A poll came out not too long ago that set off a flurry of condemnations on social media. The results showed that only 45% of Republicans now trust “science” as an authority about various issues.
The poll, conducted by Gallup, showed a stark divergence among partisan groups, with Democrats trusting “science” at a 79% clip, up from 67% in 1975. Republicans, on the other hand, dropped by 30% from a high of 72% in 1975.
The reactions were predictable. “Look at these stupid Republican rubes” they shouted from the security of their blue-checkmark accounts on Twitter. But what those hysterical takes failed to take into account is that trust is earned, not adorned via academic credentialism. If someone with a Ph.D. next to their name says something objectively false, you do not owe that person your respect, whether they are with the CDC or your local hospital.
On that note, perhaps the starkest example of why Republicans are actually justified in their distrust of the scientific community appeared Friday via an announcement from WebMD, one of the largest medical repositories on the internet, this week. The American Medical Association (AMA) has endorsed the idea that biological sex should not appear on birth certificates.
Why do Republicans not trust science? It’s a total mystery, right?
It’s hard to think of a group of people who have fallen so far, so fast because of their own idiocy than those who consider themselves part of the scientific community, including the medical corners of it. Obviously, Dr. Anthony Fauci is the leader on that front, but things don’t just stop with incoherent, inconsistent pronouncements about COVID-19.
These kinds of attempts to obscure biological truth are not just contrary to the facts, they are dangerous. Biology is not a social-contruct. It has real-world connotations that can be deadly when they are not observed.
The existence of birth defects does not negate the reality of biological sex. Even the most severe still result in a person technically being male or female at a genetic level, which is vital when it comes to treating certain illnesses and taking preventative medical measures. No, the presence of ovaries does not alone dictate biological sex. No one has ever claimed that. Yet, the presence of biological sex is an undeniable fact with far-reaching implications that must be heeded.
Regardless, if the counter-argument is that some tiny percentage of children are born without any ability to clearly define their sex at birth, those specific instances should be dealt with in a specific manner. Punting the entire idea of biological sex in relation to birth certificates is like cutting off one’s arm to remove a splinter. If there are exceptions, you handle them as exceptions. You don’t throw the entire field of medical science into chaos to soothe the concerns of far-left activists.
Returning back to the broader point, though, it’s clear that Republicans have been more than vindicated in their distrust of our current scientific establishment. The “experts” have far too often turned out to be partisans bending the knee to their chosen ideologies instead of objective reality. That’s untenable, especially when they, at the same time, demand unquestioned adherence to the proclamations of their various fields. Again, trust is earned. It is not bestowed by a credential or a CNN appearance.
In short, it is not the fault of Republicans that they don’t trust the scientific community. It is the fault of the scientific community for so betraying the tenets of science, whether we are talking about mask-wearing for the vaccinated or the erasure of biological sex. When science decides that politics should take priority over facts, they should expect a political response.
These tyrannical Leftists want to destroy America and real Americans.
Article by Rick Moran in PJMedia
Coming Soon: A 'No Buy List' for Conservatives and Other 'Hate Groups'
Suppose you’re doing a little online shopping and see a nice pair of
shoes you want to buy. But when it comes to the payment part of the
transaction, you are rejected. Your PayPal account is frozen. Your
credit cards may be canceled. And forget to try a crowdfunding site like
GoFundMe as an alternative.
You haven’t been hacked. Your personal finances have been
de-platformed. You have become a non-person in the international
financial community because somewhere someone determined that you were
spouting “hate speech.”
Perhaps you’re pro-life? That’s an anti-woman point of view and will
not be tolerated. Do you support a traditional view of marriage? Begone
from Amazon, hateful one!
The reclassification of political opponents as hate
groups has been enabled by expansive redefinitions of terms like racism,
segregation and white supremacy. When “segregation” can be used in The New York Times to describe a 70% Asian school like Stuyvesant; when the notion of color-blindness is considered racist by
influential intellectuals like Ibram X. Kendi; and when “white
supremacy” has been used to describe any support for any policy that can
result in disparate outcomes, then a broad range of organizations can
be lumped in with truly vile ones. Until now, these over-categorizations
were largely a case of rhetorical hyperbole in academic debates. Thanks
to Big Tech, they are now being operationalized.
