https://twitter.com/i/status/1781738037010993356
If you can watch this video and not come away with a sense that schools are protecting "trans" kids at the expense of other students, and that this girl was thrown to the wolves by her teacher and counselor, I can't imagine how heartless you must be.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/04/why-the-rise-in-trans-shooters
https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/03/the-detransition-time-bomb/
I appreciate Reilly on many issues. One because he's not "right wing" by any stretch, Two, because he's a black college professor (out of step with those who dominate his race and career) Three because he's coming from a background of stats and data.
He makes some good points here, especially as relates to screwing with testosterone in people, and the presence of mental health issues in the "trans" population.
It seems like the data is not supporting the "trans" Narrative, and that we're seeing the "trans" enabling community getting desperate to save their Narrative.
11 comments:
Most objective reporting results in similar conclusions. But then, when it comes to this issue, honest objective reporting is hard to come by via traditional news outlets.
I like Reilly, too, but despite his "identifying" as a leftist, most of his work seems to be refutations of typical leftist positions and assertions. When one looks at merely the titles of his NR articles, it's hard to believe he's a lefty at all!
https://www.nationalreview.com/author/wilfred-reilly/
Reading a few of them makes it harder. Reilly calling himself a lefty is almost like Dan calling himself a Christian. But it does compel investigation.
In the meantime, I reiterate his reporting on this issue is far more truthful than any traditional lefty source.
I'll start be noting that Dan got all pissy about my question regarding D1 coached trolling D2, D3, and NAIA schools looking for 6'10"+ guys who'd be willing to "trans" themselves to win a natty, although he didn't actually answer, yet completely ignored this entire post.
Objective reporting has no choice but to come to a similar place, that's what objective reporting does (or should do). It's what I learned in freshman reporting on the way to an actual degree in media/broadcasting/journalism.
Actually, Reilly refers to himself as "center-right", the only real "left" position I've seen from him is his view on Christianity, and "sexual morality" stuff. from what I've read, he pretty much follows the data where it goes and draws conclusions from there.
One of the reasons I like him, is that he's not a traditional "conservative", yet most of his conclusions support conservative positions on social, cultural issues. The fact that he's black and a professor means that he's willing to swim against the tide and call it like he sees it.
I may have missed it, but I've never heard him call himself a "lefty", always "center-right".
I'll also note that Dan has objected to one thing that I posted yesterday. Strangely enough, he's objecting to a question. It seems like attacking me for asking a question is some type of tactic designed to deter questions, not the act of someone seeking dialogue.
This is relevant because he's ignored the other "trans" story, and the antisemitic protests with their threats of violence, to bitch about a reasonable question.
I can only wonder why.
I just checked, nothing about any of this on FB, nothing at the cesspool.
Art, instead of wasting your time trying to beat me up over a "minor" disagreement, how about you take a whack at Dan's FB post about how great the economy is. Him ignoring massive inflation, and the reality of the job numbers seems like a much more worthy endeavor.
I just read, and will try to post later, a thread from Reilly regarding choice between killing Hitler as an infant, and losing 42-78 million lives. His positions on how countries should act and empathy are hardly left wing.
From Reilly,
"A similar point: my take is not "controlled opposition."
I am...not an example of anti-American opposition at all. I am a well-known professor and executive in THIS society, which I quite like. I vote for the Conservative party, and have many - not un-aggressive - ideas about how to resolve social problems.
But, if you want to destroy this society, I, like the 99% majority of other sane tax-payers, see you as a lunatic opp - a traitor or close. This is true for left, and right."
Well. Apparently I misunderstood what I thought I read. If I don't see what I thought I saw in re-reading your links, then I'm at a loss to recall what I was reading when I came to that conclusion. But that's OK, because I always took him for a conservative whenever I heard him speak on Tucker Carlson's show or on Gutfeld. I don't think I need to re-read anything, actually, as it's a minor point against the weight of his words in the links.
He's quite like Sowell in this gathering of data to inform his opinions. Unlike lefties, he gathers ALL the available data and weighs it against each other.
There was yet another black professor who recently got attacked for coming to the only conclusion his research of the data brought him...which was one concerning black crime or cops shootings or something along those lines. This guy is an actual leftist who expected the data to support his preconceived beliefs about the precise issue he researched and lost his professor gig as a result, because...well...that's what lefties do. They cancel truth. (See: Through These Woods)
"Art, instead of wasting your time trying to beat me up over a "minor" disagreement, how about you take a whack at Dan's FB post about how great the economy is. Him ignoring massive inflation, and the reality of the job numbers seems like a much more worthy endeavor."
I meant to respond to this. It's sad to imagine speaking truth is a waste of time, and it certainly is when Dan is the person with whom I'm speaking. But I concede your point.
In any case, I don't think I need to visit another of Dan's social media sites where he'd only delete me again. But I've been working out how my next post in support of Trump will be laid out, except for the general theme of what denying him the last time has done for us all. I will be making some mention of how he raped our economy among the many other Biden disasters.
Visiting Dan's FB page. Hmm. I've no doubt that will be equal parts entertaining and nauseating.
"I meant to respond to this."
You should.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/christianweller/2024/03/22/the-economy-is-much-stronger-than-four-years-ago/?sh=6559cd71644b&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1nZhSpviMcBhIzS7tdsXdYstwt0MohIyEejWQlkylIFCMiPjIVL3Xk00o_aem_ATk8hRZetdfaLqqUGra48CPKUqKXKUggW8KBwyxIX2iUDZKY-bdPwwIt9cDTuswa3aRhm760qHYJwdoyi4IQvVVi
There, I visited it for you.
It's mostly art and inconsequential crap. It's rarely/never about things like liberal antisemitism or the recent spate of "trans" mass shooters.
I've read the link above. Though I intend to read it again, it seems at first blush to regard Bidenomics as wholly praiseworthy. I'm trying to set aside the fact that it comes from a guy with ties to the Center for American Progress, who has supplied the Biden administration with around 33 former members. Not that anyone should suggest pro-Biden bias from such a source. But it seemed rather lacking context when listing numbers and stats they want readers to believe are all one needs to know. In the meantime, in doing research, I've come across a number of articles which speak to Biden's plan from a more objective analysis of what his economic tactics historically produce. I have one which is from about a month earlier which speaks to the negative impact of Bidenomics, as well as a few others which speak more on economics in general which also relate.
Now I just need to figure out how I wish to present it all in a cogent, coherent and hopefully concise manner.
I tried to find commentaries on the article, on the author and on the Center for American Progress and have come up short. That could be due to how recently is its publication. I've done so with Paul Krugman nonsense in the past, but being unable will put the onus on me to tie all the info together. I may just let competing articles speak for themselves. This will be a huge undertaking for me, as I've been less than motivated these days. Stay tuned.
You go. Tear it up.
Post a Comment