WATCH: Left-Wing Protesters Mob Joe Biden While at Dinner

Bonchie reporting for RedState 

Left-wing activists from the anti-war group CODEPINK cornered Joe Biden while he was eating dinner on Saturday night. Viral video of the incident shows protesters shouting at the president and his wife, Jill Biden, as they sit in the corner of the restaurant.

Members of the left-wing group, which describes itself as a “feminist grassroots organization working to support peace & human rights,” are heard shouting about ending the war in Ukraine and lifting the blockade on Cuba. Hilariously, the servers that move in are all wearing N95 masks…in the year 2023 because apparently science isn’t a thing in Washington, DC.

Normally, I’d condemn such behavior but it’s hard to do so in this situation when Joe Biden and his party are the ones who created this environment. They laughed at Ted Cruz getting heckled and driven out the backdoor of a restaurant in 2018. They dismissed the danger Rand Paul and his wife were placed in when they were mobbed outside the RNC in 2020.

Things then came to a head in 2022 when far-left abortion activists were allowed to harass conservative Supreme Court justices at their homes, leading to an assassination attempt against Brett Kavanaugh. Despite pleas for help, Biden and his DOJ pointedly refused to enforce federal law, which prohibits harassing judges in an attempt to influence their decisions.

So yeah, I have no sympathy for Biden’s dinner being interrupted by the hordes that he coddled and encouraged. Perhaps getting a taste of what he’s wrought will change his stance on encouraging public harassment of officials? Oh, who am I kidding, that’s not going to happen.

It will be interesting, though, to see how the press reacts to this. Do they laugh it off as they did when Republicans were the targets or do they show their hypocrisy by gnashing their teeth? I guess we’ll see.

Meet the groups hauling in cash to secretly blacklist conservative news

Gabe Kaminsky reporting for Washington Examiner 

Well-funded "disinformation" tracking groups are part of a stealth operation blacklisting and trying to defund conservative media, likely costing the news companies large sums in advertising dollars, a Washington Examiner investigation found. 

Major ad companies are increasingly seeking guidance from purportedly "nonpartisan" groups claiming to be detecting and fighting online "disinformation." These same "disinformation" monitors are compiling secret website blacklists and feeding them to ad companies, with the aim of defunding and shutting down disfavored speech, according to sources familiar with the situation, public memos, and emails obtained by the Washington Examiner. 

Brands, which have been seeking to promote products online through multiple websites to expand their digital footprint, are turning to corporate digital ad companies keyed into global markets. In turn, some of these companies are contracting "disinformation" trackers to obtain private information about which websites they should purportedly "defund." 

The Global Disinformation Index, a British group with two affiliated U.S. nonprofit groups sharing similar board members, is one entity shaping the ad world behind the scenes. GDI's CEO is Clare Melford, former senior vice president for MTV Networks, and its executive director is Daniel Rogers, a tech advisory board member for Human Rights First, a left-leaning nonprofit group that says disinformation fuels "violent extremism and public health crises." 

"It's devastating," Mike Benz, the State Department's ex-deputy assistant for internal communications and information policy, told the Washington Examiner. "The implementation of ad revenue crushing sentinels like Newsguard, Global Disinformation Index, and the like has completely crippled the potential of alternative news sources to compete on an even economic playing field with approved media outlets like CNN and the New York Times." 

GDI's mission is to "remove the financial incentive" to create "disinformation," and its "core output" is a secretive "dynamic exclusion list" that rates news outlets based on their alleged disinformation "risk" factor, according to its website. There are at least 2,000 websites on this exclusion list, which has "had a significant impact on the advertising revenue that has gone to those sites," Melford said on a March 2022 podcast episode hosted by the Safety Tech Innovation Network, a British government-backed group. 

Along with similar organizations, GDI has been raking in cash as funding pours into disinformation tracking. Its charity in San Antonio, Texas, posted $345,000 in revenue in 2020, while its affiliated private foundation saw its roughly $19,600 revenue jump in 2019 to over $569,000 in 2020, according to tax records. 

One influential ad company that has subscribed to GDI's exclusion list to defund outlets purportedly spreading disinformation is Xandr, which Microsoft bought from AT&T in 2021 for $1 billion, according to emails leaked to the Washington Examiner. 