The operationalization of de-platforming people because of the
exaggerated and overly expansive definitions of what constitutes “hate”
will eventually lead to restrictions placed on certain people regarding
their online financial presence.
The harm is compounded when the loss of speech rights is
followed by restrictions on the ability to participate in online
economic activity. Within days of the Trump-Parler cancellations, most
of the finance tech stack (Stripe, Square, PayPal, Shopify, GoFundMe, and even enterprise SaaS company Okta, which wasn’t used by anyone in the events of January 6) declared they were canceling the accounts of “individuals and organizations connected to the [Capitol] riot.”
Now PayPal has gone much further, creating the economic equivalent of
the No-Fly List with the ADL’s assistance. If history is any guide,
other fintech companies will soon follow suit. As we saw in the case of
speech restrictions, the political monoculture that prevails among
employees of these companies will create pressure for all of them to act
as a bloc.
In fact, according to Reason’s Robby Soave, the tools of oppression are already in existence.
Meanwhile, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and other sites will be expanding their
use of a centralized database that compiles extremist content for the
purposes of coordinated de-platforming. At present, the sites collude to
take down content that promotes Islamic terrorism—ISIS and the Taliban,
for instance—but in the future, it could be deployed against right-wing
extremism as well.
The Founders had the right idea. Rather than the government — or
anyone — trying to determine what might be acceptable speech and what
isn’t, just let it all out there — the good, the bad, the hateful, and
the sublime.
But that would require trust in people’s judgment. And for those who
believe their judgment superior to everyone else’s, that simply cannot
be allowed to happen.
The most cheerful headline I have seen in weeks was on Glenn Reynolds’ New York Post column: “No, Karen, we’re not masking again.” I hope he is right. I do wonder, though. I have no doubt that the second part of his headline—“A winning GOP message for 2022 [and] beyond”—is correct. At least it’s correct if it is expressed as a conditional: It would be a winning strategy were it adopted. As Reynolds notes, “There is a great deal of pent-up frustration and resentment over the inconvenience, the loss of freedom and the general climate of hectoring that the government’s pandemic response has created.” Indeed. And he’s right, too, that
It’s irritating to be lectured by officials who claim to be smarter than you. It’s infuriating to be lectured by government officials who claim to be smarter than you—but clearly aren’t.
The on-again/off-again claims on masks and vaccination are just part of it. Tired of masks? Get vaccinated, they told us. Now they’re saying wear a mask, even if you’ve been vaccinated and even if you’re associating with others who’ve been vaccinated.
And there’s talk of more lockdowns, which a growing body of scientific evidence suggests were perfectly useless and downright harmful.
As Molly Bloom exclaimed in a different context, Yes, Yes, Yes!
But to return to the question of hope, I am reminded that hope was said by some cynics to have been the last evil in Pandora’s pithos. It seems like only yesterday—in fact, it was just this past May—that both the president and the vice-president of the United States insisted that (as Joe himself put it) “Folks, if you’re fully vaccinated—you no longer need to wear a mask.”
Of course, that was more than a year after “15 days to slow the spread,” Anthony Fauci’s steady stream of contradictory, though authoritatively delivered, advice, not to mention the recent advent of (cue the scary music) The Delta Variant.
It was the New York Post,again, that cut to the chase on the latest (unless we’re on to the epsilon variant already) with its cover of July 30. “Insanity!” read its oversized headline and below was a large grid with a tiny bit of the upper right square marked. Of the 161 million people who have been vaccinated, only 5,601 have been hospitalized with the new version of the virus. Of those, only 1,141 have died. That’s .0007 percent. (And how old, one wonders, were those who succumbed and from what comorbidities did they suffer?)
Now it turns out that the latest CDC advice was based largely on an outbreak at Provincetown after the informal party time of “Bear Week” in early July. Andrew Sullivan treated the news with some portion of the skepticism it deserves. In fact, as another commentator pointed out, what the Provincetown outbreak really shows is that “even under perfect conditions for a superspreader event, the vaccine works spectacularly well.”
