VIDEO: ‘The Vanishing American Adult’ One of the Most Remarkable Discussions We’ve Ever Seen

Sissy: “A person regarded as effeminate or cowardly.”

Soy boy: “A pejorative term often used in online communities to describe men lacking masculine characteristics.”

A reader sent is a link to the Hoover Institution’s interview with Senator Benjamin Sasse by Peter Robinson to discuss his book The Vanishing American Adult. Our reader BL stated, “One of the most remarkable videos we have seen in years.”

The Vanishing American Adult is a 2017 book by United States Senator Ben Sasse published by St. Martin’s Press. In the book, Sasse describes Americans as “a drifting and aimless people — awash in material goods and yet spiritually aching for meaning.”

We fully agree. It’s time for every American to hear what Senator Sasse said in 2017. Why? Because the cultural war against manhood is happening now and it must be stopped.

Please watch the Hoover Institution’s interview with Senator Benjamin Sasse:

We have written about how a war is being waged against manhood and womanhood. In our January 22nd, 2022 column “America’s Sissy Problem” we wrote:

A reader of ours sent a link to a very interesting The American Mind article titled “China’s Sissy Problem—and Ours” by John Mac Ghlionn.

We have been concerned about the “sissyfication” of America’s boys, and girls, for some time.

Claremont Institute researcher and essayist John Mac Ghlionn wrote:

The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has made a concerted effort to banish so-called “sissy men” from society. “Morally flawed” men are no longer welcome. Men, we’re told, should look a certain way—no makeup, no high heels. Moreover, they should have resilience and a desire to seek meaningful employmentSome prominent authors argue that Beijing’s effort will backfire. Will it? Possibly, but when it comes to crackdowns, the CCP is frighteningly effective. If in doubt, just look at what is occurring in Hong Kong, a sprawling, once free-wheeling city with a population of 7.5 million, where free speech has died a swift and brutal death.

But perhaps worse we are now seeing free speech dying a swift and brutal death here in America, with a population of 330 million. Social media has now censored the truth about gender being binary and have banned it, because it doesn’t fit their narrative, as being against their collectivist social justice “community standards.”

This has led to our youth growing up not understanding what is happening to them culturally. In America today young boys are being neutered via verbal fiat.

Generation Z boys, and girls, are growing up without strong male, and female, role models.

The Sissyfication of America

Ghlionn in his column China’s Sissy Problem—and Ours notes:

It’s important to make clear that this piece is not an attack on homosexual men; it’s an attack on sissies. There is a difference between the two. In his latest special, Sorry, Louis CK finished the show with a joke about American men. Today, according to Louis, gay men carry themselves with an air of authority, purpose, and meaning. They keep themselves in good shape and dress appropriately. Straight men, on the other hand, have become notably weaker, both physically and mentally; many of them lack the characteristics that we would have associated with previous generations of men. They are sloppy, weak-willed, and overly apologetic. They dress terribly. At the end of the joke, which is much funnier than I just made it sound, the audience applauded and let out a collective roar. Why? Because Louis’s joke resonated. He articulately expressed what so many of his fans were already thinking. The United States, too, has a crisis of masculinity—one even worse, perhaps, than China’s.

QUESTION: Aren’t gays by definition sissies?

Actually if you go to a gay pride parade you see men dressed as sissies, wearing chains, in dresses with heavy make-up and acting effeminate. Not sure who Louis CK is referring to.

QUESTION: Are Ghlionn and Louis CK afraid of being labeled homophobic? So, does this make Ghlionn and Louis CK sissies?

We are seeing more and more films featuring gays and lesbians. We are seeing non-binary (a.k.a. gender queer) athletes competing in women’s sports. We are seeing men dressed up like a woman reading books to elementary school students. We are seeing graphic under age sex oriented books in public school libraries. And we have reported on the growth of Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN) clubs in our public schools.

This is all part and parcel of the culture war against boys in general and manhood in particular.

Mainstreaming Pedophilia

In our column “CULTURE WAR: The Mainstreaming of Pedophilia by Targeting Your Children” we warned:

Sadly we have seen the mainstreaming of pedophilia. Most recently we have seen pedophilia:

We have reported on efforts by groups such as B4U-ACT and the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) to indoctrinate children into believing that sex with men by children is not only normal but encouraged.

Dr. Judith Reisman in her 2016 column “They’re mainstreaming pedophilia!” wrote:

Alfred Kinsey’s ongoing sexual anarchy campaign has no end in sight.

Matt Barber, associate dean of the Liberty University School of Law, and I attended the “B4U-ACT” pedophile conference Aug. 17 [2015]. To eliminate the “stigma” against pedophiles, this growing sexual anarchist lobby wants the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to redefine pedophilia as a normal sexual orientation of “Minor-Attracted Persons.”

Adhering to the Kinsey principle of lulling “straights” into a false sense of security, pedophile dress was largely conservative – short hair, jackets, some ties and few noticeable male ear piercings.

Matt Barber and I sat in the back of the meeting room among roughly 50 activists and their “mental health” attending female enablers. “Pedophilia, Minor-Attracted Persons, and the DSM: Issues and Controversies,” keynoted “Fred Berlin, M.D., Ph.D., as founder, National Institute for the Study, Prevention and Treatment of Sexual Trauma; Johns Hopkins Sexual Disorders Clinic.”

However, the sex clinic was initially founded by John Money, Ph.D., to give judges “leeway” to keep child molesters out of jail. Money (deceased), a pedophile advocate, also called for an end to all age-of-consent laws. Dr. Berlin was his disciple.

Sissies and Soy Boys

We do have men, real men, who carry themselves with an air of authority, purpose and meaning. Most of these men are active duty military, in law enforcement, are first responders and veterans of Iraq, Afghanistan, the Korean and Vietnam Wars.

Today instead of real “alpha” males we have “soy” boys.

