Monday, May 22, 2023

Very stupid ABC soap opera goes all in on bad politics for its's (unfortunately) Season finale

 


Source: https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2023/05/22/abcs-greys-anatomy-season-finale-goes-all-in-for-abortion-climate-change-fear-mongering/

Continuing its pro-abortion storytelling obsession in this post Roe political climate, the two-episode season finale of ABC’s Grey’s Anatomy delivered a heaping pile of climate change fear mongering on its audience.

Only last month the series was pushing calumnies about crisis pregnancy centers as part of its near weekly drum beat in favor of abortion on demand at any time during a pregnancy.

Last year May, series producers and stars delivered a panic-riddled PSA warning fans that the U.S. Supreme Court was making “everybody afraid” over these “terrible times.”

Last December Grey’s Anatomy former series writer Elisabeth Finch even admitted that her habit of telling people the abortion stories she wrote for the series were based on her own life’s experiences was all based on lies and that she made up her stories about her hardships to “get attention.”

Last week’s season finales were no different for pushing the pro-abortion message as one segment of the show featured Dr. Miranda Bailey (Chandra Wilson) receiving a special award for being so active in teaching patients about how to get abortions, Newsbusters reported.

Dr. Meredith Grey (Ellen Pompeo) delivered a stirring tribute to Bailey ahead of doling out the dubious award.

Dr. Fox, in her infinite wisdom, has decided that this is the year to break the rules. For the first time ever, the award is going to go to a non-surgical project, even a non-nominee. We are in the midst of a national public health crisis in this country. I taught them. I taught them at my clinic. Right now, in more than half of our states, women are being forced to carry not only unwanted pregnancies, but unsafe pregnancies. They are legally prohibited from receiving care that protects not only their reproductive rights but their survival. And with these bans, doctors are no longer being trained in these procedures, life-saving procedures, that are used in more than just abortions. But there is one doctor who is trying to change all of that, one procedure at a time, one trainee at a time, whose groundbreaking work in protecting reproductive rights and training the next generation of doctors on how to perform reproductive care. Dr. Miranda Bailey, we would love to present you with the Catherine Fox Award for your significant contribution to medicine this year.

Granted, Dr. Grey disgorged a series of lies in her little speech. There is no U.S. state that has completely outlawed abortion for life-threatening conditions, for instance.

Further, only 17 states have heavier rules for abortions, not “half of our states.” Indeed, in the deep blue states, abortion rules have been further relaxed since the U.S. Supreme Court overruled Roe v. Wade.

But along with the constant pro-abortion theme, Grey’s Anatomy also jumped back into the climate change scare with a scene on a private jet in which it is claimed that there are more intense air currents because of global warming.

During the flight as the turbulence hits, Dr. Nick Marsh (Scott Speedman) says, “Well, it’s, uh, global warming. Air currents colliding at high altitudes, making turbulence harder to predict. In case anyone cares.”

With this year’s new episodes now winding down, Grey’s fans will have to wait until next year to see if the daily pro-abortion drumbeat will continue on the show.

-----------------

Additional thoughts: If there's a legit way to get this utter trash off the air for good, I seriously hope it's 1 day taken!!

X22, And we Know, and more- May 22

 



I went shopping today at the mall, and it took a very long time. Yikes!

I'm doing okay today, NCIS LA had an acceptable ending. Well, acceptable enough to hope for a movie in the future!

Donald Trump and the CNN Caper

American politics ain’t beanbag, and maybe never was. 
More than ever it’s become a contact sport. 
Trump is as tough as a defensive lineman.
 But in 2024 he won’t be playing defense. 


Politics is theater now, as Donald Trump showed during his recent CNN “town hall” interview, for which CNN is still taking heat. All the proper people are horrified, now. But they weren’t horrified when John F. Kennedy beat Nixon—though there was a wide, if not general, consensus that that election was stolen, in Chicago (which is why Senator Bob Dole wondered, in a letter read at his funeral, if he’d still be able to vote in Chicago). JFK was better at the theatrics that year: he was better-looking than Nixon; no five o’clock shadow; and he didn’t sweat under the klieg lights.

But Kennedy was a fraud, as was his central campaign theme: that President Eisenhower had allowed a “missile gap” to develop—a gap between the missile capabilities of the United States and the Soviets. It wasn’t true, but hey—who cares? Kennedy went to Harvard, and Nixon went to—gads . . . does anyone remember? Probably a forgettable college like the one that Hollywood actor president went to. 