But even to talk about studies and statistics and “expert” advice is to assume that we are talking primarily about an issue of public health. We aren’t. Consider this list from Jim Treacher:
Absolutely do not wear a mask
You must, must, must wear a mask or you’re killing Grandma
Don’t leave the house or you’re killing Grandma
If you can’t avoid leaving the house, stay at least six feet away from any other human being you see or you’re killing Grandma
Wash your hands 20 times a day
Do not touch your face or anything else, ever
Get vaccinated so you don’t have to wear a mask
You have to wear a mask even if you’re vaccinated
When the above rules change, and then change back, and then change back again, shut up about it or you’re a stupid MAGA-head
Don’t forget to vote Democrat!
Of course, the last item is more often left unspoken than it is overtly expressed, but it is a sentiment, an assumption, that infuses the whole shifting kaleidoscope of contradictory advice. Treacher is right. “This isn’t about science. It’s about control. You will do as you’re told, peasants, and your moral, ethical and intellectual betters will continue to do whatever they please.”
I think Glenn Reynolds is correct that opposing the tyrannous spirit that stands behind the lockdowns, the mask mandates, and the smug, hectoring, politically correct demands for proof of vaccination would be a winning strategy for GOP politicians. Will they adopt it? Most will do so timorously, if at all. That’s my prediction.
Last year at Encounter Books, we published an admonitory book by Joel Kotkin called The Coming of Neo-Feudalism: A Warning To The Global Middle Class. Some people thought Kotkin was overstating things with his talk of an increasingly stratified society in which a tiny elite lorded it over an increasingly pauperized and disenfranchised mass. It turns out, though, that if anything Kotkin understated the trends. The weaponization of public health diktats, their enforcement by a vast and increasingly overbearing cadre of nanny-state bureaucrats, is simply the latest manifestation of the profoundly anti-democratic spirit that has taken hold in Western societies.
It’s all about social control, as Jim Treacher says. At some point, there will be a revolt. The longer the arbitrary insanity persists, the more violent the reaction will be. The question is whether we are at or are approaching the point of crisis. Will the voters stand for another lockdown as we approach the 2022 election? Lockdowns markedly increased the opportunities for voter fraud; 2020 showed that. That is precisely why the swamp is prepping us for another go. Let’s see if we stand by grumbling impotently or if, finally, we actually do something. I am not holding my breath.
Just six months into their administration, both President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris’s approval ratings are plummeting.
Biden took the hardest fall, according to a Monmouth University poll released this week, consistently losing points with the public each month he’s been in office. While the Democrat entered his tenure at the White House with a net approval rating of +24, his popularity with Americans quickly slipped to just +4 as inflation rises and illegal border crossings skyrocket.
A recent Rasmussen Reports pollalso indicated that at least 52 percent of likely voters disapproved of Biden’s track record as president. And while 26 percent of those same voters said they “strongly approve” of the progressive direction the president has chosen to take during his time in office, 42 percent say they strongly disapprove of the Biden presidency.
Harris also took a hit in the polls over the last six months after she failed to adequately respond to Biden’s border crisis despite her position as border lead. In a Morning Consult-Politico poll released last week, 47 percent of registered voters attested that they had an unfavorable view of Harris while approximately 45 percent claimed they had an unfavorable view of Biden.
An Economist-YouGov poll conducted just a week later showed Harris’s unfavorability rating was up to 48 percent.
A recent ABC News/Ipsos poll recently found that just 45 percent of Americans are optimistic about the direction of the country. The drop is nearly 20 percent lower than the 64 percent optimism polled in May shortly after Biden completed 100 days in office. The same poll indicated that 55 percent of respondents are pessimistic about the direction of the country which is up 19 points from the 36 percent who reported the same thing in May.
Article by Clarice Feldman in The American Thinker
The Three Horsemen of the Bidenapocalypse
In the Bible there were four horsemen of the apocalypse -- sword,
famine, wild beasts, and plague. In the Biden Administration there are
three events spelling the doom of this administration and the Democrats:
open border policy, inflation, and coercive unscientific public
health measures. Catering to the party’s far left has poised the
Democrats over a cliff from which I see no soft landing. Without backing
off, they’ve lost the favor of the nation. But backing off will
fracture the party and cost it its most fervent leftist wing -- indeed,
its most strident supporters are already demanding more.
