Like many things...

 Like many things that the APL, in this case specifically Biden, does I wonder if they really think things through before they impliment a policy.

It was just announced that the DHS is getting a new department that will censor "disinformation".  I especially liked the director's little video where she sang about the mission of this new department to the tune of Supercalifragelistic... from Mary Poppins.   That is exactly the kind of wise, mature, governance y'all voted for, right?

Here's where I question the wisdom of this thing.  

1.  Do Biden and his minions not realize that eventually this commission will be controlled by someone who's not APL?

2.  Do Biden and his minions not realize that this is going to get tied up in court immediately, and likely get overturned at some point?  

3.  Do Biden and his minions think that "disinformation" only comes from one side of the ideological spectrum?   Does anyone expect this department to pursue leftist "disinformation" as much s "rightist"?

4.  What about "disinformation" that was later proven to be True?  

5. Given the reality that we had NEGATIVE economic growth last quarter, and that a second quarter like that means we're in a recession, is "disinformtion" really the most pressing problem for the executive branch?

6.  Given the reality that the Biden administration massive injection of printed money into the economy is part of what's driving the horrible economic news, should we really trust their ability to handle anything?

7.  Isn't free speech protected even when it's inaccurate, or offensive?

8.  This appears to be driven by Elon Musk (an African American) purchasing Twitter (a private company) and announcing that he thinks that Twitter should offer more freedom of speech rather than less.   Why is a private company opening up their platform to more legal, protected, free speech a problem?

9   Do y'all realize that just because you might be "offended", that it doesn't mean that whatever "offended" you should be censored?

10.  Orwell is looking more and more like a prophet.  

11.  Law enforcement limiting, censoring, or punishing free speech seems like a bad idea.  

Why, indeed?

 "Why is talking sexually in a work place called sexual harassment to adults, but talking sexually to a 4 year old at school is considered essential?"

Kambree (her pseudonym, not mine)

At least with the former it's usually people of roughly similar ages (at least both adults) and not always with a significant power differential.   (Obviously as we saw with Clinton/Lewinsky, there can be a massive power differential, and go way beyond just talk)  As per my "Sexual Harassment Training" there is no requirement for a power differential for sexual harassment to be present.

With the latter it's always an adult talking to a child, and the adult has a significant degree of power over the child.

But there's no way that could ever be unhealthy, right?

FYI, anybody look at the rise is sexual assault cases in schools over the past decade or so, obviously there's no possible way anyone who's sexually assault a child would take advantage of an environment where talking to children about sexuality and the like is encouraged.  Perish the thought, it could never happen, right?

When did Authoritarianism have a good name?

 https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/18/opinion/china-russia-putin.html

Why the silence?

 The NYC subway attacker (Black Supremacist) has vanished from the news.

We've not heard much, if anything, about Yaseem Jenkins whose father used him as a "human shield".

I haven't heard much about the case on Anthony Frazier.  Certainly no one is saying his name or rioting over his death,

I wonder why some black homicides are worse than others?

Bribery?

 Shockingly enough, high tax MN has accumulated a surplus of billions of dollars.   Imagine how much more there would be if they weren't pissing away billions on more light rail that people aren't going to use, but I digress.  

There is a discussion in the legislature abut what to do with this "surplus" that is kind of interesting.   In general, the DFL legislators want to spend as much of it as possible, and the GOP wants to (in general) give it back to the taxpayers.

Governor Walz, wants to spend most of it and give taxpayers back $300 each.   

Sidebar, it seems strange to not give people's money back in proportion to what they paid in, but this isn't about fair, it's about votes.

Walz wants to call these payments "Walz checks" as if he's benevolently giving us a gift.   Now he probably wouldn't say this in public, but wouldn't it be reasonable to conclude that since there's an election coming up, and since he screwed up the riot response, that having checks with his name on them go out right before an election would be good publicity, doesn't it?     

I have no problem returning this surplus to the taxpayers that paid it.  I'm not sure that people who just moved here, or don't pay income taxes should be getting checks though.  I also think that sending out "Walz checks" during an election campaign seems a little too much like vote buying for me.  

I've got less problem if they did this as a tax credit based on the actual taxes people paid (which would probably cost less money).

I've got less problem with giving it all back, proportionately to what we've paid without the "Walz check" label.  

Finally, I don't have much of a problem with using it to pay off debt, or put it in a lock box for the inevitable economic downturn.  

