golden State.”
On his website, Elder calls for “returning to the bedrock Constitutional principles of limited government and maximum personal responsibility.”
Other top Republican candidates include businessman John Cox, former San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer, and state Rep. Kevin Kiley. Nine Democrats are running, including financial analyst Kevin Paffrath and actor Patrick Kilpatrick.
The recall election of Newsom, a first-term Democrat, follows mounting criticism from within his party and across the aisle over his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and other issues.
He faced intense backlash after he was seen dining at the French Laundry restaurant with lobbyists after telling Californians to stay home. Newsom apologized for his actions.
The last time a governor was recalled in the state was Gray Davis in 2003. Residents voted “Yes” on recalling Davis by 55.4 percent and selected one of 135 candidates on the ballot to replace him.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, California is one of 19 states where recalls are permitted.
Last month, President Joe Biden publicly backed Newsom, saying in a statement that he the Democratic governor “is leading California through unprecedented crises—he’s a key partner in fighting the pandemic and helping build our economy back better.”
“To keep him on the job, registered voters should vote no on the recall election by 9/14 and keep California moving forward,” Biden added.
Democrats in the House Education and Labor Committee revealed how their committee would use the $761 billion from the $3.5 trillion budget resolution package, saying that among other things, the money will be used to lower the cost of childcare and provide free preschool and community college.
“The Education and Labor Committee’s portion of the Build Back Better Act makes historic investments that will lower costs for nearly every family, create good-paying jobs for American workers, and provide our nation’s children the strong foundation they deserve,” said Chairman Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) in a press statement Wednesday.
The committee will begin marking up the legislation on Thursday with members offering amendments in an attempt to change how the $761 billion is spent.
The legislation would subsidize childcare programs, making it so most families would not have to pay more than 7 percent of their income for each child’s daycare. The funding would also subsidize a pay increase for childcare workers, so facilities could hire more workers.
The funding would also subsidize universal pre-K, so all 3- and 4-year-olds could go to school.
The funding allots $111 billion to provide two years of free community colleges, invest in the Pell Grant program, and fund educational institutions that cater to blacks, Hispanics, and minorities to make quality degrees more affordable for those groups.
The committee’s bill provides $82 billion to public schools for repairs and upgrades. It will invest close to $80 billion in workforce development programs including training people for climate change energy-related jobs.
The funding will also include about $35 billion for school food programs during the school year and the summer months, as well as provide money to upgrade school kitchens.
Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) speaks during a news conference at the U.S. Capitol in Washington on July 29, 2020. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
Ranking Member of the committee Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-S.C.) slammed the committee’s bill, calling it a part of Biden’s “reckless,” “partisan” spending.
“Congressional Democrats could empower individuals and entrepreneurs to make the financial, professional, educational, and parental decisions that work best for them. Instead, Democrats are pushing an irresponsible spending scheme that will double down on the inflation crisis and allow the federal government to infringe on Americans’ liberties,” Foxx said in a press statement Wednesday.
Democrats are pressing forward with their $3.5 trillion budget resolution even though there is opposition within their own party, with some moderates saying this level of spending will increase inflation and saddle future generations with federal debt.
Senators Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) has repeatedly said he does not think that this level of spending is wise and his party should put a pause on the legislation until after the pandemic and after assessing the recent inflation.
Republicans have all said they will oppose the budget resolution, but Democrats do not need the GOP to vote in favor of the bill if they get all 50 Democrat senators to vote in favor of the package.
Top Democrat leaders have shared confidence that their party will rally together to pass the massive funding bill.
Schumer was asked by a local ABC news reporter on Sunday if he can convince all members of his party, particularly Manchin and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), who has also said she will not support the resolution, to vote in favor of the massive spending bill.
“I’m going to do my best and you know so far, after some discussion, and some compromise they have gone along with previous bills. Let’s hope it happens again,” said Schumer. “I have a caucus that runs from Bernie Sanders on the left to Joe Manchin, on the right. How do I bring them all together when you only have 50 votes and every one of them counts?”
Meanwhile, Sanders said he speaks directly to caucus members, in an effort to further negotiations on the budget bill.
“After a lot of negotiations and pain—and I’m going to be on the phone all week—what we are going to do is pass the most comprehensive bill for working families that this country has seen,” Sanders told The New York Time
All white people are, says “White Fragility” author Robin DiAngelo.
Race explains everything, says bestselling “How to Be an Antiracist” author Ibram X. Kendi. “Every policy is either racist or anti-racist.”