As Ghlionn reported:

For generations, the sissy has been a frowned-upon character in American life. Only recently it has become a respected, even institutionalized lifestyle. California’s Silicon-Valley stereotype of the “soy boy”a demasculinized consumer of a meatless, synthetic diet, is now national. [Emphasis added]

Sadly, since the end of the draft, those who serve are all volunteers and make up about 1% of our male population. The other 99% have never sacrificed themselves in service to the nation. The problem lies in the group of Gen Z boys that have never become real men by serving, rather they are demanding bigger government to serve them regardless of their needs to work for a living. Because Gen Z boys vote for a living.

Sissyfication and Single Parenthood

Today we have seen manhood, and womanhood, denigrated to the point where if you mention that gender is binary you are ostracized from society. We are seeing men competing in women’s sports. We are seeing the normalization of sodomy to the point that sissy men dressed as a woman are reading books to grade school students.

But there’s something deeper going on in America.

As Ghlionn points out:

[A]ccording to a Pew Research Center study, rates of children living in single-parent households have never been higher. In fact, the U.S. now boasts the highest rate of children living in single-parent households in the world. As the study notes, “3% of children in China, 4% of children in Nigeria, and 5% of children in India live in single-parent households.” In the U.S., meanwhile, the rate is a staggering 23 percent. At least 80 percent of the country’s single-parent homes are headed by single mothers.

Absolutely nothing good comes from father absence—which, according to a report published by the U.S. Department of Justice, “has a strong and significant effect on both female and male levels of violence,” including “homicide and robbery.” Children look to their fathers to lay down the rules and enforce them, and learn to do so through imitation.

The Bottom Line

On August 10th, 2019  reported:

Beyond the main point of the signatures of the founders and main thinkers of the French, postmodern philosophers all demanding that pedophilia be made legal, these guys make a lot of good points.

Also, it is food for thought about how similar the push to make little boys into drag queen strippers for adult men mirrors Afghan Muslim culture.

H/T Xanthippa

So there you have it.

Pedophiles are looking at recruiting the next generation of your children as their perverted sex slaves.

They will brainwash your child into thinking first that he/she are neither just male or female (binary) but they can choose their (non-binary) gender pronoun at will. If this doesn’t emasculate our boys, and girls, I don’t know what will!

Then they push your little boy, and girl, into the LGBTQ+ community where by then they’re to far along to resist.

If parents and grandparents fail to stop this then our children are lost for ever!

It’s time to man up.

Ditch the soy, stop being a sissy. Take charge of your lives or we will see Generation Z sissies take over our nation.

We need real men, and women, to take charge in our families, communities, culture, society and nation.

Cowards don’t lead and leaders aren’t cowards.

Edmund Burke wrote:

 The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

Sissies are evil. We need good men!

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

Adams Blasted for Promoting ‘Drag Storytellers’ in NYC Schools

In a tweet posted Thursday evening, NYC Mayor Eric Adams promoted “drag storytellers” and “the libraries and schools that support them,” claiming they are advancing the city’s core values.

“Drag storytellers, and the libraries and schools that support them, are advancing a love of diversity, personal expression, and literacy that is core to what our city embraces,” he wrote.

In, Adams argued that the education system must “educate” and make students “emotionally intelligent” through such programs.

“At a time when our LGBTQ+ communities are under increased attack across this country, we must use our education system to educate,” he added in a follow-up tweet. “The goal is not only for our children to be academically smart, but also emotionally intelligent.”

A wave of online backlash ensued.

“No @NYCMayor men dressed as highly sexualized women do not belong in schools. It has nothing to do with diversity or literacy,” wrote New York congressional candidate Maud Maron.

“Why not just advocate for taking kids to strip clubs while you are at it?” asked media personality Lisa Boothe.

“They are just dudes in women’s clothes grooming kids. Stop it,” wrote journalist Kyle Becker.

“Grooming is at the core of what NYC embraces?” asked Claremont Institute Communications Director Nick Short.

“Flee NYC while you still can,” wrote Rubin Report host and free speech advocate Dave Rubin

“This is the hill the Democrats want to die on. Pushing drag queens in schools. What insane clownworld are we living in?” wrote President of the New York Young Republican Club Gavin Mario Wax.

The mayor’s comments come as New York City’s public schools continue to use tax money to pay drag queens to perform for children, often without parental knowledge or consent. Since its creation in 2018, Drag Queen Story Hour NYC — which recently changed its name to Drag Story Hour NYC — has received $207,000 in taxpayer funds.

Eric Adams

10 Known Connections

At an April 4, 2022 press conference at City Hall, Adams announced the start of a new advertising campaign that would use five digital billboards to try to entice Floridians to relocate to New York City. The billboards’ pitch would focus on the alleged injustice of Florida’s Parental Rights in Education bill, which Florida Governor Ron DeSantis had signed into law a week earlier. Though the legislation was misrepresented by leftist critics as a “Don’t Say ‘Gay’” bill that supposedly prohibited any and all use of the word “gay” in Florida schools, the bill merely banned classroom discussions of sexual orientation and gender identity by teachers of young children in grades 3 and below. The billboards — which would be displayed for eight weeks in Fort Lauderdale, Jacksonville, Orlando, Tampa and West Palm Beach — contained the following messages:

Image 1

Image 2

Image 3

Image 4

Image 5

Adams voiced his hope that these billboards, by depicting New York City as a place that welcomed LGBT people much more readily than Florida, might help reverse the recent trend that had seen massive numbers of New Yorkers relocating to Florida. Said the mayor: “We are going to loudly show our support, to say to those who are living in Florida, ‘Listen, we want you here in New York. Want you right here in New York City.’ It’s more than just saying that. It’s also standing up and aligning ourselves with the men and women of LGBTQ-plus community, and state that we are in unison with you and your right to have a self-identification, your right to live the lifestyle, live the life that you choose to live, without any form of harassment…”

To learn more about Eric Adams, click here.