Xandr informed companies in September 2022 that it would begin adopting GDI's exclusion list to punish content that is "morally reprehensible or patently offensive," lacking "redeeming social value," or "could include false or misleading information," emails show. 

"To enforce this change, Xandr is partnering with the Global Disinformation Index ('GDI') and will be adopting their exclusion list," Xandr wrote to other companies, linking to an appeal "webform" for publishers to complete if they disagree with their "risk" rating. 

This exclusion list is developed with oversight from GDI's "advisory panel," which counts journalists, professors, and data scientists, according to GDI reports. Three advisers include Ben Nimmo, global lead for threat intelligence at Facebook's parent company Meta, journalist Anne Applebaum, who saidHunter Biden's foreign business dealings are not "interesting," and University of Washington professor Franziska Roesner. 

One source close to ad-buying operations in right-leaning media told the Washington Examiner that the outlet is on GDI's exclusion list, citing communications with ad companies. But the Washington Examiner was never contacted by GDI or informed of how it failed to meet GDI's standards. 

But GDI, which did not reply to several requests for its exclusion list, discloses in reports which outlets it identifies as the "riskiest" and "worst" offenders for peddling disinformation. These 10, which all skew to the right, are the American Spectator, Newsmax, the Federalist, the American Conservative, One America News, the Blaze, the Daily Wire, RealClearPolitics, Reason, and the New York Post. 

"The American Conservative had one of the lowest scores in the study for bias, indicating that almost all of the content sampled was either somewhat or entirely biased," said GDI, which did not clarify how its ratings may differ for websites publishing news or mostly opinion articles. 

GDI's "disinformation" tracking efforts, however, have even resulted in opinions being flagged. The organization alleged in an October 2022 memothat a Washington Examiner commentary article titled "The Left's gender-bending obsession is tiresome and absurd" was "anti-LGBTQ+" disinformation. 

That same memo singled out Amazon for hosting ads in the Washington Examiner.

Further, according to a senior executive at a company that buys ads in digital outlets, Breitbart News is on GDI's exclusion list. Melford cited Breitbart in her 2022 podcast appearance, noting that a "whole ecosystem of organizations" targeting the outlet has led to it being deplatformed. 

Topics that have recently spawned "disinformation" allegedly relate to COVID-19, anti-vaccine content, mask protests, abortion, and alleged voter fraud during the 2020 presidential election, Melford said. She added that "disinformation narratives" have also taken hold around the idea "that there's a corrupt elite working only for themselves, not serving the will of the common man, and that only a strong man can get rid of the corrupt elite." 

The Washington Examiner also spoke with a member of GDI's advisory panel who was granted anonymity to speak candidly about internal operations. The member claimed they haven't played a role in crafting the exclusion list but said that "disinformation" labeling, in general, could "definitely" appear to be cloaked censorship. 

"This is the concern," said the member, adding it "sounds plausible" that any website on the index's riskiest list would also "probably" be on the exclusion list. Other ad buyers close to conservative media who contract with multiple outlets, as well as tech analysts, agreed with this sentiment. 

But GDI has been transparent about its goal in labeling certain websites as purveyors of disinformation. The organization submitted a report to the United Nations that said it is "seeking to defund disinformation" and break "the incentive to create it for the purpose of garnering advertising revenues." 

That same report called on "governments around the world" to examine their policies for addressing disinformation and enact "stringent repercussions" for culprits. 

The "whole point" of the "disinformation" tracking industry is clearly to destroy "the reach, scalability, market, and even credibility" of conservative news outlets, added Benz, now executive director of Foundation for Freedom Online, a censorship watchdog. 

On the flip side, all of the websites that GDI ranks as the "least risky" lean left in their news coverage — minus the Wall Street Journal. These include NPR, ProPublica, the Associated Press, Insider, the New York Times, USA Today, the Washington Post, Buzzfeed News, and HuffPost, according to a 27-page report. 

The outlets purportedly show "minimal bias" and a lack of "sensational language" and have "excelled in disclosing and following their operational policies and practices," said the report. Still, many of these "least" risky outlets, such as Buzzfeed, promoted the Steele dossier, a discredited piece of opposition research that Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign fed to the FBI to link Donald Trump to Russia. 

Others, such as HuffPost, have published numerous stories boosting the falsehood that a New York Post story on Hunter Biden's infamous abandoned laptop was "Russian disinformation." 

