Media Double Standard? What Double Standard?

 

To say the media has a double standard in how it treats conservatives and liberals is akin to saying the Third Reich treated Jews and Aryans unequally. Nowhere is this more obvious more frequently than on the giant social media cesspool called Twitter. Conservatives get banned for questioning election results or vaccination mandates, whereas progressives routinely—literally-- get away with calling for the death of conservatives or even white people in general. Suggest that Hydroxychloroquine or Zinc may be effective in treating COVID-19, like former President Trump did, and you get banned from the twitterverse. No matter that the American Journal of Medicine and numerous physicians now recommend taking HCQ and Zinc to help prevent or alleviate the effects of the coronavirus. Hell, I got put in Twitter jail—on two separate occasions-- for breaking community standards and Twitter’s rules of conduct for…well, I don’t even know, honestly. (Twitter once even claimed I posted something I didn’t post. Was I framed?)

Yet, Taylor Marie Maloney, recently championed by the ACLU of Virginia as the “first openly transgender and non-binary person” to be elected student body president of Virginia Commonwealth University, posted on social media that she hates white people and advocates for cop killing, according to screenshots of the comments published by the Post Millennial. Maloney, endearingly also a Communist activist, has posted such bon mots as “ur reminder to advocate for k*lling of k*ps,” “riot, riot, riot,” and “i hate white people so much its not even funny.”

Maloney received a request from the Post Millennial for comment and did not respond, but in a tweet wrote: “I did say all these things.” Journalist Andy Ngo reported that after a black nationalist used his vehicle in an attack on the Capitol, killing a police officer, Maloney took to social media to exclaim: “love this we need more of this.” Not offensive in any way, apparently.

 

Moreover, the ironically named Gabrielle Crooks, a student at Stanford University and member of that school’s student government, took to Twitter last summer to state, “Yes I think white people need to be eradicated…” Twitter’s response was, apparently, “So she advocated for genocide…big whoop. Lobbying for a holocaust against people solely because of their skin color isn’t really that bad, as long as their skin color is white.” In Twitter’s perverted view, publicly calling for the deaths of roughly 850 million people is not as egregious as, say, pointing out that there were numerous credible examples of malfeasance in the 2020 presidential election or wishing that Nancy Pelosi would suffer an ice cream headache from time to time.

 

Crooks’ student senate page biography states that she aspires to be a “human rights attorney” so she can “address racial violence.” Of course it does.

She is, apparently, seeking re-election to the student senate even as I write this. In her official candidate statement, Crooks accuses Stanford University of having “serious problems with regard to race.”

 

She is certainly right about that, but for reasons she probably can’t conceive.

 

Professor Says Heterosexuality Is "Tragic"

 

Jane Ward, Sexuality Studies Professor at the University of California-Riverside, was recently featured in an Insider article in which she stated, "It really looks like straight men and women don't like each other very much, that women spend so much time complaining about men, and we still have so much evidence of misogyny. From an LGBT perspective, [being straight] looks actually very tragic." The article, titled “Why heterosexual relationships are so bad for us, according to a sex researcher,” cites an increase in relationship problems among straight couples since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent lockdown-- but says nothing of homosexual couples. Being straight is “very tragic,” and “so bad for us?” That doesn’t seem very welcoming, reassuring and inclusive. In fact, it seems judgmental and intolerant. Condescending. A macroaggression.

Ward also said, "I think in some ways the pandemic is revealing the tragedy of heterosexuality to people who might not have otherwise paid attention to it.” Well, it’s hard to keep track of all the tragedies happening lately. I wonder where The Tragedy of Heterosexuality ranks in comparison to other tragedies such as The Worldwide Pandemic, massive unemployment, the skyrocketing crime and suicide rates, the opioid crisis, terrorism, societal loss of purpose and confidence, etc., etc.?

She told Campus Reform via email that, “Research on heterosexual marital satisfaction over the life course shows that straight couples are struggling to balance work and family obligations, and this leads to frustration and resentment for many straight women, in particular.” Well, gay people and couples do earn more on average than their straight counterparts, and have fewer children to suck up their income, so perhaps they are fairing better in that respect.