Anything but something that looks like bribery or vote buying 

Musk

It would seem that Elon Musk (an African American) has just purchased Twitter.    Thankfully the Twitter board remembered their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders and decided to do the right thing.  For some reason this state of affairs has the APL all up in arms.   They cheered when Bezos bought newspapers, but this is the end of free speech as we know it.  Musk has been pretty clear that he wants to minimize the restrictions Twitter places on speech, even if some of that speech might offend some people.   I guess I've always been more in favor of more freedom of speech rather than less.  As offensive as the NAZI's marching in Skokie was, they had the 1st amendment right to do so.   As to the Twitter employees who have been threatening to leave since Musk started this, I say good riddance.   Although, just like all the "If Trump wins I'll move to Canada." folx, I suspect that most of them are too cowardly to actually quit.    Like anything else, Twitter will either succeed or fail with Musk as owner.   If APL's don't like a less restrictive Twitter, they're free to start their own company with all the restrictions they want.    I can't finish this without noting the absurd notion that Musk is some sort of hyper conservative.  I've seen nothing from Musk that indicates any political leanings during this whole thing.  Do I suspect that he'll introduce policies at Twitter that'll see the end of massive follower purges, shadow banning, and inconsistent application of TOS as applied to conservatives, yes.  But that's just introducing a level playing field. 

Disney

 It's interesting that a huge corporation thinks that it should be able to dictate to the elected government of FL regarding the laws FL chooses to enact.

Remember all the APL's who insist that corporations aren't people, don't have rights. and the like?  Apparently as long as corporations are on the correct side of the APL, then it's all good.

Of course remember the live action remake of Mulan?  The one that was filmed in the PRC within proximity to actual slave labor/concentration camps?  Somehow Disney didn't have a problem with that sort of oppression.   As we've seen Disney be more outspoken about efforts to push certain left wing narratives in their entertainment product, we've also seen Disney remove certain things in order not to offend the CCP.  How interesting, I guess Disney is really much more interested in money than moving forward a left wing agenda.  

https://screenrant.com/mulan-disney-defends-china-filming/

https://www.lamag.com/citythinkblog/disney-exec-wants-50-of-all-characters-gay-or-underrepresented/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10668175/Ron-DeSantis-SLAMS-Disney-president-odd-stance-called-Dont-Say-Gay-bill.html

Over the weekend, I learned that Walt Disney used a legal loophole (known as blind trusts) to purchase the land in FL where he built Disney World at lower prices.  Essentially by hiding his identity behind a trust, he was able to control the market forces that would have driven up land prices had he made his purchases in a more open manner.   It could be said that he defrauded land owners out of the rise in prices that should have accompanied this sort of acquisition.   

Further, the special status that Disney Corp has enjoyed has meant that they have not been paying their fair share of taxes to FL for over 50 years.  I'm guessing it's meant a "loss" of billions of dollars from various taxing jurisdictions over the last half century.

 Seeing the APL rushing to defend a big corp who hasn't been paying their "fair share" for decades is pretty amusing.  

New blog rule

"Reminder: If you make a fact claim, you must provide support."

 

 

Eventually this'll incude more stuff

For years we've heard wondrous tales from the APL (American political left) about the socialist paradise that exists in the Scandinavian countries.    Usually this is is regards to some of their social "safety net" policies and the like.  

Strangely enough, Sweden (and other Scandinavian countries) response to COVID didn't get the rapturous support from the APL as their social policies.   Even though their COVID response seemed to work better than many countries.

 https://washingtonmonthly.com/2022/04/19/what-sweden-got-right-about-covid/

Well, now Sweden is going against the APL grain again apparently against "Science" in how they deal with "Trans" minor children. 

 https://personandidentity.com/sweden-changes-policy-saying-the-risks-of-hormones-and-surgery-outweigh-the-benefits/ 

 

Given the response of the APL to COVID, one could logically conclude that Swedish "scientists" are wrong and that they must be corrected.  But, what if the Swede's are right about this too?  What if the APL is ignoring scientific evidence in a headlong rush to "transition" as many minor children as possible?

 

I'll likely add to this over the coming days as I've seen a lot more information that indicates that  "hormone therapy" and "delaying puberty" and the like are not the happy, benign, wonderful, "treatments" that the APL present them as. 

"Trans acceptance would be in a way better place if they stopped pushing the kid stuff,  Most reasonable people can support adults making choices about their own bodies.  Only insane people think kids can consent to sterilization or removing body parts before they can drive a car."

Blair White (Trans Woman)

 

"Children CAN"T consent to anything, by definition.  This is the elephant in the room with the "trans kids" and broader medical access discourse, the sickening "MAP" conversation, etc.  People are debating when something that isn't legally or ethically possible can occur."

 

Will Reilly (we should listen to what black voices say) 

One of the things that people extoll for "trans children" is that they delay puberty through drug/hormone injections.  Yet, "Puberty is a period of rapid growth and sexual maturation. These changes begin sometime between age eight and fourteen. Girls begin puberty at around ten years of age and boys begin approximately two years later.".   Why would anyone think that encouraging children to make life altering decisions about their "sexual identity" before they are "sexually mature", is a good idea?   Doesn't it seem reasonable that one's views on one's sexuality might change and mature as one goes through puberty?  