RELATED ARTICLE: US Supreme Court rules against Maine’s ban on tuition aid to religious schools

EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Proposed Government Solutions Ignore the Presence of Nuance, and Perpetuates Unintended Consequences

Government is not the solution to the problem, government is the problem.

We continue to see a push for legislation to cure America’s ills.  Red flag laws for guns, on demand abortion available in the name of women’s rights, prosecution of “insurrectionists”, all of these are being touted as a solution or cure.  But the reality still remains, that evil will always be present in this world.  Evil acts are a physical manifestation of Satan and the control that he has over our flesh.  You cannot pass legislation to end evil.  You can take action to minimize evil and incentivize moral behavior, but you cannot stop the Prince of Darkness with a bill that comes out of congress.

There are nuances that come with these “feel good” proposals in congress, and there are unintended consequences that result from those nuances.  Sometimes the proposed government solution can be abused and manipulated in order to expose loopholes in the law.    The worst legislation to ever come out of the halls of congress, has been a result of a knee jerk reaction to an event or crisis.  It is the “do something” mentality that has destroyed liberty in America. The definition of tyranny is said to be, “The deliberate removal of nuance.” The USA Patriot Act is a prime example of the government abuse that is tolerated by the people when there is fear among the citizenry.  If you acknowledge that the government has the authority to suspend portions of the constitution in a time of crisis, then the government, in its quest for power and authority, will create a crisis to exploit. Use the Reichstag fire in pre Nazi Germany as a point of reference.  There is too much trust in government. People have a tendency to believe the government narrative, even when it doesn’t make sense, because they believe that our government has credibility. Jim Garrison once said, “Is the government worth preserving when it lies to the people?  Doesn’t it become a dangerous country when you cannot trust anyone anymore, when you cannot tell the truth?’ Garrison then sternly asserted this familiar maxim, “Let justice be done though the heavens fall”.  He was of course referring to his case against New Orleans business man Clay Shaw, regarding the alleged conspiracy in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Do we seek justice anymore, or have we decided to forego justice and replace it with political expediency?  Garrison’s words are still very relevant today.

Do you not think that the government creates crises to push agendas?  Try running “Operation Northwoods” through an internet search and read the declassified documents.  Or maybe dig into the Gulf of Tonkin incident that was used to justify going to war in Vietnam.  Our government does not deserve our trust or respect, if they continue to lie to us, take advantage of us and waste our hard earned tax dollars on other countries and promotion of sexual deviancy.  All of this while our so called representatives, enrich themselves and become multi-millionaires after only a few terms.

Why is knee jerk legislation dangerous even when it sounds good on paper?  The answer is nuance and unintended consequences.  These two forgotten components are never part of the legislation being proposed and there is little thought into how these things may affect implementation of said law after it goes into effect.  We’ll start with Red flag laws and the very concept of imposing such law on the masses, opening Pandora’s Box when it comes to abuse and manipulation. Hypothetical scenario, a couple is getting a divorce and the woman wants to get under the skin of her soon to be ex so she makes an accusation that leads to a man having his guns confiscated in the absence of due process, because a bitter ex-wife or husband to be fair wanted to get back at their former partner.  What about a leftist progressive that lives in a neighborhood where they find out their next door neighbor possesses firearms?  An accusation is made about the gun owner to trigger confiscation of a law abiding citizen’s weapons.    These are just unintended consequences that make things worse.  This is on top of the fact that due process is being scrapped here totally.  Even if the allegations are legitimate, the accused still has a right to due process.  Suggesting anything less is putting forth a “minority report” enforcement mentality. These loopholes and the total disregard for due process and the 5th and 6th amendment, are not highlighted in the legislation, and there is no acknowledgment of these pitfalls as congress scurries to appease the activist mob.

Let’s move onto abortion laws, and the potential abuses that may exist in drafting state legislation if the SCOTUS sends regulation on the issue back to the states.  Once again, a hypothetical but realistic scenario; a woman gets pregnant and does not want to have the baby, and she lives in a state that has strict abortion restrictions but makes exceptions for rape and incest.  In order to justify her abortion, she accuses the partner that she had of rape, which leaves the accused no alibi, because he was with her.  Even though it was consensual from the perspective of both parties, the woman screams rape because she wants an abortion.  I believe that if a state passes abortion restrictions with an exception for rape, that state would see rape accusations skyrocket.  So on abortion, we must not attempt to appease the moderates.  Life is life, period.

Now onto the so called “insurrection”, and the screams from the left to prosecute any and all involved.  BLM and ANTIFA are generally given a pass, and released soon after arrest, but because they subscribe to a leftist ideology, they are handled with kid gloves.  They are certainly not subjected to the same scrutiny.  This is my warning to both sides of the aisle, and to all ideologies across the spectrum of the electorate. Be careful what you wish for, because there will be a day when there is someone in the White House, in control of the DOJ, that wants to target political opposition, and they are at the opposite end of the political spectrum from where you are. Be careful when you demand peoples’ heads on a silver platter. German born Martin Niemöller, son of a Pastor, wrote a poem that I think is relevant to this subject.

“First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a communist;

Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a socialist;

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a trade unionist;

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out – because I was not a Jew;

Then they came for me – and there was no one left to speak out for me.”

Martin Niemöller

We have to stand up for the rights that we have as individuals as dictated by God, not government. We must be consistent in our defense of these rights, not selective, based on political ideology. If we don’t take this seriously, the law is dead, and all that is left is tribalism and warring factions. I hear many people cite the 14th amendment when it comes to equal protection under the law. However, I have to submit, that if we are all given equal protection, we must all be held accountable under the same law. Translation: government officials from either side of the aisle, should not be immune to prosecution when corruption/wrongdoing are present.

©Fred Brownbill. All rights reserved.

AUN-TV and its 11 TV Stations are Seeking Conservative Shows and Programming

A new era of independent news has started with an eye to revolutionizing the way America views the news, as American Uncensored News has made its debut!