She also claims heterosexuality pushes straight men to objectify women because they are seen as more masculine when they do so. She labels this phenomenon the “misogyny paradox,” and says it leads to a lack of respect for women. And we know that gays and lesbians never objectify men or women, really don’t care about physical appearance or attributes at all. Just as straight women never wish to be objectified nor ever objectify men…as we know from stupefyingly successful books such as the Fifty Shades series and television shows such as the Bachelor.

Ward, who teaches courses focusing on feminist, queer, and heterosexuality studies, has also written a book, called The Tragedy of Heterosexuality, that a school-sponsored event promoted last fall.

Those who believe in traditional values are being summarily silenced, but it is okay—indeed fashionable—to decry heterosexuality. Amazing. Ward, who purports to “love straight people,” is, I’m sure, “pro-choice,” i.e. a big fan of abortion. Sense a theme?

Those who think that the way all life was designed to be created is “tragic” are beyond the pale. Complementarity is beautiful. Symbiosis. Mutually beneficial. Win-win. Yin-Yang. Screw-nut, peanut butter-jelly. Male-female. Is heterosexuality tragic for all other animal species, too? Or would it perhaps be more tragic if there were no males, females, complimentary sex organs, other animals or people? No…them. Nothing. Or at least no one to perceive anything.

The tragedy of heterosexuality? The tragedy of reproduction? The tragedy of Genesis? The tragedy of being?

No.

This is hate speech. It is evil. It is incitement. It is unscientific. It is fake news.

It is the tragedy of mental illness.

 

Vaccine Terrorism

 

Those on the left are increasingly aggressive in their insistence that each and every one of us, regardless of age or health, get vaccinated. Whether it’s the Biden Administration, Dr. Fauci, “educators,” or members of the lamestream media, if they are proponents of Big Government, they want us to present arms and take a dose…or two.

 

Recently, Sunny Hostin of "The View" said that Americans who don’t wish to be injected with a COVID-19 vaccine should be “shunned,” specifically calling out "white evangelicals" and "Republicans." As someone who has considered getting vaccinated, it is concerning to me who is demanding we all submit to getting jabbed. When the Joy Behars, Don Lemons, Brian Stelters, Chris Cuomos…and Sunny Hostins of the world are highly motivated to force others to do something, it should give all of us pause. The vaccines are fantastically effective they say, so It is especially odd that now that anybody who wants to get vaccinated can easily and quickly do so, that isn’t enough. Forget herd immunity, we all still have to wear masks, at least until every last American citizen has been inoculated. They have moved the goalposts so many times, the posts have long since exited the stadium.

 

Perhaps these “elites” truly are solely concerned with our health and happiness. Their track record does not inspire much hope that this is the case, however. They have habitually utilized The Tyranny of Fears to scare others into ceding them even more power. “If you all get vaccinated, things can return to normal…sort of,” they say. It is hard to fathom that the same people who jumped at the chance to take away our freedoms-- when they sensed that we’d let them-- now wish to set us all free again…sort of.

 

“Don’t be selfish,” they say, get vaccinated. Is it really selfish not to potentially expose oneself to blood clots, Bell’s palsy, menstruation and reproductive issues, and assorted other possible afflictions?

 

What ever happened to “my body, my choice?” Progressives are pro-choice when choosing to end another’s life for their own convenience, but entirely unwilling to grant others the autonomy to decide what, if any, potent drugs/serums/RNA tweakers they allow into their bodies, even though the long-term effects are currently unknown and unknowable.  Preposterous.

 

Moreover, if you refuse to comply with their wishes and remain unvaccinated, you may never have your freedoms reinstated.

 

Do these emergency vaccines alone legitimize the Constitution? Do our rights come from them? Or do the vaccines come from God?

What we really need is a vaccine that will inoculate us against the most dangerous pandemic of all: anti-American Derangement Syndrome (AADS.)

How would leftists react if we tried to force them to take that vaccine? 

 

Welcome Back, Carter?

 

Welcome back, Carter.