Kendi’s and DiAngelo’s books are now recommended reading at schools, corporations and in the military. Both authors command high speaking fees.
Isn’t that good? It’s important to educate people about racism.
But John McWhorter, author of “Woke Racism,” says, “The way we’re being encouraged to think, hurts Black people.”
In my new video, he gives this example: “There is a disproportionate number of suspensions of Black boys in schools for violence. (Kendi says) that must be racist … a stereotype of Black men as violent. But … the data makes it very clear that Black boys do commit more violent acts in schools. If you don’t suspend those boys, the violence is being perpetrated (mostly) against other Black kids.”
Kendi’s positions “leave Black kids in the lurch,” says McWhorter.
Kendi and DiAngelo call most every disparity between races “systemic racism.”
White people live longer than Black people? Racism.
Income inequality? Racism.
White and Asian students get higher test scores? Systemic racism.
In the past, says McWhorter, civil rights leaders asked, “How can we make it so that Black kids are better at the test?” Now they want to “eliminate the tests” because they “make Black people unhappy.”
This just makes the problem worse, he says, because it encourages people to think of themselves as victims. If you believe you are a helpless victim of racism, why study?
The idea that it is “unreasonable to expect Black kids to use analytical thinking in a rigorous way. … This is a new way of thinking. It’s a religious way of thinking.”
Blaming racism for low test scores ignores “aspects of Black culture that don’t stress getting good at those tests — the way that South Asian immigrant culture clearly does.”
Nigerian and Caribbean culture, too. People from those places are often just as dark or darker than Black Americans. They “come here and deal with the same racism that everybody else does. Yet they make the best of the worst. That means: so could Black Americans.”
The media label Kendi and DiAngelo “leading scholars,” but their arguments are rarely tested in the marketplace of ideas. Both refuse to debate opponents. McWhorter calls their work far from scholarly — “more like a toxic religion, a cult.”
In fact, he adds, “Kendi is dim.”
I argue that, even if Kendi is “dim,” he’s winning hearts and minds. Companies now donate millions to his Center for Antiracist Research. His book sales and success with students show that his arguments convince people.
McWhorter disagrees. “As we come out of the pandemic and we’re less bored, less anxious, I suspect that a lot of the extremes that we saw are going to start retreating because there’s going to be pushback.”
The idea of anti-racism is “charismatic,” he adds. “It makes it seem like you’ve got one answer to a bunch of things that look disparate and difficult. But all disparities between white people and Black people are not due to something unfair that was driven by whites.”
I’m puzzled that DiAngelo’s and Kendi’s message is so popular today, when life for racial minorities seems to be better than ever before. With some exceptions, there’s less racism, more intermarriage, more opportunities for minorities, etc.
“Why now?” I ask.
There’s an advantage to being identified as a victim, says McWhorter. “An emotional balm to be treated as this victimized person. The problem is that it’s anti-Black.”
Anti-white too.
If the “systemic racism” cult wins, says McWhorter, “we all lose.”
A radical left-wing activist group organizing a pro-abortion protest outside the home of Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh had some interesting advice for prospective attendees. An addendum to the notice announcing the protest urged activists “to be as inclusive as possible in your language” while making a ruckus outside Kavanaugh’s home in Washington, D.C.
“Women and girls are not the only people who can get pregnant and need abortions,” the organizers from ShutDownDC wrote. That’s going to be rather inconvenient for anyone who was planning to reuse old signage about stopping the “war on women,” but at least they’ve been given a few days to prepare. Alas, “Stop the war on people who can get pregnant” has far too many syllables to incorporate into a catchy chant.
Additionally, the protest organizers cautioned attendees to “please avoid comparing U.S. abortion-restricting politicians to the Taliban” because it would be unfair to the Taliban. (No, seriously.) “The former are a distinctly homegrown phenomenon and ignoring that in favor of such comparisons is Islamophobic,” they explained.
Since the Taliban’s rapid takeover in Afghanistan, even prominent Democrats have delighted in comparing people they don’t like to the militant Islamist group. “Have you noticed how strikingly similar both the mindsets and actions are between the suicide bombers at Kabul’s airport, and the anti-mask and anti-vax people here?” wrote Arne Duncan, an Islamophobe who served seven years as former president Barack Obama’s secretary of education.