"The Left’s censorship efforts are anti-American, and conservatives should oppose them regardless of whether they originate in the private sector or in the White House," Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN) told the Washington Examiner.

GDI is not alone among groups blacklisting certain websites while coordinating with ad companies. 

Another is DoubleVerify, a $4 billion publicly traded company that operates an "inflammatory news index" that clients can gain access to. Content from websites gets added to the index if it contains "blatant opinion statements in non-editorial content," violence incitement, or "the use of slurs when referring to public figures," according to DoubleVerify. 

DoubleVerify, which posted its highest revenue of $112 million in November 2022, does not publicize outlets or content on its index. However, Breitbartand Newsbusters, as well as the left-leaning website RawStory, have been included in it, according to a 2016 Wired report. So has WND.com, DoubleVerify told the New York Times in 2016. 

The Washington Examiner has also been labeled as "inflammatory," according to emails and an ad-buying source close to the matter. Because of this, the outlet has run into ad problems with Comcast, Facebook, and Google, among others, emails show. 

GDI and DoubleVerify are also linked to Integral Ad Science, an ad verification company worth over $1.6 billion that uses an artificial intelligence algorithm to rate alleged disinformation. IAS uses a technology that blocks ads from appearing on client pages deemed "too risky for their brand," according to a 2017 report. 

IAS, which partners with the GDI to evaluate websites, teamed up with DoubleVerify in January to assist Twitter with a "brand safety" operation, according to a press release. Through this new initiative, Twitter will be informed by IAS and DoubleVerify if the companies determine that ad groups share allegedly inappropriate content, TechCrunch reported. 

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

"Unfortunately, this leveraging of AI technology for censorship is the gold standard now," Benz said. "AI is the censorship workhorse, the secret sauce, and virtually no professional disinformation company in 2023 enters the industry without some AI tech aspect to their censorship scheme — whether that's AI for identifying posts, for flagging posts, for sorting targeted online communities, or for mapping interrelations between different targeted online communities." 

IAS has released dozens of recommendations through the years to brands on how to combat "fake news" and extremist" websites. One includes urging companies to "use a combination of exclusion lists," which it has claimed, separately, may not go far "enough" in fighting "fraud." 

The Global Disinformation Index did not reply to several Washington Examinerrequests for comment, nor did DoubleVerify or IAS.

X22, Christian Patriot News, and more- Feb 19

 

Got an emotional Tuesday and Wednesday ahead, so just bear with me.

Here's tonight's news:

With Republicans Like These, Who Needs Democrats?

posted by Pamela Garber at American Thinker 

Reagan’s famous refusal to “exploit his opponent’s lack of experience” was a class method of swatting away the petty political poking of using age as an automatic determiner of ability. Just as everything once old becomes new again, the conflating of age with skillset has been dusted off by both Nikki Haley and Sarah Huckabee-Sanders.

We all know there is some practicality to age limitations.  New football players at seventy and above exist only in fiction and dreams. But, one foundational tenant of our conservative ideology is that demographics are not tea leaves. A specific piece of demographical data does not automatically indicate or forecast other aspects of a person’s capabilities. That territory of cut and paste formulaic explanations -- where one piece of personal data is used to pigeonhole the entirety of someone’s persona -- belongs to the Democrats. Why are Nikki Haley and Sara Huckabee-Sanders borrowing it? The bootlegged explanation is that they are describing President Biden and other members of Congress.

Trump could not pay for a better barb. In terms of Nikki Haley’s campaign, what will she have to say about the savvy style of the ancient Betsy Ross? Maybe Betsy’s colors and proportions are gauche by today’s standards – what can you expect from a Philly gal older than Gen X, after all? Perhaps Nikki could take a page from Philadelphia’s Main Line to modernize our flag, since it is well over seventy. Then the crop of youthful presidential candidates could collectively rework Benjamin Franklin’s Poor Richard’s Almanac. Henry Kissinger’s insight can be better replaced with someone younger, perhaps George Stephanopoulos or Susan Rice?

In present zeitgeist, we expect the values of our Founding Fathers to be ridiculed based on age and race -- but not by conservatives running on the Republican ticket or already holding office. No surprise for the clever pairing of discrediting the competition with some purported handicap and then blaming this very handicap for the many grievances of others. But it is stunning whenever yet another opportunity for an adult discussion about the fate of our county becomes manipulated into savvy soundbites saying nothing -- and for this to be done by a so-called conservative who recognizes the stakes.