Anyone want to party like it’s 1979? Okay, at least in 1979 we weren’t locked down, masked up, and socially distanced. But, other than that, there wasn’t much to celebrate. The economy was in the tank, inflation was rampant, gas lines were long, daubers were down, and no one in the White House knew what to do about any of it. A new term had to be coined for something thought impossible/oxymoronic…”stagflation.” Yes, even as the economy was slowing down, inflation was rampant, an unprecedented pairing of economic indicators.

And today? The economy is in the tank, inflation is rampant, gas lines are getting long in some areas, daubers are down, and no one in the White House knows what to do about any of it. It may be worse than that. It may be possible that no one in the White House wants to do anything about any of it because it is part of the plan, the Great Reset, the elite’s desire to take the U.S. down a peg while/by reducing greenhouse gases-- and increasing intersectionality, multiculturalism, critical race theory, and other noxious forms of political correctness. And another unprecedented economic event has occurred: rising unemployment in a time of acute labor shortage. Only leftist policy prescriptions can yield truly miraculous outcomes such as this. Sagging economy and rising inflation, rising unemployment and severe labor shortage.

Well, at least we can look forward to the continued evisceration of small businesses, the utter destruction of our energy sector, the insolvency of social security and Medicare, and the bankrupting of our children and grandchildren…if not total societal collapse. “Which is nice,” to sardonically quote Bill Murray’s character in the 1980 move “Caddyshack.” 

Speaking of 1980, the Carter Era was brought to a merciful end with the election of Ronald Reagan on November 4^th of that year. Reagan restored America’s economy and spirit. Hope quickly replaced malaise. But, as the Gipper said, “Freedom is a fragile thing and it's never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by way of inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people. And those in world history who have known freedom and then lost it have never known it again.”

For one brief shining moment under President Trump, it appeared that America might once again regain its bearings and its purpose, both lost during the Obama Era. However, whereas Carter was a one-term president followed by two-term Reagan, Obama was a two-term executive while Trump was voted out-- or cheated out-- of office after one term.

In light of stupefying—and tragically effective-- Democratic malfeasance, and the degradation of the American public’s character and values on one hand and its apparent docility on the other…it appears likely that Reagan’s warning will not be heeded.

If citizens of the United States relinquish their freedoms, good luck to the rest of the world.

 

Welcome back, Carter! To that same old place from which we threw you out.

Welcome back, that you were gone we had no doubt
Welcome back, to that same old place where you strolled about

Though the names have all changed since you hung around
Stagflation’s back, malaise and gas lines abound  

Who'd have thought Kamala
(Who'd have thought Kamala)
And Biden would repeat ya’
(And Biden would repeat ya’)    

He is appeasing a lot ‘cause a clue he has not, he takes naps
He’s not Black, he’s a hack, Hunter’s on crack

And we’re on our backs, we’re on our backs, we’re on our backs

 

 

California Considering New Proposal For Math Instruction

 

The California Department of Education is considering a new framework for teaching mathematics in the formerly Golden State’s school systems. The proposed framework, developed by the Instructional Quality Commission, would discourage or prevent naturally talented students from being placed in advanced math classes. Why, you ask?  To combat "inequity” of course.

The education department purports to believe that the way math is currently taught leads to unjust outcomes and explains why minorities and women are underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematical (STEM) fields. It claims that the primary reason all California students do not excel in math is a "history of exclusion and filtering" that discourages girls and "black and brown" students from pursuing advanced mathematical studies.

The framework states, "There persists a mentality that some people are 'bad in math' (or otherwise do not belong), and this mentality pervades many sources and at many levels.” It avers, "The inequity of mathematics tracking in California can be undone through a coordinated approach in grades 6-12. Unfortunately, many students, parents, and teachers encourage acceleration beginning in grade eight (or sooner) because of mistaken beliefs that Calculus is an important high school goal." The framework flatly rejects a “color-blind” approach to mathematics, adding, "The belief that 'I treat everyone the same' is insufficient: Active efforts in mathematics teaching are required in order to counter the cultural forces that have led to and continue to perpetuate current inequities."