The protest is scheduled to take place on the evening of Monday, Sept. 13. ShutDownDC, a left-wing activist group that purports to use “strategic direct action to advance justice and hold officials accountable,” said they intend to “make our voices heard” by calling for Kavanaugh’s resignation and telling him to “keep your oppressive ideology out of our bodies.”
Earlier this year, ShutDownDC organized a small gathering outside the Virginia home of Sen. Josh Hawley (R., Mo.), where protesters used a bullhorn to yell at his wife. (The senator wasn’t there.) They also left a copy of the U.S. Constitution on his doorstep. It was very sad.
Two GOP representatives are calling on Congress to pass legislation that would require schools that receive federal funding to make the curriculum they use to teach students available to parents and the public.
Education and Labor Committee Ranking Member Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) and Rep. Scott Fitzgerald (R-Wis.) introduced the Curriculum Review of Teachings Transparency Act (pdf). The bill stipulates that federal funding can be denied if K-12 schools do not comply with the rule.
Making the K-12 curriculum openly available to parents is an effort by Foxx and Fitzgerald to counter what they call controversial and factually inaccurate ideas being taught in schools under the name of critical race theory (CRT).
“Decisions about what to teach students in school are being made by bureaucrats and teachers unions, often without the input from parents. As a result, parents across the country are flocking to their local school board to demand transparency and to oppose dangerous ideologies, like critical race theory,” said Fitzgerald said in a press statement.
CRT is rooted in the Marxist theory of class struggle, but with a particular focus on race. Proponents of CRT see racism in every aspect of the American public and private life and seek to dismantle American institutions—such as the Constitution and legal system—which they claim to be inherently and irredeemably racist.
While schools have for years been quietly infusing CRT into their curriculums, it wasn’t until last year, during lockdowns enacted in response to the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus pandemic, that parents were able to see what their children were being taught. Since then, parents have been increasingly stepping forward to oppose CRT due to its racially divisive and anti-American concepts.
There has been fierce debate over whether CRT or similar initiatives—including The New York Times’ “1619 Project” or diversity, equity, and inclusion training—should be taught to schoolchildren. Parents across the United States have held protests against school boards that have increasingly started to promote CRT or CRT-aligned viewpoints in class.
Meanwhile, some media outlets have claimed that CRT is only taught in higher education settings, such as in colleges and universities, and isn’t being widely adopted by teachers. However, critics of CRT have said there are plenty of examples of young children in school being taught to believe that white people are inherently racist—a key CRT tenet—and that “systemic racism” permeates every U.S. institution.
Foxx wrote in a recent op-ed that education’s goal was originally to produce virtuous citizens who would make the country stronger, adding, “The future of our country depends upon a high-quality education system dedicated to equipping the next generation with the knowledge needed for an active civic life. Critical race theory is incompatible with this mission.”
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal (D-Mass.) likely put a smile on President Joe Biden’s face on Sept. 7, with an extraordinarily ambitious schedule for completing the key panel’s part of the president’s $3.5 trillion “Build Back Better” spending plan.
“On Thursday, Sept. 9, 2021, and Friday, Sept. 10, 2021, at 10:00 a.m., the committee will mark up measures spanning from universal paid family and medical leave and access to child-care to strengthening retirement savings and trade programs that prioritize American workers,” the committee said in a statement.
“This is our historic opportunity to support working families and ensure our economy is stronger, more inclusive, and more resilient for generations to come,” Neal said in the statement.
What followed in the statement were 16 promises to create new benefits, greatly expand existing ones, and increase funding for a host of federal programs targeted by Biden to combat global warming, the CCP virus (also known as the novel coronavirus), the affordable housing shortage, and homelessness, among many other issues.
Other Democratic committee chairmen who head panels with mark-up roles on the spending plan are following similar paths. The fact that virtually all House members are back home in their districts on recess and won’t return until Sept. 20 is just one of a host of problems Democratic leaders must confront.
Much of the markup work will be done via virtual committee meetings.
The biggest of the problems, however, are likely to be Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.). The Senate is split 50-50 between the parties, meaning Democrats have no margin for error in counting votes. The House is only slightly more favorable to Democrats, with a 221–213 margin, meaning Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) can lose no more than four votes.
Manchin and Sinema have both expressed reservations about the massive spending and expansion of government in the $3.5 trillion Biden plan. Lose either one, and Vice President Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) is no longer the Senate’s tie-breaking vote for Democrats unless at least one Republican crosses the aisle.