American Uncensored News Network, (AUN-TV), was founded to solve what may be America’s biggest problem: the near monopoly on television of corrupt and censored news that advances the world view and policies of a small group that is hostile to American Values. These values, such as Liberty and Justice for All, Economic Freedom, and Limited Government have already been severely damaged. The future of America depends on exposing and defeating this monopoly by having a truthful and legitimate alternative.

All the news that’s true has a home at the AUN-TV network, The Uncensored News Network! AUN-TV has a mission of creating “uncensored” news, talk and documentary programming from independent media and grassroots production. The network’s goal is to report the news and features other networks are afraid to touch. AUN-TV Network with its sister website will air and post hard hitting credible stories that no other television network will touch.

AUN-TV will open with a 11 station television broadcast network based in Northern California. Broadcasting outlets will include: Channel 3 (San Francisco, CA), Channel 12 (San Francisco/Marin County) CA, Channel 8 (Fort Bragg/North Coast CA), Channel 27 (Santa Rosa, CA), Channel 45 (Wine Country, CA), Channel 23 (Redding, CA), Channel 11, (Chico, CA), and Channel 28, (Sacramento/Chico, CA). All combined, the network covers a market of over 10 million people, with many yearning for AUN-TV’s unvarnished and uncensored take on news and views. Future stations in process include outlets in Monterey, CA, Carson City/Lake Tahoe, NV, and Reno, NV.

Dana Allen the founder of AUN-TV has also announced the appointment of Rick Trader as President and CEO. AUN-TV and its companion website –, – is proud to announce the launch of the AUN-TV Television Network. There is an unmet need in America for uncensored news and investigations. Most TV news sources ridicule and demonize the majority of their own viewers, something unheard of in other industries. For example in polls only 15% of Americans believe that evolution is the sole source of humans, yet that 85% of Americans is ridiculed as if they were an extremist 2% group by most TV news channels. The same is true on other issues. AUN will respect our viewers right to think for themselves. The majority of Americans believe the news media has covered up multiple government corruption scandals, they are right. As someone who has been in the news media I have first hand witnessed news censorship. It is the mission of AUN to end that censorship.”

Rick Trader is also the producer and host of the Conservative Commandos Radio Show (CCRS). Over the past 10 years, the CCRS has interviewed a “Who’s Who” of thinkers, authors, writers and policy makers from Washington and around the world.

Trader will be responsible for bringing the best of uncensored talk shows to the AUN-TV Network.

“I am thrilled and excited at the prospects of AUN-TV! Now, many great shows, views and voices will have a television platform to call their own” says Trader. “The AUN-TV Network is badly needed to report on the stories the alphabet networks do not want the American people to know of. Our goal is to bring original, thought provoking programs to the viewing public that has a thirst for the truth, and to return our country to the principals of Liberty, Rule of Law and Judeo-Christian ethics our founding father created it for.”



Thank you,

Rick Trader

© All rights reserved.

Made in America Series: CREEKKOOLER & American Fireworks for the 4th of July

Here at 2ndVote we always advocate for the three pillars of shopping your values; shop local whenever possible, shop the highest 2ndVote score whenever possible, and shop American whenever possible. American production has been outsourced overseas for the sake of labor costs, sometimes even using slave labor, for far too long. It is high time that we as Americans demand that the goods and services we purchase are made by Americans, for Americans, in AMERICA!

That’s why we at 2ndVote endorse a product Made-in-America every week. This weekly message features various products that have been verified to be 100% American produced so that 2ndVote shoppers can better support American economic independence. It should be noted that while any products or companies featured in this series have been vetted for being American-made, there is not a guarantee that all such companies have been scored by 2ndVote at the time of publication.

Made-in-America product is the CREEKKOOLER:

Introducing the CreekKooler. An innovative patented floating cooler designed with dual-wall construction and top quality insulation resulting in superior ice retention. 

The CreekKooler glides across all surfaces and easily navigates behind your kayak, canoe, SUP or raft. With tow points allowing users to tie it to their boat or canoe, users favorite beverages and food are always within arms reach. 

The CreekKooler, whether used as a cooler or for safe storage, is at home anywhere, especially in the water.

CreekKooler is made in Rogers, AR

Check them out here!

Made-in-America product is American Fireworks:

American Fireworks Company was started in 1902 by Vincenzo Sorgi, the fourth generation of his family to be involved in the field of pyrotechnics.

Starting out in one small building, Vincenzo Sorgi quickly gained recognition for his handmade products of beauty and quality. In 1929, “Jimmy the Bomb” (as his friends referred to him) gained worldwide recognition by becoming one of the first attempting to shoot a rocket to the moon. Though never achieving his goal, his designs and plans closely parallel those used today and he was regarded as an innovator, well ahead of his time.

Today, over a century later, things at American Fireworks have changed very little. The business is still family owned and operated. Vincenzo’s son Jim and grandson John guided it from the late 20’s to the early 2000’s; they were the fifth and sixth generations of the Sorgi fireworks family. Now, over a hundred years later, Jim’s wife Nancy, John’s wife Mercy and the seventh generation of Sorgi’s, his great grandsons John and Roberto, are carrying on the family’s passion. Over their seven generations they have always tried to raise the bar in terms of quality and most importantly safety.

Vincenzo’s one building on 1/2 acre has grown into more than 60 buildings on 70 acres. Special formulas, handmade craftsmanship, and unique touch for each show are still hallmarks of the company. Although they are no longer trying to shoot rockets to the moon, their firework displays are still like Vincenzo said, “ahead of their time.”

American Fireworks are made in Hudson, OH

Check them out here!

The best way to make positive change in the world of woke businesses is to vote with your wallet, so remember: shop local, shop the highest score possible, and shop American! 2ndVote is not paid for this feature. While any products or companies featured in this series have been vetted for being American-made, there is not a guarantee that all such companies have been scored by 2ndVote at the time of publication.

EDITORS NOTE: This 2ndVote Made in America Series column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Twitter Unanimously Approves Elon Musk’s $44 Billion Purchase Bid

Twitter’s board unanimously recommended Tuesday that shareholders approve billionaire Elon Musk’s offer to buy the social media site for $44 billion.