The proposed instructional guidelines urge teachers to focus on countering "racialized or gendered ideas about mathematics achievement.” The Instructional Quality Commission (IQC) says that, "The fixed mindset about mathematics ability reflected in these beliefs helps to explain the exclusionary role that mathematics plays in students' opportunities, and leads to widespread inequities in the discipline of mathematics.” Ergo, the commission recommends keeping gifted mathematics students in the same classrooms as students who struggle with advanced math. Yes, that should work out well for everyone.

The authors of the proposed new framework "reject ideas of natural gifts and talents" in the belief that these very ideas themselves create inequities.

No doubt that’s true. We need to expand this kind of thinking to other aspects of life and other endeavors. The NBA, for instance. The ideas of “natural gifts and talents” themselves create any inequity on the basketball court. The way the game is currently taught surely leads to unjust outcomes and explains why white people and women are so underrepresented in the league. It is systemic racism and sexism alone that accounts for this vast discrepancy and deprives so many white people and women from receiving the nearly $7 million average annual salary that NBA players make.

There is no reason to separate naturally gifted players from poor ones. I say keep them in the same league, on the same teams and on the court at the same time. Besides, "There persists a mentality that some people are 'bad at basketball' (or otherwise do not belong), and this mentality pervades many sources and at many levels.” And we all can agree that “Active efforts in teaching basketball are required in order to counter the cultural forces that have led to and continue to perpetuate current inequities."

              Pretending there are no possible differences in traits, skill sets or inclinations, whether among individuals or groups, is an exercise in futility. Marginalizing excellence—or even competence— always leads to societal disaster.

(The IQC will meet on May 19^th and 20th to produce a second draft of the proposal for review and revision.)

 

 

 

Breastfeeding Taking Back Seat To Transgenderism

 

              You probably believe that women have breasts for a reason and that that reason is so that they can nurture their children as nature intended and is the norm for all mammals.

              You would be wrong.

              At least, according to a pair of female academicians. A recent edition of the journal Pediatrics contained an article written by Jessica Martucci of the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine and Anne Barnhill of Johns Hopkins University. They wrote, “We are concerned about breastfeeding promotion that praises breastfeeding as the ‘natural’ way to feed infants. Promoting breastfeeding as ‘natural’ may be ethically problematic, and, even more troublingly, it may bolster this belief that ‘natural’ approaches are presumptively healthier."

              I confess I thought breastfeeding was “natural” in the same way that breeding or breathing is “natural.” In fact, I thought females of many species had breasts specifically so they could nourish their offspring. I thought the science was settled. Silly me.

Martucci and Barnhill “explained” that in the 1950s and 1960s, some women sought to promote breastfeeding in the wake of advances in artificial baby formulas — an action that the researchers find “ethically problematic” because it may “support biologically deterministic arguments about the roles of men and women in the family.” You know, like women should be the ones to breastfeed the children that came out of their wombs. Is supporting “natural” childbirth “ethically problematic” too? The nutty professors claim that those who suggest there are any “natural” roles for males and females or any norms of family life or organization possess a “controversial set of values.”

Martucci and Barnhill also purport to be concerned that such rhetoric “may ultimately challenge public health’s aims in other contexts, particularly childhood vaccination.” Huh?

The times, they are a changin’, and quicker and quicker at that. As recently as 2012, the American Academy of Pediatrics reaffirmed its stance that “breastfeeding and human milk are the normative standards for infant feeding and nutrition.” The AAP added, “Given the documented short- and long-term medical and neurodevelopmental advantages of breastfeeding, infant nutrition should be considered a public health issue and not only a lifestyle choice.”

That is, like, so 2012! We know better now. Screw the children! What really matters is that we don’t offend transgender “women” or arbitrarily confine real women to a life of mammary exploitation! And, anyway, dad, mom, mad, dom…it’s all the same.

The important thing is that we continue to deny reality at all costs. What could be more “woke” than that?

    *********************************************************

              Talk about “Deniers!” Claiming that breastfeeding is not necessarily natural or women-specific is bizarre, anti-science, and…anti-woman. How have less than 1% of the population been afforded this much power?