The next big obstacle is how to pay for the biggest expansion of federal spending since the Great Society in the 1960s at a time when inflation is increasing, employers can’t find workers, small and medium-sized businesses are struggling to stay afloat, and only one in three Americans thinking the country is headed in the right direction.
Republicans such as Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas), the ranking minority member of Neal’s committee, sees nothing but bad economic news being generated by the Biden plan, especially in the area of tax increases.
Brady issued a scathing statement just before the Labor Day weekend, in which he predicted Democrats will have to raise taxes on middle- and lower-class taxpayers due to the Biden plan.
“The left-leaning Tax Policy Center found that Biden’s tax plan will raise taxes on 75 percent of middle-class families next year, rising to 95 percent of middle-class families by 2031—contradicting his pledge not to raise taxes on middle-class Americans.
“The Joint Committee on Taxation says that within 10 years of a corporate tax increase, 66.3 percent of the corporate tax burden would be borne by lower- and middle-income taxpayers.
“Studies show that the capital gains tax alone would shrink the economy, and the left-leaning Tax Policy Center finds that Biden’s proposal raises taxes far past the amount necessary to maximize revenue. Past analyses by the Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation agree.
“Democrats’ second death tax will destroy more than 1 million jobs over the next 12 years, slash paychecks for workers, and shrink our economy by $100 billion over the next decade.”
If Democrats don’t raise taxes and choose instead to fund the new spending with bigger deficits, they will add an estimated $4.3 trillion to the national debt that now approaches $30 trillion, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. That estimate includes the $1.1 trillion infrastructure bill that’s a companion to the spending plan.
In such a scenario, there is no guarantee that Democrats will be able to force through Congress an increase in the national debt ceiling by Sept. 30, the end of the current fiscal year.
Democratic campaign strategists know that a contracting economy with spiraling consumer prices and fewer jobs being created could move voters to restore Republican control of either or both chambers of Congress in November 2022.
Then there is the planned Sept. 18 protest demonstration at the Capitol in support of the Jan. 6 detainees being organized by a group known as Look Ahead America (LAA), which is led by former Trump campaign strategist Matt Braynard.
The LAA has previously organized protests that included a few conservative Republican House members, but multiple senior House Republican aides speaking on background told The Epoch Times they don’t expect any to be present for the Sept. 18 event.
Congressional correspondent Mark Tapscott may be contacted at mark.tapscott@epochtimes.nyc. Follow him on Twitter at @mtapscott and on Parler at @Mtapscott.
All “anti-racism” and “social justice” writings and campaigns are predicated on the claim that certain races and sexes are being treated unfairly. The only evidence presented to support this assertion is statistical disparities between different census categories of races and sexes.
But statistical disparities don’t prove unfair treatment; they only prove unequal outcomes. Race advocates and feminists claim that statistical disparities reflect racist and sexist discrimination. This is a factual question, and so we must consider the evidence.
But before we address the relevant evidence, it’s important to note the revolutionary change in raising census race and sex categories to the utmost importance. Western Enlightenment culture, particularly in the English-speaking world, has always placed the individual as of prime importance. In this view, collectivities such as governments, churches, and business are meant to serve individuals and their interests, rather than individuals being measured by their service to collectivities. But at least collectivities do have some existence, while the census categories of race and sex to which we are asked to bow are empty labels. This is why racism and sexism are so obnoxious: they honor labels rather than actual human beings.
Is it Discrimination?
Race and sex activists claim that statistical disparities reflect racist and sexist discrimination. With no further proof of actual discrimination, activists claim that any membership or benefit that doesn’t see 13.4 percent representation of black Americans, 18.5 percent of Hispanics, and 50 percent of female Americans—their percentages of the general population—must have resulted from racial and sexist discrimination. For example, the fact that blacks make up 5 percent and Hispanics make up 5.8 percent of medical doctors means that blacks and Hispanics are statistically underrepresented, and that this result is the consequence of racist discrimination against blacks and Hispanics.
Similarly, females make up 15 percent of the American engineering workforce, and are thus statistically underrepresented. For race and feminist activists, these statistical underrepresentations are in and of themselves proof of discrimination. But do feminists then grant that the demographic dominance of females among students and graduates generally, with females making up close to 60 percent, is proof that the underrepresentation of males is the result of sexist, anti-male discrimination? As most students in the social sciences, humanities, education, and social work are females, apparently they prefer these fields to others, including engineering and some other STEM fields. In the most gender-egalitarian societies, such as Sweden, females make up the lowest percentages of STEM students in the world, presumably because they feel free to follow their preferences. Discrimination doesn’t come into it.