Musk told Twitter employees earlier in June that he still planned to move forward with the purchase, despite shares in the company remaining significantly lower than his offer price, The Associated Press reported. He noted on Tuesday that approval of the purchase by shareholders was one of a number of unresolved matters halting his purchase, the outlet continued.

The Tesla billionaire’s offer would net a profit of $15.22 per share for investors if it closed now, the AP noted. Musk offered to pay $54.20 per share, despite them falling short of this number upon opening bell Tuesday, the outlet reported.

Twitter’s board of directors said in a filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission that it “unanimously recommends that you vote (for) the adoption of the merger agreement.”

Musk has previously said that Twitter “will neither thrive nor serve this societal imperative in its current form. Twitter needs to be transformed as a private company.” He then offered to buy the entirety of the company in order to “unlock” the “extraordinary potential” of the social media platform. Twitter founder and former CEO Jack Dorsey has praised Musk’s decision to purchase the platform and has also said that he will “never be CEO again.”




RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Rape Office’: Elon Musk Hammers NBC’s Many Scandals

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Why It Matters That Fauci Got Covid-19

In the end Dr. Fauci was no more successful in avoiding the virus than Prince Prospero, the villain from Poe’s imagination who believed his castle could protect him from the plague.

I recently returned from a week-long vacation in the north woods of Wisconsin. We played beach volleyball, went fishing and boating, had a lively game of Wiffle Ball with the kids, and swam until our skin was prune-like.

Even without a cell phone, I managed to stumble on a bit of breaking news from an unusual source: television. (It was virtually the only media I had up there.) Naturally, I had to share this bit of news.

“Fauci has Covid,” I told some of my companions, stuffing beer into coolers.

A discussion quickly broke out over whether the news was relevant.

“So what?” a friend responded. “I accepted a long time ago that everyone is going to get this thing.”

I partly agreed with my friend. Even during the early stages of the pandemic, I harbored suspicions that the virus was going to spread regardless of any interventions politicians or bureaucrats enacted—and those interventions could prove to be destructive, perhaps more destructive than the virus itself.

But I told him not to underestimate the importance of Fauci contracting Covid.

It’s important to understand that Fauci isn’t just the president’s top medical advisor. Fauci, whose official title is director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, is “America’s Doctor,” as The New Yorker described him in April 2020.

More importantly, for better or worse, Fauci became the architect of the US Covid response.

It was Fauci who, early in the pandemic, proposed a Covid strategy that was simultaneously radical and simple: keep Americans apart from one another, using state force, if necessary.

In March 2020, Fauci told “Face the Nation” that the strategy was working.

“The kinds of mitigation issues that are going on right now, the things that we’re seeing in this country, this physical separation at the same time as we’re preventing an influx of cases coming in, I think that’s going to go a long way to preventing us from becoming an Italy,” Fauci said.

The “mitigations” Fauci was referring to were lockdowns. Schools closed. Parks closed. Businesses closed. Any enterprise or activity not deemed “essential” by state authorities was illegal.

Americans were told these efforts were only temporary. “Fifteen days to slow the spread,” became a national mantra.

Six months later, however, nothing had changed. In fact, Fauci was now saying it would have to continue until 2022.

The idea that humans could hide indefinitely from an airborne pathogen if government bureaucrats turned the dial just right has more than a touch of madness to it, but what few seem to realize is that for Fauci, this was just the first step in a larger revolution.

Writing at the Brownstone Institute, Jeffrey Tucker points to an August 2020 Cell article written by Fauci wherein the doctor explains his ideological vision, which rings of Rousseauian idealism.

“Living in greater harmony with nature will require changes in human behavior as well as other radical changes that may take decades to achieve: rebuilding the infrastructures of human existence, from cities to homes to workplaces, to water and sewer systems, to recreational and gatherings venues.

In such a transformation we will need to prioritize changes in those human behaviors that constitute risks for the emergence of infectious diseases. Chief among them are reducing crowding at home, work, and in public places as well as minimizing environmental perturbations such as deforestation, intense urbanization, and intensive animal farming.”

The article, Tucker points out, makes it clear Fauci’s pandemic response was not just about Covid, but a larger technocratic revolution that was hard to define—and one Americans had not signed up for.

“It’s not socialism or capitalism. It’s something else entirely, something very strange,” Tucker writes. “No one has voted for such a thing. It is something Fauci and his friends dreamed up on their own and deployed all their enormous power to enact just as a test, until it fell apart.”

And this is what makes Fauci’s infection—which comes more than two years after the first lockdowns were imposed—so important.

“It’s a sign and symbol that [Fauci’s] entire theory of virus control was wrong,” Tucker writes. “He got his way with policy and it did not work. The virus finally landed on him, as if to reenact Edgar Allan Poe’s fictional story of Prince Prospero in his castle that he believed would protect him.”

In his 1974 Nobel Prize acceptance speech, the economist F.A. Hayek concluded with a warning: he urged humans to act humbly with the immense power of modern science.

“There is danger in the exuberant feeling of ever growing power which the advance of the physical sciences has engendered,” Hayek said, “and which tempts man to try, ‘dizzy with success,’ to use a characteristic phrase of early communism, to subject not only our natural but also our human environment to the control of a human will.”

He continued:

“The recognition of the insuperable limits to his knowledge ought indeed to teach the student of society a lesson of humility which should guard him against becoming an accomplice in men’s fatal striving to control society – a striving which makes him not only a tyrant over his fellows, but which may well make him the destroyer of a civilization which no brain has designed but which has grown from the free efforts of millions of individuals.”

A careful look at Dr. Fauci reveals that humility is not one of his stronger attributes, and his actions show the fatal conceit that Hayek warned against infects public health officials as well as economic planners.

Despite all his efforts, Fauci was no more successful in avoiding the plague than Prince Prospero. But his mad, arrogant effort to extinguish the virus through force is a tale worthy of its own parable.


EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. This article was adapted from an issue of the FEE Daily email newsletter. Click here to sign up and get free-market news and analysis like this in your inbox every weekday.

Providing Former Taliban Associates with Visas and Asylum

The Biden administration continues its assault on U.S. national security.

Biden’s botched withdrawal from Afghanistan has created unprecedented threats to U.S. national security as I noted in an earlier article, Biden’s Catastrophic Policies: Immigration and Afghanistan and those threats are about to be exacerbated by a policy change of the Biden administration.

On June 14, 2022 The Los Angeles Times reported, Some Afghan refugees now have chance to avoid terrorism designation that blocked path to U.S.

Here is how this disconcerting news report begins:

Doctors, teachers, engineers and other Afghans who were forced to associate with the Taliban will now have a chance at asylum or visas after the Biden administration loosened a terrorism-related designation on Tuesday, according to government officials and documents reviewed by the Los Angeles Times.

The exemption will be applied on a case by case basis after security vetting and is expected to help Afghans who fled their country after U.S. troops withdrew and the Taliban took over last August, as well as some Afghans who entered the U.S. earlier, said officials from the Department of Homeland Security.

The administration assurances that each case will be adjudicated on a case by case basis that will involve security vetting does absolutely nothing to assuage my serious concerns.

The fact that among the refugees are doctors, teachers and engineers does nothing to prove that these individual do not pose a threat to US security.  I would remind you that Osama bin Laden had a degree in civil engineering (which, in fact, made him all the more dangerous) and George Habash the founder of the PFLP (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine) an exceedingly violent terrorist organization, was a pediatrician.

That news report and the policy change of the Biden administration comes on the heels of a February 18, 2022 Fox News report: Pentagon IG report says 50 Afghan evacuees brought to US had ‘potentially significant security concerns’

Here is how that report began:

A Pentagon inspector general report released this week found that officials identified at least 50 Afghan evacuees who were brought to the United States in the wake of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan whose information indicated “potentially significant security concerns” –and were unable to locate dozens of those who it said had “derogatory information” that would make them ineligible for parole.

The report, released on Thursday, found that U.S. agencies “did not use all available data when vetting Afghan evacuees.” The National Ground Intelligence Center (NGIC) later expanded its review to fill the gaps in screening, the report said.

The Fox News report is only the tip of a very huge iceberg.

There is a Yiddish expression that states, “When the fish goes bad, it smells from the head!”

The head of DHS is Alejandro Mayorkas the very same Mayorkas who now promises that the applications for visas and asylum will be carefully scrutinized.

Putting Mayorkas in charge of DHS is the equivalent of putting an arsonist in charge of the fire department!

In short, Mayorkas, who demanded that those who worked for him at USCIS approve virtually all applications for visas, demonstrated serious malfeasance that undermined the integrity of the visa issuing process.

Even before Biden was sworn in as President, he announced that Mayorkas would be his pick to become the Secretary of DHS (Department of Homeland Security).  I wrote an article about Biden’s choice for this important position in my December 7, 2020 article, Biden’s DHS: Department of Homeland SurrenderAlejandro Mayorkas, architect of DACA, picked by Biden to head DHS.

My article included a link to an Inspector General report that was issued on March 24, 2015 into allegations made by employees of USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services)that were, at the time under the direction of Mayorkas.  Here is how the cover letter from the Inspector General began:

Attached is our report of the investigation on the allegations made against Deputy Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. I have also attached the written statement he gave to our investigators. The report is furnished for whatever action you consider appropriate.

This report resulted from employees within USCIS who stepped forward to tell us what they witnessed. We will protect the confidentiality of these courageous employees, who are protected from retaliation by the Whistleblower Protection Act and whose identities are protected under the provisions of the Inspector General Act. We hope that their actions will set an example for all potential whistleblowers who look to the Office of Inspector General to give them a voice.

My article also included this excerpt:

ABC News published several in-depth articles about the troubling findings of the Office of the Inspector General (OIG).

On March 24, 2015 ABC News reported, Top Homeland Official Alejandro Mayorkas Accused of Political Favoritism Alejandro Mayorkas oversaw controversial $500,000 visa program.

The above-noted report was preceded by two ABC News reports that were published on February 3, 2015 which illustrate a clear nexus between these visas and national security:

Whistleblowers: US Gave Visas to Suspected Forgers, Fraudsters, Criminals Internal documents show feds ignored warnings from FBI.”  This report began with this excerpt:

Officials overseeing a federal program that offers an immigration short-cut to wealthy foreign investors have ignored pointed warnings from federal agents and approved visas for some immigrants suspected of having committed fraud, money laundering, and even one applicant with alleged ties to a child porn website, an ABC News investigation has found. The shortcomings prompted concerns within the Department of Homeland Security that the boutique immigration program would be exploited by terrorists, according to internal documents obtained by ABC News.

It is shocking,” said Sen. Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican. “Particularly when you have F.B.I. and other law enforcement agencies that are saying national security could be compromised or is being compromised — that’s enough for us to be concerned.”

Feds Investigating Iran Ties to Firm Involved in US Visa Program Documents: Iranian operatives may be abusing program to “infiltrate” U.S.”  This report began with these excerpt:

Federal agents in Los Angeles are investigating an L.A. shipping firm and its Iranian-born owner who for years have participated in and promoted an obscure U.S. immigration program — allowing the company to recruit wealthy foreign investors to receive visas and potentially Green Cards, law enforcement sources told ABC News.

The companys name surfaced in a confidential Department of Homeland Security government document, which raised “concerns that this particular visa program may be abused by Iranian operatives to infiltrate the United States.”

Whistleblowers inside the federal agency that oversees the immigration program told ABC News they have been deeply frustrated by an inability to de-certify the company, even after they became aware of the investigation and saw the companys name surface in an alarming internal Department Homeland Security memo. The memo, shared with ABC News, outlines concerns that Irans Revolutionary Guards have attempted to exploit the visa program “to infiltrate the United States.”