 

Senate Democrats Vote Down Amendment Protecting Asians From Discrimination

 

Senate Democrats recently voted down an amendment that would have barred “Federal funding for any institution of higher education that discriminates against Asian Americans in recruitment, applicant review, or admissions.” The amendment was sponsored by Ted Cruz, John Kennedy, and Bill Haggerty. Cruz stated: “This amendment is straight-forward, it targets the ongoing discrimination that is being directed against Asian-Americans by colleges and universities across the country.” He noted that many universities have been unjustly “denying admission to qualified Asian-American applicants in favor of underrepresented minority groups,” and added that the Department of Justice had recently sued these universities, until President Joe Biden put a stop to the lawsuits.

This isn’t the first time Democrats have treated Asian-Americans like second-class citizens…or worse. Think Franklin Roosevelt and the internment of roughly 120,000 Japanese Americans in World War II, most of whom were actually American citizens.

Louisiana Senator John Kennedy said, “We have major universities in this country that are discriminating in admissions against Asian-Americans. Discrimination is discrimination.” He added, “This is wrong, it is contemptible, it is odious.”

Cruz put up the amendment as part of a vote on Senate legislation called the “COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act” that would require “expedited review of hate crimes” by the Department of Justice. The “COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act” was proposed by Hawaii Democratic Senator Mazie Hirono and would “establish online reporting of hate crimes or incidents” and “expand public education campaigns aimed at raising awareness of hate crimes and reaching victims.”

Ironically, Hirono voted against the amendment targeting discrimination perpetrated against Asians by so-called institutions of higher learning, calling it a “cynical attack” on universities that seek to “increase diversity.” (Hirono’s legislation is awaiting a vote in the U.S. House of Representatives.)

To recap, Democrats are virtually saying, “We have to protect the structural ability to discriminate against Asians (and white people) if we are to finally eliminate systemic racism in this country. Anyone with a brain knows that not discriminating against Asians (and white people) is racist!”

 

 

California Rep. Asks Greta Thunberg For Parenting Advice

 

California Rep. Katie Porter (it would be stating the obvious to point out that she is a Democrat) recently asked 18-year-old climate activist Greta Thunberg what she should tell her daughter about climate change. The 47-year-old mother and elected Golden State representative queried Thunberg, stating: “I told my nine-year-old daughter that I was going to be speaking with you. And I said, what do you think about the climate change? And she said, ‘the earth is on fire and we’re all going to die soon.’ And I asked her how that made her feel and she said it made her feel angry. What should I tell my daughter and how should I help her and the youngest generation bear the emotional toll of the actions that we’re taking, fossil fuel companies are taking to destroy our planet.”

To which Thunberg replied: “And, of course, always the best medication against anger and anxiety is to take action yourself. So that’s what I would tell her. To take action herself, because that will make her feel so much better. That’s what it did to me, at least, and so many others.”

How do nine-year-old kids get the idea that “the earth is on fire” and “we’re all going to die soon?” It comes from teachers and the media, of course. And the likes of Greta Thunberg, Al Gore and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. People who benefit from making as many others as possible “feel angry.” People who are guilty of using misinformation and lies to further their own agenda, manipulate others, and frighten children. They are as guilty of child-molestation as they are of trafficking in fake news.

If it wasn’t for fossil fuel companies, none of us—environmental activists included—would have anything like the quality of life we have enjoyed. Gore wouldn’t have a huge, heated home—and pool. Thunberg couldn’t fly around the world lecturing people on the evils of fossil fuels and the imminent and existential danger of global warming/climate change. Ocasio-Cortez wouldn’t be chauffeured around in SUV limos wearing chic apparel and accessories. We would not have had the medical breakthroughs, ease of travel, technical advances, and time-saving gadgetry that we do. Our lives would be poorer and harder in every way. And shorter. Fossil fuel companies are not destroying the planet. Period. So-called “progressive” activists are doing everything they can to sow doubt, fear and anger--- in short, destroy society.

Greta Thunberg could be the poster-child for Planned Parenthood. Asking her for parenting advice is like asking Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez about the Constitution or Michael Moore for dieting advice. No wonder why kids are so confused these days.

It is time parents stopped talking about feelings and started seeking the truth. Maybe if parents grow up, their children will, too,

 

Anti-Racist Day Care?