With President Trump in office, our country was off life support just a few years ago. America was doing well post op and breathing on her own. ICE was protecting her streets and the homes of her honest, hardworking citizens. Gang members were arrested. Illegal violent criminals were deported. Guarded neutrality was the extent of her military muscle in motion. Right to Try and other supervised freedoms were in place in her medical arena. Her economy was purring like a well-fed kitten. Made in America was replacing made in China. America was energy independent.

Smug psychiatrists called President Trump various psychological diagnoses the way bitchy housewives shout slurs on The Housewives of New Jersey. “Narcissist” was their favorite word choice for pathology-as-weapon, but putting the amount of narcissism needed for any public presenter at an American Psychiatric Association convention aside, what person who meets criteria for narcissistic personality disorder sits at a conference table, asking others to claim the spotlight? How many NPDs are collaborative in their presentations and work? Most essential, what does the adult son or daughter of someone with NPD look like in terms of their lifestyle and demeanor? Bruce Springsteen is relevant here as it’s “Hard To Be a Saint in the City.” Trump is no saint. He did business in Atlantic City. He was monogamy-challenged during his first marriage and perhaps at other times. Character as an issue is one thing, but not at the expense of losing our country. Though Trump has been elected by the media and local district attorneys to be the proverbial ham sandwich, he has not been convicted of a crime post multiple investigations.  He offered no new definitions of is-is. He is not an anti-Semite. No attendance of church services with Jeremiah Wright. He is not a rapist -- no requests for a female in his presence to put ice on her lip. No pictures of a “naked Trump” in Russia -- much to the dismay of Adam Schiff -- though perhaps an artist, maybe Hunter, could sketch something for a price.

He will have competition for the Republican party ticket -- fine. Can the so-called conservatives kindly debate Trump on at least one of the issues pertaining to the sovereignty of our great nation? Imagine having to ask boxers to use their gloves instead of pulling each other’s shorts or standing, hands on hips and giving youthful raspberries. When our Republican presidential candidates debate, let’s not have it look like they got lost inside a DNC convention.

Meeting Military Recruitment Goals

posted by Bob Saxby at American Thinker

Recently we’ve heard arguments that the failure of the military to meet its recruitment goals is a product of recruitment policy.  Politics are also held to play a supporting role. But these only address the surface issues needing adjustment.  The real cause is more complicated and rooted in the last thirty years of constant international strife.

The 17-24-year-old populace is the focus in recruiting.  This is traditionally where new military personnel are found.  So what have these people been bombarded with their whole lives?  Constant combat, bloody house-to-house fighting against a foe who seeks death as a reward, detailed accounts of every death, never-ending rotations through Iraq, Afghanistan, Africa and other trouble spots around the world.  Does the media shout our servicemen’s bravery, their commitment to national pride and support?  No -- they are shown as failures of our politicians, failures of our foreign policy, stupid for even joining and ignored at home.  Returning soldiers commit suicide at record levels because of lack of public and political support.  There is no end to the wars in far-off lands where politicians bloviate and big business grows wealthy. 

I spent 26+ years in green, so I know what the military can do for you and how it can help make you a better person.  That military is gone.  It died as we went to war in Iraq.  Vietnam was bad enough for politicalizing foreign wars.  The Middle East is worse. There is no end to battling a religion.  As long as one person believes, the war rages on.  Especially when some areas are off limits to attack, as were Cambodia, North Vietnam, and Laos.  Or Pakistan and Iran.  We never seem to learn that war is either all or nothing.  The military knows this simple fact;  politicians don’t.  Shackles are kept on the military so politicians can show their “leadership,” their worth as “humanitarians.” Reelection is more important than national security,  more important than body bags filled with our young soldiers. More important than destroyed cities we fought to “win.” Politicians bask in the sunshine of victories, even if they are only a product of their imagination. 

After years of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, after trillions of dollars spent, after thousands of maimed and dead Americans, what did the politicians do?  They gave it all away with the wave of a hand and the good intentions of our “all-knowing” politicians.  Our troops gave their lives to secure all those cities and villages.  We were proud of what we had accomplished.  Then the politicians left behind enough material to equip an army.  They embarrassed the U.S. internationally.  They stabbed our allies in the back and left them stranded.  Everything we had bled for was, in one fell swoop, thrown away because a politician wanted to smile into a camara.