But Ronald Reagan had skills, the skills of an actor. Oh, wait a minute: Reagan was an actor. That was reason enough for the glitterati to despise him—notwithstanding the Kennedys’ chumminess with a number of actors, not all of whom seemed appropriate as White House guests. 

Theater requires a number of different skills. Looks is one, but only one. Voice projection counts. As does—well, the sheer bravado of the actor. Can he carry it off—“it” being the part he’s playing?

Maybe politics has always been theater in the raw: quietly approved of by the intellectuals when they were winning, but not when they weren’t. 

When Trump beat “crooked” Hillary Clinton, the intellectuals were aghast. She had gone to Wellesley, and all the proper people were for her. Trump had gone somewhere else—does anyone remember? Wherever it was, he was obviously a boor, and it was shocking—shocking!—when he won. And all the more so given that two FBInics had emailed each other vowing (and cooing) that they would stop him. But it didn’t work out that way. Trump turned out to be a terrific actor—even if he was just playing himself. 

It didn’t work for him the second time. Joe Biden is an old man who was lucky in his third campaign and got himself elected during the time of COVID. That played to his strength: he was weak, but he could campaign from his basement, and he had a good, or at least satisfactory, reason for doing so. The press savaged Trump and hid the sins of the Bidens, father, son, and (holy smoke!) other family members as well. That won’t work a second time. 

This time Biden will have to be on stage. And on stage with him (in time if not in space) may be a consummate actor, a reality TV star, a man who can make up facts and lines faster than any playwright or ChatGPT could produce them. If Trump is the Republicans’ nominee, the 2024 campaign will be a show to remember. 

A Trump-Biden rematch will be fundamentally different from the 2020 setup. In that one, Trump was, mostly, defending his record against a hostile press and its lapdog candidate. In 2024, it will be Biden—or if Biden doesn’t run, some other poor Democrat—who will be defending the policies of the preceding four years. Talk about challenges! 

The list of Biden catastrophes, which are the raison d’être of the current Democrat party, is almost endless: the woke assault on basic American values (freedom of religion and of expression) and on good schools; an open border that invites crime and drugs; endless subsidies for the lazy; an aggressive racial spoils policy; woke transgenderism and sexual perversions in the military; stagflation, crony capitalism, and a Justice Department that punishes the innocent and ignores the guilty—not to mention environmental rules that will deprive people of gas stoves and functioning dishwashers. There is no limit to what the Democrats are willing to do to the American people.  

People say Trump lies. But does anyone lie like Biden and his people? How many times have we been told by Biden’s Homeland Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and by White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre that the southern border is secure? 

It is apparent now, and becomes ever more apparent as days go by, that Democrats don’t like Americans—would you tell such an obvious lie about the border to people you liked? Americans are a problem; they really are theproblem: they don’t act right, and they don’t think right. The modern Democratic Party exists to reform them: to teach them to live in the cold (where it’s cold) or in the heat (where it’s hot) and (coming soon) to eat bugs instead of meat. And to be nice little transies and to transify their toddler children as well. It’s sick, but it’s what the Democratic Party is all about.

Against that will be a litany of programs traditional Americans want: law and order, a stable currency, manageable interest rates, schools with separate bathrooms for boys and girls, a vigorous man who can deal with foreign adversaries; someone who will make it safe—as Trump did once before (so the story goes)—to say “Merry Christmas” in public. 

That may sound like low-grade stuff to John Kerry, the country’s carbon dioxide emitter-in-chief, who flies the skies in his wife’s private jet pushing a ridiculous climate change agenda on the poor slobs who have to fly commercial (yuk).

Trump has an edge over other Republicans, whether you like it or not. He’s the showman. He’s the actor. He’s the Kennedy in the race. He doesn’t have a five o’clock shadow. He doesn’t sweat under the klieg lights. He likes conflict. Conflict is his oxygen.

American politics ain’t beanbag, and maybe never was. It’s now a contact sport. Trump is as tough as a defensive lineman. But in 2024 he won’t be playing defense. 

There may be (no: there surely are) other more “attractive” Republicans who could be the 2024 nominee. But it’s not likely there will be anyone tougher. 

Whoever the Republican nominee is, he will be treated by the media the way Nixon and Trump were treated. That would be true even if the Republicans nominated Grandma Moses to run with Mother Teresa. 

The primary system will show us if there’s any Republican who’s even tougher than Trump. If so, let him run and wish him well. 