The ABC report included this excerpt about one company in particularly, TTC (Total Transportation Concepts):

The records show that the TTC employee was suspected of ties to an Iranian terror network that was involved in bombing plots and attempted assassinations. In 2012, federal investigators sent an email to immigration officials to advise them against re-certifying American Logistics for the immigration program, warning that an approval “would likely have serious national security implications.”

I strongly advise against a favorable adjudication,” wrote a Homeland Security Special Agent in the Counter-Proliferation Investigations Center in the April 30, 2012 email.

But agents with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) moved forward and green-lighted American Logistics and Mahdavi, to continue overseeing a designated “regional center” for a special U.S. immigration program for wealthy foreigners known by its visa classification, EB-5.

Under the best of circumstance, vetting aliens, particularly those who come from countries that are under the control of hostile governments is daunting, to say the least.

My December 2019 article, Terror Attack At Naval Air Station Highlights Immigration Catastrophe– Limitations in the vetting process endanger national security.was predicated on the deadly shooting at the Pensacola Air Naval Station by a 21 year old member of the Saudi military, Mohammed Saeed Alshamrani, a second lieutenant in the Saudi Air Force as reported in the New York Times on December 6, 2019, Trainee on Military Base Mounts Deadly Attack.

That article included links to reports about other terrorists who were not stopped by the vetting process:

On December 3, 2019 the DOJ reported, Hizballah Operative Sentenced to 40 Years in Prison for Covert Terrorist Activities on Behalf of Hizballahs Islamic Jihad Organization; Ali Kourani Was Trained by Hizballahs External Terrorist Operations Component and Gathered Intelligence in New York City in Support of Attack-Planning Efforts.

My recent article, Alleged Hezbollah Sleeper” Arrested In NYC By Joint Terrorism Task Force included this paragraph:

On September 19, 2019 the U.S. Attorneys Office for the Southern District of New York issued a press release that announced, Manhattan U.S. Attorney Announces Indictment Of New Jersey Man For Terrorist Activities On Behalf Of Hizballahs Islamic Jihad Organization. The subtitle of that press release provides more disturbing information, Alexei Saab Allegedly Was Trained by Hizballahs External Terrorist Operations Component in Bomb-Making and Conducted Intelligence-Gathering in New York City and Washington, D.C., and Elsewhere in Support of Hizballahs Attack-Planning Efforts.

On August 2, 2019 the Justice Department posted thus extremely this worrying news release, Afghanistan National and Former U.S. Military Interpreter Charged for Role in Human Smuggling Conspiracy.

On August 20, 2018 the Department of Justice issued a press release, Two Individuals Charged for Acting as Illegal Agents of the Government of Iran.

My piece written in February 2018, Saudi Graduate Of Al Qaeda Terror Training Camp Arrested In Oklahoma –  Alleged classmate of 9/11 hijackers attended US flight school in 2016 included a link to the DOJ press release, Saudi Citizen Charged in Oklahoma With Concealing Attendance at Al Qaeda Training Camp.

When you add to the mix the mindset of an individual such as Mayorkas, who has refused to secure our borders, enforce our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States and refuse to pursue immigration fraudsters, as I wrote in my October 22, 2022 article, Biden Administration Plans To Protect Immigration Fraudsters we have a potentially catastrophic situation even as intelligence services warn that within a couple of years ISIS and other terror groups will be in the position to carry out deadly terror attacks within the borders of the United States- the borders the Biden administration refuses to secure.

As I noted in a recent article, Mayorkas is not Americas guardian — he’s its innkeeper.

©Michael Cutler. All rights reserved.

VIDEO: After the Guns Were Confiscated, the Killing Fields Began

“Our Founding Fathers didn’t give us the Second Amendment for duck hunting or simply for self-protection in a country that at the time had a vast and yet unknown frontier. They bestowed it upon us so that we could protect our precious nation from devolving into tyranny as so many others have done.”

Watch this flashback video of Pamela Geller on the Dr. Drew Show debating gun control:

After the Guns Were Removed, the Killing Fields Began

By: J. William Middendorf, June 16, 2022

J. William Middendorf is a former secretary of the Navy and author of “The Great Nightfall: How We Win the New Cold War” (2020).

“All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The Communist Party must command all the guns; that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party.”

The quote was from Mao Zedong, founder of Communist China. Mao’s first act after gaining complete control of China in 1949 was to take away all guns from the population. It was a policy he began in 1935 as he took over each rural province. Anyone found with a gun post-confiscation was executed.

An estimated 65 million Chinese died as a result of Mao’s repeated, merciless attempts to create a new “socialist” China. Anyone who got in his way was done away with—by execution, imprisonment, or forced famine.

Mao killed more people than either Stalin or Hitler during World War II. And it all began after he took away the guns.

Dictators throughout much of history have disarmed their populations before they began their mass killings. Examples abound beyond Mao: Hitler took guns from the Jews in November of 1938, and Kristallnacht and the Holocaust followed; and then there was Fidel Castro in Cuba and Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, to name but a few.

Cuba and Gun Control

Everybody ought to have a gun, Castro maintained—until he took over Cuba in 1959. At a rally in Havana before he assumed power, he explained: “This is how democracy works: It gives rifles to farmers, to students, to women, to Negroes, to the poor, and to every citizen who is ready to defend a just cause.”

Weapons ranging from Czech submachine guns to Belgian FN automatic rifles were handed out to 50,000 soldiers, 400,000 militiamen, 100,000 members of the factory-guarding popular defense force, and to many men, women, and children in Cuba’s 1 million-strong “neighborhood vigilance committees.”

Immediately after assuming power in 1959, Castro changed his position, following Mao’s rule that guns should not be in the hands of the people.

For three weeks after the Castro government was formed, Radio Havana warned, “All citizens must turn in their combat weapons. Civilians must take arms to police stations, soldiers to military headquarters.”