Biden’s popularity sinks more every week
and Harris’s is not much better. Rasmussen reports the latest poll
shows that 47% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Biden’s job
performance. Fifty-one percent (51%) disapprove. The two polls on
Harris’s favorability last week show her disapproval ratingsedged out the approvals as well.
The Immigration Debacle
It’s
only going to get worse for the administration. While the major media
have downplayed the size of the stream of illegal aliens crossing the
border, they cannot hide forever the tens of thousands of illegal
crossings each month and that the tide keeps growing geometrically. Here’s a video of Congressman James Langford detailing the tsunami into this country.
After dithering for months, Harris, who was tasked by Biden with dealing with this, came out with an absurd and limp proposal -- asking U.S. corporations with facilities in Central America to be
generous to local employees and adding more legal pathways to
immigration.
As
Langford points out, however, the border jumpers hail from 100
countries all around the globe, so blaming this on employment conditions
in Central America doesn’t wash. Neither would adding more legal
pathways seem to be sufficient to persuade thousands of people from 100
countries to go home and wait for such unlikely legislation to be
enacted and even longer to take force.
Texas has ordered troops
to stop NGOs and others from transporting illegals through the state.
Only law enforcement officials will be allowed to do this .Despite the
absence of federal action to enforce immigration law effectively,
Attorney General Merrick Garland is threatening judicial injunctive relief
to prevent such state action. Should he follow through on his threat I
foresee a public relations backlash and a humiliating judicial loss.
Notably, many of these illegals seem to be suffering from COVID-19 and
yet they are being released by border agents and housed by federally
compensated non-government outfits like Catholic Charities in
unsuspecting communities. This at the very same time that the CDC,
Biden, mayors, some businesses and institutions are mandating
vaccinations and even masking for those fully vaccinated, along with
related restrictions. You have to be an idiot not to see the cognitive
dissonance in these discordant policies.
The Biden Inflation
You
also have to be an idiot to believe that cheap borrowing and flooding
the nation with federal funds will not lead to inflation, especially
when coupled with regulatory actions certain to raise prices. Or to
believe that it will be of short duration.
The U.S. Department of Commerce revealed that
a key inflation metric rose to its highest level since the early 1990s.
Personal Consumption Expenditures Price Index -- which the Federal
Reserve uses as a key guide for monetary policy decisions -- has risen
4% between June 2020 and June 2021.
Nestle’s, the world’s largest food company reports inflation is causing it to raise food prices. Other food and beverage producers are also lifting prices. Residential housing prices
are soaring and there seems to be no rational reason to believe this
will change soon. In large part due to Biden’s moronic energy policies,
gasoline prices keep rising. I can’t imagine strapped families will
miss the correlation between the administration’s actions and their
diminishing resources.
We got some new COVID-19 rules yesterday. They were different than
the rules we got the day before that, and I assume they’re different
than the rules we’ll get tomorrow.
To recap:
Absolutely do not wear a mask
You must, must, must wear a mask or you’re killing Grandma
Don’t leave the house or you’re killing Grandma
If you can’t avoid leaving the house, stay at least six feet away from any other human being you see or you’re killing Grandma
Wash your hands 20 times a day
Do not touch your face or anything else, ever
Get vaccinated so you don’t have to wear a mask
You have to wear a mask even if you’re vaccinated
When the above rules change, and then change back, and then change back again, shut up about it or you’re a stupid MAGA-head
“This whole pandemic has been bizarre for us,” said CDC spokesman
Dexter Park. “Normally, we put out recommendations like only cook a
steak well-done and only fry eggs over-hard, and people don’t even pay
enough attention to make fun of us, so people acting like what we say
during the pandemic matters is really confusing.”
The CDC is a group of bureaucrats used to working a 9-to-5 job of
complete pointlessness, making lists of recommendations that are fated
to be crumpled up and thrown in a wastepaper basket. Thus, the pandemic
turning them into experts whose opinions matter has caught them
completely by surprise.
“People keep saying our suggestions on masking are dumb and make no
sense,” said CDC regulator Lyle Howell. “But that’s all of our
suggestions on everything. We have to keep making recommendations,
though, to justify our existence and get a budget. But no one listens to
them -- not even us. So can’t you all just go back to ignoring us and
stop yelling at us? I’m just here until I get my pension.”