But the CNN-Trump event was a preview of what we can expect if Trump is the nominee. Take no prisoners. Shoot the wounded. Win. America may be ready for that again.

If you don’t like it, don’t blame CNN. Blame the Bidens. They made it possible. And likely. 



The Absurdities of Our Age ~ VDH

What cannot go on, will not go on and all the absurdities of the present will end with a bang not a whimper. 


A sign of a civilization in headlong decline is its embrace of absurdities. Unfortunately for the United States, we are witnessing an epidemic of nihilist nonsense. Here are a few examples:  

Reparations  

How could a dysfunctional state like California even contemplate $800 billion in reparations? 

The state currently faces a $31 billion annual deficit—and it’s climbing. Its $100 billion high-speed rail project is inert, a veritable Stonehenge of concrete monoliths with a foot of track.  

California’s income tax rates are already the highest in the nation. Its sales taxes, electricity rates, and gas taxes and prices are among the steepest in the country. And for what? 

Crime, homelessness, and medieval decay characterize the once great downtowns of San Francisco and Los Angeles. It is now not safe to walk alone in any major California city after dark.  

Shoplifting and smash-and-grab theft are no longer treated as crimes. The result is the mass flight of brand stores from our downtowns and inner cities, with all the accustomed cries of “racism,” even as racist public prosecutors pick and choose whether to indict the arrested on the basis of race.  

California infrastructure, once the best in the county, is now among the worst. Decaying and crowded freeways, inadequate water storage, and pot-holed streets are the new norm.  

The state’s public schools are dysfunctional. Once premier public universities are spiraling headlong into decline—junking scholastic tests for admissions, using illegal racial quotas to warp admissions, and institutionalizing racialized dorms and graduation ceremonies.  

Even if California enjoyed a huge surplus, even if 300,000 residents were not fleeing the state each year, even if California had a history of being a Confederate slave state, even if whites were the majority of the population, even if the black population was greater than its present 5-6 percent, it would be insane for the state to even contemplate racial reparations.  

Twenty-seven percent of the state’s residents were born outside of the United States, and have no American ancestors. The state is the most racially diverse in America, and one in which every group could, in theory, lodge complaints against the dead of the past. Mexican-Americans, Armenians, Asians, and the descendants of the impoverished “Okie” diaspora could all cite legacies of bias—but from whom exactly? The long dead?  

For those of increasingly mixed heritage—about a quarter of the state—did their own ancestors oppress their own ancestors? Are all blacks sure that eight generations ago their individual ancestors were slaves outside of California, and therefore they have monetary grievances against those in the state whose ancestors eight generations ago might have owned slaves outside of California? And can such writs be documented? 

Do we really wish to go down this path of destroying individuality and insisting that superficial appearance damns us to a collective rooted in the past?  

If so, are we to tally up the half-century role of racial quotas to calibrate all the impoverished whites of the last 50 years who were discriminated against in admissions and hiring? Have there not been existing reparations from the decades-long implementations of racial preferences and exemptions—or perhaps in some $20 trillion dollars in reparatory transferences during a half-century of Great Society entitlements? 

If we are collectives and not individuals anymore, are all of us to be judged by adding up our group’s historical and current pluses and minuses?  

If so, do we add or subtract reparatory charges based on group data? If one race is vastly overrepresented in hate crimes or interracial crime statistics, and other groups vastly underrepresented as perpetrators, is it the role of the state now to intervene and provide reparatory and collective “equity” from one collective for the relatives of the victims of another collective? 

Are we really convinced that past institutional racial bias is all-determinative of present opportunity? If so, why do Asians nationally as a collective on average earn $20,000 a year more than non-Hispanic whites—despite past exclusionary immigration laws, forced government relocations, and zoning prohibitions? Was there some university study that postulated that the Japanese-internment or early 20th century Yellow Peril exclusionary immigration statutes were irrelevant to Asian-American upward mobility? 

Inequality Under the Laws 

Ideology now has made a mockery of the cherished traditions of blind justice and equality under the laws. Whether you are arrested, indicted, and convicted increasingly hinges on your politics. 

During the 120 days of 2020 riots, looting, arson, and assault that saw $2 billion in damage, 35-40 killed and hundreds of injured police officers, and 14,000 arrests, were there mass detentions, thousands of convictions and lengthy sentences handed out to Antifa and BLM members for the violence? After all, the insurrectionary rioters staged iconic attacks on the idea of government, whether defined as torching a police precinct or federal courthouse.  