If statistical underrepresentation is the result of discrimination, so too must overrepresentation be a result of discrimination. Let us consider a few cases. National Football League players are 70 percent black (compared to their 13.4 percent of the general population), while 74.2 percent of National Basketball Association players are black, 16.9 white, 2.2 Latino, and 0.4 Asian. Are these statistical levels of participation the result of racial discrimination? Are the NFL and NBA actively discriminating against white, Latino, and Asian players? Rather, it appears that teams are competing for the best players so that they can succeed in their fields of competition. The selection is based on athletic merit, rather than race. No racial discrimination is evident.
Asian Americans, with 5.9 percent of the population, provide 17.1 percent of the medical doctors. This is a major statistical disparity. Does it result from racial discrimination against whites, blacks, and Hispanics? Who exactly is discriminating in favor of Asian Americans, people who themselves have long suffered discrimination? Is there any evidence of discrimination in favor of Asian Americans?
If racial discrimination does not explain the dominance of black athletes in professional sport, or the high level of Asian Americans in the medical field, what does explain these successes? We are warned by Ibram X. Kendi that “racial-group behavior is a figment of the racist’s imagination.” Yet, if we consult evidence rather than racialist ideology, it’s beyond dispute that family structure, community culture, and crime level do differ markedly among members of different racial categories.
What Might Be the Reasons for Different Outcomes?
We know that two-parent families, in comparison with one-parent families, are associated with children’s higher educational achievement and with a lower level of criminal activity and incarceration. Members of different census race categories differ in their family structure: the percentage of single-parent families among African Americans, in 2019, was 64 percent; among American Indians, 52 percent; among Hispanics, 42 percent; among whites, 24 percent; and among Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, 15 percent.
Educational achievement correlates with family structure. In all standardized tests, Asian Americans achieve the highest scores, then, well behind, are whites, and well behind are Hispanics, and finally blacks. This reflects not only family structure, but also family and community culture. Asian American families have a high level of discipline and respect for parental authority, and their families and communities are notoriously committed to education.
Crime follows a similar pattern: According to 2019 FBI homicide data, “When the race of the offender was known, 55.9 percent were Black or African American, 41.1 percent were White, and 3.0 percent were of other races.” Among murder victims in 2019 for whom race was known, “54.7 percent were Black or African American, 42.3 percent were White, and 3.1 percent were of other races.”
This means the per-capita offending rate for African-Americans was around six times higher than that of whites. As a result, African Americans are highly overrepresented in prisons by demography, although not overrepresented in terms of criminal activity.
The pattern of economic success, as measured by income, is much the same. Median household income of Asian Americans was, in 2018, $87,243, of whites $67,937, Hispanics, $51,404, and blacks, $41,511. Race, however, does not seem to be a determinant, as Nigerian immigrants to the United States have an average income of $52,000, while 35 percent of Nigerian immigrant households earn $90,000.
All of these statistical disparities that indicate difficulties in the African American community have resulted after 50 years of legalized discrimination on behalf of African Americans. “Affirmative action” has made black Americans a preferred category of applicants, and has granted special conditions and benefits for black Americans. Now “diversity, equity, and inclusion” intensifies pro-black discrimination, and, incidentally, anti-white and anti-Asian discrimination. But the disparities remain, because even 50 years of racial discrimination in favor of black Americans has not addressed the social pathologies of their community.
Now, Ibram X. Kendi has warned us that “One either believes problems are rooted in groups of people, as a racist, or locates the roots of problems in power and policies, as an antiracist.” Thus, referring to different characteristics of family structure, community culture, and criminality in different race categories is, according to Kendi, racist. Kendi is advocating for black Americans, and rejects the evidence that blacks bear some responsibility for their levels of achievement and for social pathologies such as crime. The problem, according to Kendi, is “power and policies,” and in taking this stand, he’s robbing black Americans of their agency as human beings, of their capability to achieve and to seek their own ends. This is not “anti-racism,” it’s undermining the constituency Kendi claims to champion by no expectations of performance.
Kendi’s solution to “racism” and alleged discrimination is to increase the preferences and benefits for blacks, in perpetuity: “The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.” Kendi aims to disaggregate rewards from performance, so that his favored racial category gets the rewards irrespective of performance. This is not anti-racism; it’s reverse racism, as well as the negation of achievement and merit, and the advancement of mediocrity in all of our fields of knowledge and service.