Martin Kulldorff, a professor of medicine at Harvard
Medical School and a biostatistician and epidemiologist at the Brigham
and Women's Hospital has listed 12 principles of public health policy all of which are in contravention of the administration's policies.
#3 Public health is about everyone. It should not be used to shift
the burden of disease from the affluent to the less affluent, as the #COVID19#lockdowns have done.
#5 Risks and harms cannot be completely eliminated, but they can be
reduced. Elimination and zero-COVID strategies backfire, making things
worse. theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…@JuliaLMarcus
#6 Public health should focus on high-risk populations. For #COVID19, many standard public health measures were never used to protect high-risk older people, leading to unnecessary deaths.
#7 While contact tracing and isolation is critically important for
some infectious diseases, it is futile and counterproductive for common
infections such as influenza and #COVID19. inference-review.com/article/on-the…@MikkoPackalen
#8 A case is only a case if a person is sick. Mass testing asymptomatic individuals is harmful to public health.
#9 Public health is about trust. To gain the trust of the public,
public health officials and the media must be honest and trust the
public. Shaming and fear should never be used in a pandemic. thehill.com/opinion/health… @camakridis
#10 Public health scientists and officials must be honest with what
is not known. For example, epidemic models should be run with the whole
range of plausible input parameters.
#11 In public health, open civilized debate is profoundly critical.
Censoring, silencing and smearing leads to fear of speaking, herd
thinking and distrust. scientificamerican.com/article/the-co…@JeanneLenzer1
#12 It is important for public health scientists and officials to
listen to the public, who are living the public health consequences.
This pandemic has proved that many non-epidemiologists understand public
health better than some epidemiologists.
If you doubt that the administration is getting blowback
from this constant, inconsistent, and unscientific messaging, maybe
this will persuade you. Friday, after the CDC announced that even
vaccinated people should mask, it stopped holding promised coronavirus briefings. Several federal unions
which are a significant part of the Biden base, threatened court
challenges to the requirement that both federal employees and federal
contractors must “attest to their vaccination status and regularly
submit to testing if not vaccinated.”
Montana’s legislature has
banned any vaccination mandate and Texas’s governor Greg Abbott has
banned any mask or vaccination mandate. I anticipate growing resistance.
It’s
hard to justify any additional government mandates for masking and
there is little reason to mask outside hospitals and nursing homes. I
see no constitutional basis for the government to compel vaccinations.
COVID mortality is down, natural immunity is up, there are easy, rapid treatments
for early-stage infections. Despite scare reports about the Delta
variant, it is weaker than the original and is likely to vanish in a
matter of weeks in the way of such things. At the moment, only about
.0007% of vaccinated U.S. residents
have died as a result of COVID. It makes no sense to restrict the
lives of vaccinated people in an effort to shield the unvaccinated. The
more the administration tries to restrict movement and liberty on such a
basis, the more pushback it will receive and the lower its
approval ratings. By dropping the CDC briefings, I think they're
telegraphing that they're finally getting the message: We aren't buying
any more of this shuck and jive.
A couple of days ago, I posted on how Twitter has weaponized its “community standards” to shut down any form of resistance to the narrative put out by the Biden bunch and will permit all forms of falsehoods so long as those lies and falsehoods support Biden, the Democrat party, and the media narrative.
Case in point, a clown named Eric Feigl-Ding, who has a huge Twitter following, tweeted out this TikTok video of what appears to be a near relative of the banjo player in Deliverance reciting made up “facts” about the impact the so-called Delta variant of the Wuhan virus has had on Arkansas hospitals.
Nothing this woman says is true. Arkansas’s ICU usage is essentially normal. Yet, Twitter allows it to be spread without restriction, even though it is deliberately sowing panic because this twit has to know she is lying, because the Biden bunch want panic to stampede the country back into lockdown and face diapers.
This particular lie is not unusual. There is a whole genre of “my hospital is full” stories. Sometimes the result can be hilarious.
Take, for instance, the case of progressive Democrat and, as we will see, liar Debby Burnett who is running against conservative Lauren Boebert in Colorado’s Third Congressional District. Burnett says she is running for Congress “to defeat the seditionist Lauren Boebert in 2022.” So I guess we can add nutter to the bill of particulars.