 

Adolescence is the period between the onset of puberty, and adulthood.  

https://pdx.pressbooks.pub/humandevelopment/chapter/puberty-cognition/

https://www.aacap.org/AACAP/Families_and_Youth/Facts_for_Families/FFF-Guide/The-Teen-Brain-Behavior-Problem-Solving-and-Decision-Making-095.aspx

https://www.cincinnatichildrens.org/health/c/cognitive

https://kidshelpline.com.au/parents/issues/mood-swings-and-puberty

I could be wrong, but this looks like some experts who seem pretty agreed that puberty kicks off a major change in how children's thought processes and decision making abilities change between childhood and adulthood.   It sure seems like encouraging children to make major, life (permanent body altering decisions) before they are cognitively equipped to do so, veers toward child abuse.  

Instead of posting the multiple links, I'm linking to the whole post.  

https://winteryknight.com/2022/04/26/will-the-harming-of-trans-children-cause-secular-leftists-to-reconsider-their-values/

Let's just ignore this.

https://www.genderdissent.com/post/transition-your-body-destroy-your-mind

 

"What a time to be alive when I , as a gay man, have to defend the rights of straight people who just want to send their kids to school without them being indoctrinated with radical TQUIA+ religious ideologies"

Storm Robinson 

 

This can't be a good thing, can it?   Are "trans" children adequately warned about these risks?  

https://twitter.com/anoushtutoush/status/1517459738316918785

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24336244/

https://www.brighamandwomens.org/assets/BWH/patients-and-families/rehabilitation-services/pdfs/pelvic-floor-considerations-in-the-transgender-and-gender-noncomforming-patient.pdf?TRILIBIS_EMULATOR_UA=aqkljlpwmmkitx%2Caqkljlpwmmkitx

I mean "urinary incontinence", "rectal dysfunction", and " fecal incontinence" don't sound good at all.

https://transcare.ucsf.edu/guidelines/pain-transmen

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41419-020-2484-2

Is "skeletal muscle atrophy" a big deal?  

 https://www.google.com/search?q=amaze.org+videos+is+it+normal+to+watch+porn&client=firefox-b-1-e&ei=Wh1sYuuGFd-8ytMPquyFkA0&ved=0ahUKEwjrm4-X47n3AhVfnnIEHSp2AdIQ4dUDCA4&uact=5&oq=amaze.org+videos+is+it+normal+to+watch+porn&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAM6BwgAEEcQsAM6BggAEBYQHjoFCCEQoAE6BQghEKsCOggIIRAWEB0QHkoECEEYAEoECEYYAFCqCFijTGD7UGgBcAF4AIAB7QGIAaoZkgEGNC4yMS4ymAEAoAEByAEIwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9ZNINhdhN0

This doesn't seem quite normal.

https://hype.my/2022/268681/video-tiktok-user-identifies-as-fishgender-and-netizens-are-confused/

While this article seems to lean towards, surgical intervention for adolescents, it's pretty clear that there is much to little actual research, to dogmatically claim that early intervention is the best option.

This quote was one of the more troubling in the article.  The fact that US therapists are basing heir advice based on "fear" of what advocates for a particular position will call them instead of what's best for their patients, seems like malpractice.

"Edwards-Leeper says in the U.S., therapists now fear that if they encourage young people to think more deeply about their gender, the therapists may be labeled transphobic."

https://undark.org/2022/04/06/the-evolution-of-pediatric-transgender-medicine/

This seems to raise questions about the benefits of "transitioning" pre puberty, and about informed consent.

"At a recent talk at Duke University on "Trans & Gender Diverse Policies, Care, Practices, & Wellbeing," surgeon and "trans affirming" doctor Marci Bowers, who transitioned at the age of 38, admitted that children who undergo transition before puberty will never have adult sexual function or experience orgasm. An observation that I had," said Bowers, "every single child who was, or adolescent, who was truly blocked at Tanner stage 2," which is the beginning of physical development, when hormones begin their work of advancing a child to adulthood, "has never experienced orgasm. I mean, it's really about zero.

"And they don't really go on testosterone at around surgery or into adulthood. And so we don't know they're going to have this sensation, there's no question about that. But are they going to be able to really achieve sexual satisfaction? It's important in relationships, and I know that from my work with female genital mutilation survivors, that that the lack of being able to be intimate with a partner is very important. And so this is what really raised the red flag for me, is to say, look, we're gonna really, we need to have our eyes open about it."

Bowers, who had three children before undergoing gender transition in middle-age, said that this concern should change the "informed consent models" where children are told what they are giving up—sexual function, sexual pleasure, intimacy in relationships, having children—and then agree to it before they even have any idea what those things truly are.