Now, we have a Secretary of Defense who is a party hack, doing everything the politicians want to make it appear as if politicians look good and know what they are doing.  He is castrating the military with wokeness in the form of mandatory COVID shots and white supremacy eradication.  His worship at the throne of far-left politics is leading the military into insignificance.  As our enemies grow stronger, we are sliding ever further into incompetence.  And to add to our disastrous military condition, the military chief of staff is a left-leaning NeverTrumper.  What kind of an officer stabs his commander (President Trump) in the back by calling the Chinese and telling them he will warn them if Trump does anything to attack them?

This whole administration is anti-military, anti-American, and pro-incompetence.  At every turn, they further destroy our will to fight.  They further divide us as a nation.  The motive behind every action is the destruction of the U.S. as a unified, strong international power. One federal representative after another stands before the people and lies with a straight face, while the mainstream media backs them up like an echo in a canyon. The media told us that the Trump administration was the laughingstock of the world.  What are world leaders saying now?  Tell me they think the Biden administration is anything besides fruit-loops crazy.

Given all these issues combined, what sane young person would want to join our military?  According to what we have seen, anything we do leaves our soldiers, sailors and airmen dangling over a dangerous personal chasm with little prospect of a happy, prosperous future.  In the past, I encouraged young people to join and serve.  It was an honorable, worthwhile career.  Now?  I cannot in good faith advise our young people to raise their hand to become a soldier, a sailor or Marine. 

We are a divided nation torn by a minority who seek to destroy the principles that made the U.S. the strongest, freest nation ever to walk this world. Recruitment will again be strong only when we return to the principles that made us the world power that defeated the Axis forces of World War II.

Trained To Hate Their Sex And Selves, 1 In 3 Teen Girls Now Considers Suicide

Toxic feminism isn’t the only thing making teenage girls sad. 

The combination of social media and transgenderism 

makes them miserable.

Auguste Meyrat reporting for The Federalist

A new survey from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has revealed a serious spike in depression among teenage girls. More than half (57 percent) report feeling “persistently sad or hopeless,” and nearly 1 in 3 (30 percent) has considered committing suicide.

What’s especially troubling about this report is how it runs counter to today’s conventional wisdom. After all, our society allegedly celebrates women more than ever and offers abundant opportunities to girls. Furthermore, women are doing much better than men in some crucial areas, outnumbering them at colleges and in the workplace.

Moreover, strong female protagonists abound in popular movies and television shows. Women have more representation in politics and sports. Schools continually push girls to achieve and break glass ceilings. No longer do girls live in a world where they’re expected to find a husband, have children, and submit to lifelong domestic drudgery. They can do anything.

Of course, the fact that girls are more unhappy than ever raises some serious questions about feminists’ arguments. Would doubling down on attacks on men, ineffective diversity quotas in the boardroom, and expanded access to abortion help young girls?

To be fair, there are those who realize that feminism doesn’t solve the problem. Rather than feeling supported and encouraged as women, the incessant feminist messaging has left most of them feeling pressured and shamed into a lifestyle they don’t enjoy. Rather than wanting to imitate the girl bosses they see on the screen, many simply feel insulted by them. Rather than experiencing liberation by working outside the home, they are experiencing endless tedium and boredom.

That said, there is something else besides toxic feminism that’s making teenage girls sad. What has changed in the last decade and in the last few years that has driven young women ever further to despair? From what I’ve witnessed as a high school teacher, this would probably be the rise of social media and transgenderism. 

Social media is particularly bad for adolescent girls because of its addictiveness and promotion of unattainable ideals. For hours at a time, girls will scroll through TikTok or Instagram, studying the many ways they fall short, be it their intelligence, their looks, or their charisma. They are bombarded with each new trend and fad and behave impulsively because of their fear of missing out. Due to the immediacy of these platforms, there is little time to reflect on the content they’re passively internalizing. 

The featured images of happiness and material success they consume are utterly fake and frequently incompatible with the destructive ideas and habits that are inculcated through social media (like idling so many hours a day on their smartphone). Online, they are told they can have it all, but in the real world, this just isn’t so.

There’s also the narcissistic component of social media. Self-consciousness deepens into obsession when a girl has to produce a steady stream of videos, pictures, and personal beliefs for her peers and anonymous followers. As Logan Lane, a teenage girl who eventually swore off social media and started a Luddite club, attests, “I became completely consumed. … I couldn’t not post a good picture if I had one.”