Both pieces of legislation are packed with new environmental programs. For example, the IIJ would direct millions towards research and development of low-emission school buses and ferries and millions more towards expanding electric car charging locations.
After the Senate’s passage of the legislation, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in a press conference that the IIJ had some good provisions for addressing climate change, but that it didn’t go far enough.
Sanders’ budget resolution would indeed do much more. In total, the proposal would devote a total of $265 billion toward what Sanders called an “extremely aggressive [transformation] away from fossil fuels in the U.S.”
Sanders also proposed that with the funding in the proposal Democrats would create a “Civilian Climate Corps,” which he said would give young people the opportunity “to get decent pay and to roll up their sleeves … in order to combat climate change.” Sanders implied that this “Climate Corps” would help in the “extremely aggressive” transformation away from fossil fuels, but he did not elaborate on the way that the group would help achieve that.
Initially, Pelosi planned on bringing both pieces of legislation through the House for a vote at the same time as part of what Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has called a “two-track approach.”
This approach has met with far more challenges than Democrat leadership originally expected. While the IIJ, passed by all 50 Democrats and 19 Republicans in the Senate, has faced comparatively few challenges, this expansive budget resolution has proved far more controversial.
Throughout the August recess, the White House and Democrat House leaders were in drawn-out negotiations with a group of moderates who threatened to derail the process. They refused to vote for the budget resolution before passing the infrastructure bill, recoiling at the thought of making what they saw as a “bipartisan victory for our nation” linked to the much more partisan budget. Pelosi originally brushed off these efforts as “amateur.”
The moderates refused to relent, however, and Pelosi was forced to make an eleventh-hour deal with the moderates the morning of the House vote to advance the resolution. This deal satiated the moderates, who voted unanimously with their party to advance the resolution on the evening of Aug. 24.
But trials are not over for President Biden nor congressional leadership. Because of the deal that Pelosi made with the moderates, House Democrats now need to work at a breakneck, unheard of speed to draft legislation before Sept. 27, when Pelosi promised a vote on the IIJ. Moderates in the House still pose a challenge, as they likely will not vote for the resolution before the IIJ is passed.
Beyond this, the quickly-crafted bill must satisfy moderate members of the Senate. This will be difficult, as both Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) have emphatically rejected the huge spending package.
So Democrats are turning to a new excuse to get these new moderate holdouts on board: Hurricane Ida.
Chuck Schumer said in a press conference: “Global warming is upon us, and it’s going to get worse, and worse, and worse unless we do something about it. That’s why it’s so imperative to pass the two bills.”
On Twitter, President Biden expressed the same sentiment. Biden wrote: “The past few days of Hurricane Ida, wildfires in the West, and unprecedented flash floods in New York and New Jersey are another reminder that the climate crisis is here. We need to be better prepared. That’s why I’m urging Congress to act and pass my Build Back Better plan.”
Tuesday morning, President Biden met briefly with reporters outside the south portico of the White House on his way for a visit to New York and New Jersey.
When asked what he hopes to see on the trip, Biden said, “I’m hoping to see the things we’re going to be able to fix permanently with the bill that we have for infrastructure.”
Asked how he’s going to convince hesitant Democrats to vote for his broad policy agenda, Biden expressed optimism that both bills would pass, saying, “The sun is going to come out tomorrow.”
In spite of the president’s optimism, the challenges facing his party in Congress are great. Over the next month, Democrats will need to draft the spending and tax bill, deal with a brewing battle with Republicans over the debt ceiling, and get moderate holdouts on board. This last will be the most difficult challenge, as Manchin and Sinema have expressed opposition to the price of the bill rather than its contents. On the other hand, progressives are unlikely to support any lower than $3.5 trillion—Sanders’ original proposal was a veritable progressive wishlist, with almost $6 trillion in spending; for these progressives, accepting the lower limits of the final cut of the resolution was already a significant compromise.
It is unclear whether Manchin and Sinema will be swayed by these efforts to link the budget resolution to the ongoing disaster in the gulf coast states, but because of their expressed opposition to the price tag, the effort is unlikely to be successful.
Rather, it is likely that moderates in both chambers will join with Republicans to call for a pause on the spending bill in order to craft hurricane relief legislation. For many, especially in affected areas, immediate relief will likely seem far more pressing than efforts at long-term prevention.