"These are to be answered questions: So can we avoid puberty and get good adult results? And secondly, how do we? How do we assure someone that they're going to be able to be sexually responsive? Do we remove the blockers during the course of their adolescence? And let a little bit of puberty come back? Do we delay it a little bit? Maybe into tanners three or four? Maybe before they have their first orgasms? Maybe? Or? Or do we add testosterone later in their adolescence or early adulthood? Or at or around the time of surgery, enough not to cause a secondary sex characteristics they were trying to avoid, but maybe beneficial to enhance this ability. So these are these are questions that I of course, I'm very interested in," Bowers said."

 https://thepostmillennial.com/gender-affirming-surgeon-admits-children-who-undergo-transition-before-puberty-never-attain-sexual-satisfaction

 

If a Dr tells a prepubescent child who's never had sex before,  (and who is probably unaware of how important sex can be in a healthy adult relationship) that they may never be able to have satisfying sex, how can the child make an informed decision about what they're giving up?

 

 

 

 

Who would have thought

https://www.nj.com/politics/2022/04/what-murphy-said-about-2-women-at-nj-prison-getting-pregnant-after-consensual-sex-between-inmates.html 

What an absolute shocking revelation.  A "trans woman" gets "herself" sent to a women's prison and promptly starts having sex with the women prisoners.  Who could have foreseen this?   What could possibly be bad about women getting pregnant in prison?  Will the state pay for abortions?  Does the state have any responsibility to prevent this?  Why should taxpayers bear these additional (preventable) costs? Can someone please explain how one "woman" can impregnate another "woman"?  

It's all good. 

Question

 Is there any circumstance where it would be appropriate for a high government official to tell church leaders/pastors something like, "You need to use your positions, and the trust you have with your congregation, to repeat XYZ message from the government."

This has absolutely nothing to do with political party, political philosophy, denomination, or theological position.  It's a simple, hypothetical, question.   The rational, acceptable answers are either yes or no. 

Announcement

 I'll be out of town for a family celebration for the next few days.  My recent practice has been not to interact on any of the blogs I follow on weekends or when I'm on vacation.    In this case, I will try to pop in once or twice to get comments out of moderation, and possibly make short replies.  

Hillsong...

 Recently, among people in the "worship" community there has been some uproar about choosing not to use music by Hillsong because of an ongoing investigation of sexual impropriety of the founding pastor, and the cover up of that impropriety by his son and subsequent senior leadership.    Strangely enough, I never hear any of these folx complaining about using music by Hillsong (or Bethel, or Elevation, etc) because of the theological concerns raised about each of these churches.  The message being sent is something like, "We won't stand for sexual impropriety, but we'll tolerate bad/questionable theology/doctrine.".

Clearly allegations of sexual impropriety (I'm using impropriety because I have no real desire to dig into the details and the term covers a lot of possible actions) at a church or ministry are, and should be, taken seriously and dealt with.   Yet,  the seeming uninterest  by these people in the theological content contained in the music and preaching at these churches, seems strange.    

Given the reality that churches are made up from sinful, fallen humans,  while simultaneously being "the Bride of Christ", seems to indicate that somehow God will work through The Church despite the fallen, sinful, nature of those in The Church.    Maybe we don't need to throw out the "baby with the bathwater" in these circumstances. 

Listen to POC

 "Gay movement: the sex you're attracted to is hardwired at birth, even though there's no gay gene.

Trans movement: your sex is entirely fluid, even though there is a definitive sex chromosome.

LGBT movement:  you must believe both of those things at once or else you're a bigot."

Vivek Ramaswamy

 

"The whole LGBT movement went from "stay out of our bedroom" to " hey there kindergartner, you should know what happens in our bedroom" real fast."

Will Reilly

 

"The Left:  Student loans should be forgiven bc18 year olds were too young to fully understand what they were doing.  Society failed them.

Also The Left:  Kids know their true selves.  Their identity should be affirmed no matter what the cost.  Discussion & asking qs are hate crimes.""

 Mauer the Bulldog (her pseudonym, not mine)

Liberal Nice

 A self described writer who's resume includes The Daily Beast. The Atlantic, Rolling Stone, NBC News, and The Business Insider named Thor Benson, approached as Asian gentleman who he though was Andy Ngo in a bar and told (this random Asian guy) that he was a "garbage person".  Of course he felt it necessary to brag about it on social media, and claimed that he "politely" called a random Asian that they were a "garbage person".   Of course Ngo claimed that he wasn't in the same city, and a bunch of wonderfully lovely leftists cheered Benson on.   Clearly this is the sort of behavior that passes for normal for many on the left side of the political spectrum.