Why then were so many protestors of January 6 demonstrations at the Capitol that saw no violent deaths at the hands of another—except a Trump supporter lethally shot for the misdemeanor of entering a broken window of the Capitol—given lengthy prison sentences?  

George Floyd—a 6’4”, 223 pound black career violent felon, arrested while passing counterfeit money, serially high on dangerous drugs, resisting arrest—was choked into unconsciousness while resisting arrest by a reckless white police officer.  

Floyd was canonized as an American hero, often portrayed with halo and angelic wings.  

The officer was convicted of second-degree murder and is serving a combined state and federal prison sentence of over 40 years.  

A white Ashli Babbitt, 5’2”, 113 pounds, a 14-year military veteran, and, like Floyd, unarmed, was lethally shot for the crime of entering a broken window in the Capitol by a black policeman.  

Postmortem, her life was smeared and slandered, her shooter canonized. Was Babbitt some sinner, Floyd a saint? The choker officer Chauvin a Satan, the lethal shooter cop Byrd godly? The petite Babbitt a mortal danger stopped only by a bullet, the huge Floyd easy to arrest with no need of force? 

Why were the downtowns of Washington, D.C. and Seattle simply hijacked and expropriated by violent groups with impunity, while federal troops were forbidden to assist overtaxed local law enforcement? Was that not in stark contrast to the barbed wire, 20,000 soldiers and barricades that marked Washington for weeks after the Capitol demonstrations?  

Why was there not to be a 2020 riot congressional commission to investigate the deaths and destruction caused by groups who crossed state lines to plan and orchestrate the violence, often weaving their conspiracies with the aid of social media?  

Nullification 

Did we not fight a Civil War to reestablish that states and locales could not ignore federal laws?  

Why did 550 local and state jurisdictions, in old Confederate South Carolina style, declare with impunity that federal immigration law did not apply in their territories? Does the Left now believe in such neo-Confederate principles? Would it applaud counties that rendered federal endangered species, or handgun-control statutes null and void in their jurisdictions?  

Or do we now declare some nullifications good and others bad, depending on our own politics? 

How did the Biden Administration simply suspend all immigration law to greenlight 6-7 million illegal entries across the southern border since January 2021? Did Biden not take an oath to execute our laws faithfully? 

Does any president now have the right to order the executive branch not to execute entire bodies of federal law? Will the next president declare entire sections of EPA statutes inert by de facto nonenforcement to appease a particular political base? 

At any time, did Joe Biden send a bill to Congress requesting that anyone can now cross U.S. borders without identification and legal sanction?  

So do citizens fly into JFK or LAX from foreign countries and simply announce that they either forgot their passports or never obtained them? And as a reward for lack of an ID or legal permission, are they still allowed into the United States and given a free phone, and a free hotel room? Do we have one set of laws for citizens, and another for non-citizens? And if so, why? 

Rogue Agencies 

How can a former FBI director under oath claim amnesia or ignorance 245 times during congressional testimony, or leak a classified account of a private conversation with a president with complete impunity, as did James Comey?  

How can an FBI director, as did Andrew McCabe, lie on four occasions with impunity to federal investigators? Is it now the case that FBI directors at times must lie and deceive as part of their job descriptions? 

How can a former FBI director, as in the case of Robert Mueller, with all seriousness deny under oath any knowledge of Fusion GPS or the Steele dossier, whose controversies prompted his own special counsel appointment? Can citizens tell inquisitive IRS auditors that they have no memory of deductions in question? 

Why is there still an FBI after it has been confessed that it paid a foreign national, Christopher Steele, to compile dirt against a presidential candidate—and paid his source in Washington to provide Steele with false information to impugn a presidential candidate? How did the FBI manage to play a central role in the 2016 and 2020 elections in efforts to alter the result? 

How can a legitimate FBI knowingly submit such information that it knew was false to a federal judge to spy on an American citizen to further a farcical plot to destroy a presidential campaign?  

So what will the FBI not do? Forge documents? Offer in vain $1 million to a foreign national to verify just one fact in a fake, bought dossier used to obtain a FISA warrant? Disappear cell phone data under subpoena?  

Have high-ranking officials promise that a presidential candidate will never be elected? Infiltrate Latin-Mass Catholic Church services and school board meetings to monitor the activities of church-goers and parents in attendance?  