Related to the problem of social media is the transgenderism movement, which argues that sex is fluid and that changing one’s sex will make someone happier. This idea has been incredibly destabilizing for female identity and has led to the wide-scale invasion of women’s spaces. Either a girl will begin to identify as a boy to win approval and sympathy from others, or she will cheer on the confused men who beat them in sports, change in their locker rooms, and boast that they are more authentically female than biological women. 

As for those who reject transgenderism as an irreversible forfeiture of one’s womanhood or a shameless appropriation of it, they will be subjected to charges of bigotry and all that it entails. They are labeled as trans-exclusionary radical feminists, or TERFs, who’re actively harming trans people with their hateful views.

Thus, transgenderism becomes a catch-22 that either irreversibly damages the girls who buy into it or stigmatizes those who reject it. Until one can thread the needle between these two pitfalls, it will remain an ongoing dilemma that continues to drag down already vulnerable young women dealing with the stresses of adolescence. 

Fortunately, there are potential ways out of this. On a cultural level, we could start telling stories of women with actual personalities and actual flaws. A great film that did this in recent memory was “Lady Bird,” a film that focuses on the relationship between a teenager on the brink of graduating from high school and her overbearing mother, who stresses her out and makes her feel like a failure. 

Girls need more movies like this that speak to their reality and fewer escapist flicks like “Black Widow,” “Wonder Woman,” or “Captain Marvel,” which set impossible standards for girls and have no message.

Judge's Take-Down of Kathy Hochul's 'Hate Speech' Law Is Important and Satisfying

Bonchie reporting for RedState 

Kathy Hochul’s dangerous and Orwellian “Hateful Conduct Law” suffered a major defeat, being struck down in the Southern District of New York by Judge Andrew L. Carter. That came after Rumble and a blogger teamed up to challenge the law in court.

The law, which Hochul originally signed in the summer of 2022, would have forced social media companies to “report” hateful conduct to the state (in this case, New York) and also have policies in place to censor such speech.

According to Judge Carter (Breitbart), that was a no-go given the protections afforded by the First Amendment.

“The Hateful Conduct Law both compels social media networks to speak about the contours of hate speech and chills the constitutionally protected speech of social media users, without articulating a compelling governmental interest or ensuring that the law is narrowly tailored to that goal,” said Judge Carter Jr. in his ruling.

The law, according to Judge Carter, conflicts with the United States’ “national commitment to the free expression of speech, even where that speech is offensive or repugnant.”

“The law is clearly aimed at regulating speech. Social media websites are publishers and curators of speech, and their users are engaged in speech by writing, posting, and creating content. Although the law ostensibly is aimed at social media networks, it fundamentally implicates the speech of the networks’ users by mandating a policy and mechanism by which users can complain about other users’ protected speech.”

It’s always nice to see sanity prevail, even if those moments seem to be happening less and less lately. New York’s law was an obvious infringement on free speech, seeking to have social media companies quell user posts based on vague, state-defined definitions of what constitutes “hateful conduct.”

As the judge notes, there was also no compelling government interest here. What exactly did New York plan to do with the information provided to them by social media companies? I think we can speculate on that given the breakneck pace at which liberals have shifted away from respect for the First Amendment.

In other words, this law sure seemed like a giant first step in outright criminalizing speech, by proxy at first with an eye toward direct intervention. Why else pass and sign a law that requires the reporting of “hateful conduct,” if the government had no intention of using that data for its own tyrannical ends?

The judge’s second argument is also prudent. By having the long arm of the government involved, mandating that social media companies provide a mechanism by which some users can demand the censorship of others is, in and of itself, an attempt to quell free speech. It’s not enough for the government to not directly infringe on speech. They are also not allowed to use proxies to do so through fear of reprisal.

But as my colleague Jeff Charles shared in his VIP post on this matter, don’t expect this to be the endpoint for left-wing quashing of speech. They never give up, and every setback is just another opportunity to push the ball down the field the next play. California has a similar law that needs to meet the same fate, and eventually, the Supreme Court will likely have to weigh in. In the meantime, it is vitally important that lower court judges continue to set these precedents.