 

According to Campus Reform, Michelle DeJohnette, a San Diego Community College District adjunct faculty member, is now running an anti-racist day care facility. DeJohnette, who is currently completing a joint doctoral program in education at San Diego State University and Claremont Graduate University, is studying “critical theory, culturally responsible pedagogy, anti-bias/anti-racist education, and issues of equity in early childhood education, focusing on preschool.” She is currently applying her knowledge of critical race theory and equity by attempting to teach it to toddlers at Village Kids Family Child Care in San Diego, where she is the director. The day care service’s Twitter and Facebook pages both provide resources discussing anti-racism in preschool education.

Speaking of education, here is the definition of “pedagogy”: the theory and practice of learning.

And here is the definition of “equity”: justice according to natural law or right; specifically: freedom from bias or favoritism.

Village Kids Family Child Care (or VKFCC as noted on its website) accepts kids aged from infants to about five years old. The theory and practice of teaching toddlers “critical theory, culturally responsible pedagogy, anti-bias/anti-racist education, and issues of equity” in a sane world would be this: don’t do it. Why instruct kids to be hyper aware of their own-- and their peers-- skin color before they are able to tie their shoes? “Teaching” them that there are two kinds of people in this world, oppressors and the oppressed, is itself a form of opression. It is likely to hinder or prevent their minds from dwelling on kids’ things and therefore from developing properly over time. Natural law is an important concept, but one that shouldn’t be taught in this context or at this age level.

Critical race theory, intersectionality and all the other leftist dogmas are antithetical to the concept of natural law/rights. They are based on…and directly lead to…bias and favoritism.

“Progressives” can’t wait to teach their perversions of reality and morality to young children. They want all-encompassing sex education in early grade school. They want drag queens to read to your kindergartners. And they want to start preaching “social justice” and “critical race theory” in pre-school.

What’s next? Anti-racist pre-natal care? Planned Parenthood pre-abortion classes to teach your never-to-be-born baby about systemic racism and the white, patriarchal society they will never see?

 “Before you terminate your fetus, teach it about intolerance and marginalization!”

 

 

Target Celebrating Its Own Destruction

 

Big business is so woke now, it not only is helping to sow the seeds of its own destruction, it is actually celebrating it. The very same Target store that was nearly demolished by looters and arsonists in Minneapolis last year recently put up a series of signs proclaiming that it proudly stands…with the looters and arsonists. The mural spans much of one side of the store’s exterior, and is comprised in part of three large signs, each sporting one word centered in a graphic. The first sign states “WE,” the second “STAND.” The third states “TOGETHER” amidst a background of what appears to be BLM rioters standing just outside a large burning building, fists raised in a triumphant Black Lives Matter gesture.

To say that a giant retail corporation openly touting a felony like arson is unusual would be an understatement, but company exulting in massive damage to one of its own outlets is, as far as I know, unprecedented. Target has, ironically and literally, made itself a target. Or, at the very least, agreed that it should be one.

The psychosis that has taken hold of many of our large corporations is the same one that has gripped many in the legacy media and entertainment fields. It has some similarities to the Wuhan Flu, in that it is a disease that was manufactured in academia and subsequently deliberately loosed on the country. The difference is that it was dribbled out of these “higher education” laboratories over the last few decades rather than being sent out all at once. Yet the damage it has caused has been far greater. Whereas roughly 98.5% of those under 70 years old recover from the coronavirus, a heartbreakingly high percentage of those afflicted by the Anti-American Derangement Syndrome (AADS) never recover. This loss of the ability to logically process information, separate truth from fiction, string a connected series of facts together to advance a cogent argument—in short to reason—is tragically detrimental not just to themselves, but to society as a whole.

Like several giant corporations, Target had a banner year in 2020 in spite of because of mandates and restrictions imposed on Americans by the government, purportedly necessary due to the pandemic. Unlike progressives, conservatives are often loath to boycott companies…because we have principals. But, even though we have a target on our backs, we do not have to carry Target on our backs. It is time these corporations stop patronizing us, and we stop patronizing them.

           It is the only way to effect change, and the only chance to save this republic.