Use armed performance-art SWAT teams to swoop into private homes to arrest suspects accused of mostly misdemeanors? Hire out social media private companies like Twitter to suppress free expression deemed by the FBI unhelpful or problematic?  

Suppress information about an FBI-confiscated Hunter Biden laptop, while keeping mum as former intelligence officers lie absurdly before a national election that the computer in FBI hands was likely the work of Russian disinformationists?  

Destroy the lives of any whistleblowers who expose such miscreant behavior to Congress?  

Printing Money 

The journalist/historian Paul Johnson famously once wrote that the tripartite duty of any government leadership was “to ensure external security, internal order and maintenance of an honest currency.”  

We certainly do not maintain an honest currency by borrowing 130 percent of annual GDP, with a looming debt of $33 trillion, an annual $1.5 trillion-plus budget deficit, and a 2022 annualized 6.5 percent inflation rate.  

But statistics mask the real problem, which is a mentality of suicidal spending passed off as juvenile “modern monetary theory.” Unlimited borrowing as a “theory” is the academic idiocy that some socialist hare-brained professors dreamed up to excuse printing money we do not have.  

Both parties have run up the debt. Yet the culpability mounts as each successive president adds to the crushing debt, in fear that on his watch the medicine of restraint will be worse than the disease of insolvency. 

Note how casually the federal government burns through billions of dollars. We still have no idea how many billions of dollars in arms and equipment the military shrugged away in Kabul. Who cares anyway whether the terrorist Taliban is becoming one of the largest dispensers of U.S. taxpayers’ weaponry?  

Currently, Joe Biden lies that by not spending allotted money he somehow is the greatest deficit hawk in memory, as he rams through a $1.5 trillion 2023 budget deficit.  

The top federal income tax rate is 37 percent. In California, to take the example of our largest state, the top state bracket is 13.3 percent. Income subject to federal payroll taxes is 15.3 percent for the self-employed—and income subject to that crushing take is a whopping $160,200.  

The above taxes are well aside from capital gains taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, and fuel taxes, which, along with income taxes, can easily take 50-60 percent of one’s middle-class income. Note that the government not only does not appreciate the crushing extractions but targets for auditing those who pay at that rate.  

Adding insult to injury, our current White House occupant, Mr. “Ten-Percent”/ “The Big Guy” Joe Biden demagogues as greedy anyone who resents the wastage of federal spending after handing over half his income to the government. Yet did the Bidens report all their past foreign income and pay at that rate? Could Joe have ensured that his son first paid all he owed to the IRS before he smeared other Americans as not paying their fair shares 

A sane country would immediately reboot and update the old Simpson-Bowles reduction and simplification of taxes and spending proposals that would gradually work our way toward a balanced budget—and maybe, in a century, pay off what we have borrowed. But we know that is impossible since we would hear ad nauseam that such fiscal integrity was racist, heartless, and cruel.  

So we will keep up borrowing and printing bread-and-circus money until, like the late fourth-century polis, or late imperial Rome, there is finally no money for the upkeep of infrastructure, domestic law and order, and deterrence against foreign enemies. 

Then what cannot go on, will not go on and all the absurdities of the present will end with a bang not a whimper.



Devin Nunes Discusses Big Picture of Durham Report with Maria Bartiromo



SIDE NOTE: The Durham Report is 306 pages with footnotes and citations, combined with a 48-page *classified appendix* that will be available to House and Senate intelligence committee representatives who would request review.   Keep in mind – unfortunately because the classified appendix is attached with the same rules and regulations as attached to the FISC silo, we should anticipate the classified appendix to be reviewed by those with an interest in keeping the information within it hidden from public review.  I will have more on my review of the report shortly.

“We note that the Classified Appendix contains some information that is derived from Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (“FISA”) authorities. Accordingly, to the extent the Department determines that it is appropriate to share information contained in the Classified Appendix with congressional or other government entities outside of the Department, steps will need to be taken in accordance with that Act and any relevant Orders that have been issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.” {link}

Devin Nunes appears with Mari Bartiromo to discuss his perspective on the big picture issues within the Durham report. {Direct Rumble Link} – WATCH:



Tucker Carlson More Popular Than Fox News: Poll



Former Fox News prime-time host Tucker Carlson is more popular among Republicans than the network that fired him, according to a new poll out from Change Research. Carlson also beat out Twitter CEO Elon Musk.

Based on results from 404 likely Republican primary voters, Carlson scored a 59 percent net favorability rating. Musk trailed slightly behind him with 53 percent, and Fox News earned a negative 4 percent.