Keep in mind that despite the scrubs and crazy eyes, Burnett is a veterinarian. She also claims to be a part-time physical therapist at Cheyenne (WY) Regional Medical Center, explaining the physical therapy table and dumbells.
As they say, let’s go to the video.
Currently, Colorado is not experiencing a surge in ICU usage. In fact, the ICU occupancy rate is at or a little below normal.
Colorado has reported having 1,346 staffed adult ICU beds. 790 are filled by non-COVID patients and 102 are filled by COVID patients. Overall, 892 out of 1,346 (66%) are filled.
Colorado’s Third District’s major population center is Grand Junction. It is reporting ICU usage at normal levels.
Grand Junction metro area has reported having 38 staffed adult ICU beds. 19 are filled by non-COVID patients and 5 are filled by COVID patients. Overall, 24 out of 38 (65%) are filled.
That’s right. Five Wuhan virus patients are in the ICU. Five.
In terms of vaccination rates, Third District vaccination rates seem to be about the same as the rest of the state, and one of the two Colorado counties with the highest vaccination rate, over 70%, is in that district. (See the map widget here).
But, in the spirit of charity, let’s assume that Burnett is just misoriented and thinks the hospital where she’s a part-time physical therapist is in Colorado and not Wyoming. I mean, that’s a mistake just about any Democrat could make. So what do things look like there?
Cheyenne metro area has reported having 25 staffed adult ICU beds. 1 are filled by non-COVID patients and 12 are filled by COVID patients. Overall, 13 out of 25 (55%) are filled.
The ICU capacity in Cheyenne is significantly below the norm. It does, however, have an out-of-proportion number of Wuhan patients (or, more likely, someone transposed the categories).
Let’s review the bidding.
Lauren Boebert’s Democrat opponent is not a medical doctor and does not work on a Wuhan ward or ICU. She is a veterinarian who is a part-time physical therapist. She doesn’t work in a hospital in Colorado, so no matter what is happening in “her hospital,” it has nothing to do with Colorado. Colorado’s ICU situation is at or below normal. The vaccination rate in Third District is on par with the rest of the state, and one of the two highest vaccination rates in Colorado is in Third District.
Literally, nothing Burnett claimed is true. And yet, it is allowed to circulate as though it has some relationship to the facts on the ground.
Like many others, I have fond memories of my childhood. Whether I was marching in an Independence Day Parade, binge-watching the Power Rangers, or making gingerbread men for Christmas with my family, I had the chance to enjoy a childhood that preserved my innocence, an innocence that is unique to children and that, once lost, doesn’t return.
A subset of children growing up today will likely recall certain aspects of their childhood very differently. The left has, with a startling degree of success, endeavored to reshape our society by embedding their beliefs within the experience of childhood, overshadowing 4th of July parades with Pride parades, implanting LGBT propaganda in children’s shows, and supplanting gingerbread men with the “genderbread person.”
In isolation, any of these specific incidences would be unsettling, to say the least, but by viewing them in the larger context one reaches a conclusion that is just as unconscionable as it is unavoidable. It isn’t just that controversial beliefs are being thrust into childhood experiences, but that the natural curiosity, openness, and naivety that is the inherent disposition of youth is being hijacked to normalize a divergent sexual ethic.
This interest in children s not purely ideological, however. With increasing frequency, the obvious has become undeniable. Those who have a creepy obsession with involving children in their sexual tastes, and use any avenue at their disposal to do so, either have a direct sexual interest in children or want to run cover for those who do. The left has a pedophilia problem, and it’s only getting worse.
I was made painstakingly aware of this fact when I attended the 2019 San Francisco Pride Parade to interview attendees for my YouTube channel, which I co-host with a friend. One particularly honest marcher told my co-host that he is “down for the kink with kids,” mentioning later that he believed that “age is a construct.”
Another demonstrator informed me that child involvement in drag is “so cool” and that “there should be more kids doing drag” before saying that the statement “love has no age” is “100 percent true” and letting loose a Freudian slip when he admitted that a child drag queen who performed in a gay night club was paid in the same manner “you do with strippers.”