Neil Oliver, The Government Doesn’t Value Human Beings – But Technocracy Cannot Replace Human Skill

For his weekly monologue U.K pundit Neil Oliver weaves the outline of how government officials, and the system creators who support them, have dismissed the inherent ability of humankind to advance itself without external inputs.

Indeed, in the biggest of big pictures the inherent skills and ability of the individual to overcome great challenge is factually a unique attribute to people, human beings.  We were born by the grace of a loving God, with a very unique set of abilities in the universe of life.  We can learn, discover, formulate and achieve great things when we focus as individuals on the issues of greatest priority.  Everything Mr. Oliver states in this monologue is inherently true, naturally true and empirically true.

Ultimately, as governments -consisting of people- and technocrats, again more people, attempt to subvert and replace unique human abilities with technological advancements, you always end at a place where a physical person with skill is needed to accomplish the mechanics of what the designed system cannot provide.

In very real terms, Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Klaus Schwab and every person who operates within the system of creating or promoting artificial intelligence, likely does not possess the skill to manage their own household plumbing or repair a broken weld.  WATCH:

Neil skirts around an issue that I have contemplated for years.  Just as surgeons possess specific sets of skills that can repair a human body, ultimately so too do blue-collar workers hold similar skillsets.

I can easily envision a time (it’s coming soon) when the average population is so critically incapable of fixing things, an outcome of diminished emphasis on doing, that the value of those who can fix things will afford them incredible income.

As technology continues to drive forward, the financial value assigned to irreplaceable physical human labor will ultimately invert.  Surgeons may indeed be replaced by machines, but robots will never be able to fix a leaky roof.  There are just too many variables and the technocrats do not think of such things.

Haley Stakes out Conservative Path, Says DeSantis 'Parental Rights in Education Act' Is Too Weak

Mike Miller reporting for RedState 

Following former UN Ambassador and South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley’s official announcement on Tuesday of her 2024 bid for the White House, political talking heads promptly made pronouncements and predictions about how Haley would fare and if she could stake out a successful path to the nomination.

Many wondered aloud about whether Haley would take it to the paint against Donald Trump — she won’t; at least not in the beginning — and how she’d attempt to draw a distinction between herself and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. While DeSantis has remained mum on whether he’ll run in 2024, safe money should be put on: “of course he’ll run.”

While some Republican voters suggest DeSantis should “wait his turn” until 2028, there’s no such thing as “a turn” in politics, and on the contrary, windows of opportunity can close as fast as they open. Team DeSantis is well aware of that political reality.

As to a path to the nomination for Nikki Haley, we got a preview of coming attractions on Friday when the former Trump official declared that Gov. DeSantis’s Parental Rights in Education Act doesn’t go far enough.

As reported by Fox News, Haley highlighted the controversial Florida law, which critics have dubbed the “don’t say gay” bill, in comments at a packed town hall in New Hampshire on Thursday.

There was all this talk about the Florida bill — the ‘don’t say gay bill.’ Basically what it said was you shouldn’t be able to talk about gender before third grade. I’m sorry. I don’t think that goes far enough. When I was in school you didn’t have sex ed until 7th grade. And even then, your parents had to sign whether you could take the class. That’s a decision for parents to make.

The audience applauded in approval.

On the other hand, DeSantis has seen his popularity soar among conservatives across the country over the past three years due in large part to his forceful pushback against draconian COVID pandemic restrictions, his standing up to public schools, the media, and corporations, most notably Disney. Moreover, the popular Florida governor garnered national attention in 2022 for signing the parental rights legislation into law.

Haley was asked by Fox News Digital if she thought the national praise heaped on DeSantis for the parental rights bill and other culture wars actions are warranted. She replied: “I think Ron’s been a good governor. I just think that third grade’s too young. We should not be talking to kids in elementary school about gender, period.” She continued:

And if you are going to talk to kids about it, you need to get the parents’ permission to do that. That is something between a parent and a child. That is not something that schools need to be teaching. Schools need to be teaching reading and math and science. They don’t need to be teaching whether they think you’re a boy or a girl.

As a political writer, it sometimes strikes me how we often write from nuanced positions about controversial issues as radical as the left’s metastasis within the public education system in a brazen attempt to gain control of America’s young children through indoctrination, when we should instead be screaming from rooftops about the left’s broader goal of destroying America as we know it, but I digress.