In total, pollsters for Change Research interviewed 1,208 registered voters via Facebook, Instagram, and telephone between April 28 and May 2. The poll was conducted with a 3 percent margin of error.

In polling reviewed by The Federalist, researchers found that the poll’s total group of respondents, which included Republicans, Democrats, and independents, gave former President Donald Trump and Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson the highest overall favorability ratings at 35 percent each. Among this total group, Carlson’s overall favorability rating was double that of Fox News.

Fox News fired Carlson in April, days after the network’s highest-rated host gave the keynote address at the Heritage Foundation’s 50th anniversary.

Carlson announced shortly after his termination from television that he would bring his show to Twitter.

“There aren’t many platforms left that allow free speech,” Carlson said in a three-minute video. “The last big one remaining in the world, the only one, is Twitter, where we are now.”

Fox News’ ratings plummeted after the network gave Carlson the boot.

“Cable news ratings show that in the two weeks since the host was fired, figures for Carlson’s former spot have dropped by around 50 percent,” Newsweek reported, “while the network’s audience among 25- to 54-year-olds had shrunk by two thirds.”

Musk, on the other hand, will be stepping down from Twitter as the platform’s chief executive but will remain the company’s executive chair. The billionaire entrepreneur named former NBC Universal advertising executive Linda Yaccarino to Twitter’s top job.



Education Secretary Cardona Claims Teachers Not You Know What Is Best for Your Kid

Education Secretary Cardona Claims Teachers Not You Know What Is Best for Your Kid

streiff reporting for RedState 

One of the themes of local races during the 2020 election was “parental rights.” Despite Hillary Clinton’s idiotic “it takes a village” viewpoint, most Americans believe parents are the final arbiter over their children unless they are demonstrably and dangerously unfit. The US Supreme Court has stated, “the interest of parents in the care, custody and control of their children—is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this Court.”

In 2020, though, we saw startling revelations of how school systems routinely endangered children by refusing to respect the primacy and even the legitimacy of parental rights. In Loudoun County, Virginia, we saw how the school system protected sexual predators because they alleged they were “transgender.” We saw a parent arrested (Loudoun County Father Who Was Slandered, Beaten, and Arrested Speaks Out) for demanding answers about his daughter’s forcible sodomizing in a girls’ restroom (Loudoun County Grand Jury Gives Horrific Report on School Rape, Concerns Over ‘Transphobia’). We were treated to the pornography mainstreamed into the school curriculum under the guise of “diversity” and “inclusion.” Children have been encouraged to adopt a different gender and lie to their parents about it. They have been subjected to activities that can only be described as pedophilia grooming exercises. The more pressure applied by parents and relatively sane elected officials, the more insane these people have become (As Parents’ Rights Becomes a Hot Issue the Groomer Community Goes Nuts Fighting to Control Your Kids).

What we are seeing is not just the narcissism and sexual perversion of a handful of “educators.” The idea that teachers have the right to interfere in a child’s life or come between children and their parents is so pervasive that they don’t bother to disguise the contempt.

This pathology is not only developed in university education curricula; it is fed into the schools by the federal government.

This is patent bullsh**. And Cardona was promptly called out on it.

In an elementary school setting, a teacher divides the six-hour day between 20-30 students. This is about 18 minutes per child per day, assuming the teacher does not teach classes…an assumption I’m beginning to believe is close to the norm. Once students start changing classes, a teacher has to split the attention of a 45-50 minute class between the same number of students. The idea that a teacher who is highly motivated and diligent knows a child as well as their parents is so profoundly stupid that making that assertion should be grounds for commitment to a mental institution. The notion that my right to guide my child’s education and moral formation ends once they go to school is beyond wrong. It is insane.

The next GOP president must begin actively demolishing the Department of Education. It should be reduced to a handful of clerks who write grant checks to school districts. At the state level, we must encourage legislatures to pull the corrupt public education establishment that exists for the benefit of teachers and administrators out by the roots and replace it with a decentralized, home and community-based system that focuses on educational attainment. We need to pass laws that criminalize school teachers or administrators inserting themselves in any way into a child’s medical or psychological care. And we need laws that require that give parents standing to sue teachers or administrators if children are counseled about sexual orientation or any other non-academic subject without prior parental approval.

An educational system once the envy of the world has now become a morass of sexual deviants, moral cripples, and incompetents. We have to act to crush this nonsense before more kids’ lives are ruined.