In case you have the impression that this is an isolated incident, take a look at this mashup of Vice headlines, which in several instances attempt to generate sympathy for pedophiles, obfuscate the definition of pedophilia, and confer legitimacy to “non-offending” pedophiles, including one pseudonymously named Ian whose job “involved children directly” and another called Gary, a man who “developed feelings for a three-year-old girl” but calls himself a “virtuous” pedophile who supposedly doesn’t act on his attraction. Gary was also a foster parent to three children and was subsequently accused of sexually assaulting one of the young girls.
These articles offer some rather striking context for other articles from Vice, such as one in which they fawn over “Photos of the Fabulous Kids of RuPaul’s Drag Convention,” which the publication describes with a fire emoji. As mentioned earlier, one of these children danced on stage for money in a New York City gay bar for a crowd of adult men, which was caught in a video that I can’t link in good conscience.
Lest you believe that Vice is alone in their attempt to normalize pedophilia, turn your attention to the New York Times article “What’s the Best Way to Protect Sex Workers? Depends on Whom You Ask” which opens with the line “TS Candii first traded sex at age 13.” No, New York Times. That’s called pedophilia, not trading sex.
The article reports glowingly on the pedophilic, serial rape of a child who turned to prostitution after “she was forced out of her family home” before “taking refuge with a group of older transgender women who became her mentors” and “taught her how to support herself through sex.”
Normal people would think this sounds a whole lot like a group of perverts pimping out a homeless child for sex. One has to ponder why euphemisms are being used to try and obscure that reality. Perhaps it is because the left has a pedophilia problem.
This type of perversion isn’t an isolated incident in the corporate media, either, with The Washington Post recently running a piece called “Yes, kink belongs at Pride. And I want my kids to see it” that is just as disgusting as the headline makes it sound.
Associate professor at Yale University Joe Fischel echoed this sentiment in his article “Keep Pride Nude” where he asks “What is the presumptive harm if a child …. sees an adult’s butt cheeks, or even an adult’s genitals or breasts?” Fischel then goes on to advocate for children to be exposed to a whole host of other perversions and speaks the language of groomers, which I detail in a previous article. He even tries to justify his perversity when he says “children might like it.”
The New York Times, Washington Post, and Yale faculty aren’t the only powerful players attempting to normalize pedophilia.Flora Gill, a biweekly columnist on “sex and relationships” who writes for GQ.co.uk, called for the creation of “porn for children,” which she calls “entry level porn,” in a now deleted tweet.
There’s also Netflix with its gut-wrenching film “Cuties,” which one grand jury in Texas indicted as child porn.
Popular left-wing personality Vaush also has a history of defending pedophilia, saying in one video that pedophiles who buy child pornography should not be held accountable. The “antifascist” figure also takes an interest in the “sexual dynamics of pre-colonial Hawaiian civilization,” where people allegedly had sex with children, despite there being “no culture of child abuse,” the implication being that pedophilia is apparently not a form of child abuse.
Left-wing openness about targeting children have become even bolder recently, with the San Francisco Gay Men’s Chorus performing a song with the lyrics “You think that we’ll corrupt your kids if our agenda goes unchecked. Fine, just this once you’re correct” before following up with “We’ll convert your children, happens bit by bit, quietly and subtly and you will barely notice it.”
They even sing “You’ll be disgusted when they start finding things online that you’ve kept far from their sight” in a not-so-subtle apparent reference to pornography.
Although the group issued a statement, claiming the song was a joke and just about “teaching young people to speak out against anti-LGBTQ hate,” it appears skepticism is warranted, if for no other reason than that the left has a pedophilia problem. As it turns out, a Western Journal report found that several of the performers’ names were also listed on California’s sex offender registry, some for acts of pedophilia, although it is possible these matches are coincidental.
Those singers might not be the only ones from this performance with a shady record. The song’s writers, Charlie Sohne and Tim Rosser, previously wrote a musical all about the pedophilic practice of bacha bazi, or “boy play,” which even the New York Times found disgusting.
The left has a pedophilia problem, and it’ll keep getting worse unless the right is entirely unencumbered by disingenuous appeals to “tolerance,” meaningless catchphrases like “love is love,” or empty insults like “homophobe.” Such rhetorical devices are not used in good faith, and treating them as if they are anything other than well-crafted maneuvers to undermine any sexual ethic that leaves childhood innocence intact is the height of naivety.