Finally, while Haley hasn’t directly gone after Trump —yet — the same can’t be said in reverse. As my colleague Becca Lower reported on Wednesday, Team Trump attempted to smear Trump’s former UN Ambassador with an out-of-context quote about Hillary Clinton.

In addition, the expected personal attack against Haley, courtesy of Taylor Budowich, head of Make America Great Again Inc.:

Nikki Haley is just another career politician. She started out as a Never Trumper before resigning to serve in the Trump admin. She then resigned early to go rake in money on corporate boards. Now, she’s telling us she represents a ‘new generation.’ Sure just looks like more of the same, a career politician whose only fulfilled commitment is to herself.

I’d point out the irony of that last sentence, given where it came from, but let’s just leave it alone — for now.

Leftists Have a Huge Problem With Florida Removing Pornographic Material From the Classroom

posted by Jeff Charles at RedStateVIP 

Progressives are not happy about Florida’s effort to ensure that small children are not being exposed to inappropriate material in schools. Ever since the state’s legislature passed the Parental Rights in Education legislation, they have been railing against Gov. Ron DeSantis and Republican state lawmakers, claiming, without evidence, that they are targeting members of the LGBTQ community.

In the latest episode of “Let’s Get Mad at People Who Don’t Want Pornography In Schools,” a Florida teacher was placed on administrative leave after he filmed a series of TikTok videos featuring his students spreading his “pro-pornography for kids” propaganda.

Florida’s Voice reported:

Orange County Public Schools announced a middle school teacher would be placed on administrative leave after using students as “political props” in TikTok videos that implied Florida schools were banning books such as dictionaries.

Howard Middle School Language Arts teacher Ethan Hooper posted videos of skits with his students acting out that Florida had banned books such as dictionaries and Harry Potter.

Libs of TikTok posted a montage of the videos on Twitter. The educator removed the videos, after Florida’s Voice reached out to the school district asking “whether it was appropriate behavior for a teacher.”

Superintendent Maria Vazquez said she was “appalled at the behavior and judgment of the teacher” who used “students as political props.”

“This is not free speech — it is the exploitation of our students for political purposes and it will not be tolerated in our school district,” she added.

Orange County Public Schools Media Manager Michael Ollendorf insisted that the district would “not tolerate” teachers exploiting children for political purposes.

“Any employee of who creates videos or other content with students in an effort to exploit them for political purposes will be immediately removed from the classroom, placed on administrative leave and swift action will be taken to terminate employment,” he said.

The videos were titled “P.O.V. A Florida Classroom” and showed the teacher encouraging students to repeat that they “shall not read books” and that “books are bad.”

In another video, he pretended to ban “Harry Potter,” books with “a black boy,” along with others.

“About to run up on these kids and start banning these books right away,” Hooper said in one of the videos, before going into his classroom.

It appears Hooper was parroting one of the talking points that progressives are using to defend inappropriate materials in classrooms and school libraries. They claim conservative politicians like DeSantis are guilty of “book banning,” in a not-so-subtle reference to Nazi Germany.

DeSantis’ administration recently announced that over 20 schools removed books in the past school year that “contained pornography, violence, or were not appropriate for the grade level,” according to Florida’s Voice.

The Daily Signal reported that “[a]n overwhelming majority of books removed from Florida Schools since the beginning of the academic year in September 2022 were pornographic, violent, or inappropriate for students’ grade levels.”

This number comes from the state’s Education Department.

Indeed, Jeremy Redfern, a deputy press secretary for Gov. DeSantis, posted images of some of the books in question. One of these was a book titled “It’s Perfectly Normal,” which is intended for 10-year-old children. The book features graphic depictions of sexual acts and encourages readers to masturbate.

“Many people masturbate. Many don’t. Whether you masturbate or not is your choice. Masturbating is perfectly normal,” one section reads.

In another, the author notes that “Most often, people have sexual intercourse because it feels good.”

Another passage reads: “Another kind of sexual intercourse happens when the sexual parts of two people who have female bodies touch or when the sexual parts of two people who have male bodies touch.”

Redfern’s thread also shows other books featuring material that is inappropriate for small children.

Nevertheless, progressives still continue to cry foul against schools removing sexual content from the classroom, claiming that the issue is overblown. But the fact that folks like Libs of TikTok and other continue exposing videos made by teachers boasting about discussing their sexuality with children has blown up that particular narrative.