Radio Havana’s explanation was somewhat contradictory: The guns were in bad shape anyway and the “struggle against our enemies requires a rigorous control of all combat weapons.”

There was an urgency about the new policy that suggested serious concern. Failure to turn in military weapons by Sept. 1, 1959, warned Radio Havana, would be punished not by criminal courts but by the dreaded Revolutionary Tribunals—those kangaroo courts that sentenced thousands of Cubans to death after Castro took over.

Venezuela and Gun Control  

Venezuela is now paying the price for allowing Chavez to implement the Mao rule when he came to power in 2012.

The shocking nature of an economic collapse that led Venezuela from being one of the richest countries in Latin America to one of the poorest has been well documented.

One aspect of the Venezuelan crisis that does not receive much coverage is the country’s gun control regime. All guns were outlawed when Chavez came to power, and harsh penalties were imposed on violators. The Venezuelan Armed Forces have exclusive power to control, register, and potentially confiscate firearms.

Many citizens now regret the repressive gun control legislation the Venezuelan government implemented in 2012. Naturally, this regret is warranted. The Venezuelan government is among the most tyrannical in the world, with a proven track record of violating basic civil liberties such as free speech, debasing its national currency, confiscating private property, and creating economic controls that destroy the country’s productivity.

Elections have proven to be useless, as they’ve been mired with corruption and charges of government tampering. For many, taking up arms is the only option left for the country to shake off its tyrannical government. But the Venezuelan government has prevented such an uprising with its draconian gun control.

These life-and-death lessons of history are lost on too many Americans. Our Founding Fathers didn’t give us the Second Amendment for duck hunting or simply for self-protection in a country that at the time had a vast and yet unknown frontier. They bestowed it upon us so that we could protect our precious nation from devolving into tyranny as so many others have done.

Politicians who respect the American ideal don’t try to diminish the Second Amendment or blame it for other ills of society that they have failed to solve, but rather embrace it as part of the legacy of rights that helps keep America free.



EXCLUSIVE: More Than A Dozen Republican AGs Demand Senators Reject Biden’s ‘Anti-Gun’ ATF Nominee

Five Major Cities on Pace to Pass High 2021 Homicide Totals Halfway Through 2022, UP 25% – All Run By Democrats

Muslim Privilege: Cleveland ‘Officer of the Year’ Ismail Quran Under Investigation for Jew-Hating, Pro-Hitler Tweets

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

From ‘your choice’ to familism: A path for 21st century feminism

The discussion which should follow the Supreme Court decision on abortion.

This is the second part of a review of The Rights of Women: Reclaiming a Lost Vision, by Erika Bachiochi. The first part is here.

When the US Supreme Court in its 1992 Casey decision doubled down on Roe v Wade, the court majority claimed that “an entire generation has come of age free to assume Roe’s concept of liberty in defining the capacity of women to act in society”.

What was Roe’s concept of liberty? That of the autonomous individual, the hero of American libertarianism and a parody of the self-governing (virtuous) individual of the founding era.

Roe’s heroine is the one who “chooses”, behind the veil of “privacy”, all by herself, what to do about an “unplanned” child she has conceived.

Her options are stark. Will she keep the baby and risk her marriage or career, or both? Is she prepared to see the last of her uncommitted partner, and face years of poverty and loneliness as a single parent, trying to balance work/welfare and care of her child?

Or will she “get rid of it” and simplify her life, make progress in the job market – and hope for better circumstances next time around?

Since 1973 American has, through its laws and economy, told women that they are on their own in this matter. Caring for children is a choice, a private thing. Society is interested in women as workers, not mothers. Workers just like men.

As Erika Bachiochi observes in her book, The Rights of Women: Reclaiming a Lost Vision, “When Casey reaffirmed the ‘right to choose’ abortion, employers and other public institutions remained ‘free’ to be unchanged by women’s participation in them.”

In support she quotes a pro-choice law professor, Deborah Dinner:

“The discourse of reproductive choice continues to legitimate workplace structures modelled on the masculine ideal [with no caregiving responsibilities] as well as social policies that provide inadequate public support for families.”

“In the end,” adds Bachiochi, “it may just be that an unmitigated right to abortion serves of profit-driven market above all else.”

How did “women’s rights” end up in this blind alley?

In the second-last chapter of her book, Bachiochi explores the work of Harvard legal luminary Mary Ann Glendon to throw light on this question.

Family law in America vs Europe

Glendon, whose early experience of single parenthood was formative for her views, traced the source of the problem to the libertarianism of the Anglo-American rights tradition and its effect on family law and culture.

By the mid-twentieth century, she found, “self-sufficiency” had become the guiding principle in US family law, leading to the removal of legal protection from the family unit (through, for example, no-fault divorce) and to the idea of marriage as, “an association of individuals”.

In Europe, things were different. In many countries the civil law, reflecting classical and Christian ideas about human dignity and the common good, had more to say about spousal rights and duties, and envisaged marriage as a community of persons for the nurture of children. As women won equal status during the twentieth century, marriage law was not emptied of content as in the US.

In most modern European constitutions the basic social institution of the family (and often the status of motherhood itself) remained protected, as it had been in the 1948 UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Thus, in 1970, the Federal Constitutional Court in West Germany stated:

“The concept of man in the Basic Law [i.e. the Constitution] is not that of an isolated sovereign individual; rather, the Basic Law has decided in favour of a relationship between individual and community in the sense of a person’s dependence on and commitment to the community, without infringing on a person’s individual value.”

Though European countries have since bought into autonomy and individualism, most have far better supports for families. They are also more conservative regarding abortion.

A dignitarian vision of marriage

Glendon pointed out that while American law advanced women’s rights in the sphere of work and public life, it simultaneously devalued women’s role in reproduction and the concrete caregiving work they had traditionally done at home, and which still had to be done by parents – or someone. She wrote, in 1996:

“[In modern times, women] have adapted to that situation in two ways. They are having fewer children, and they are maintaining at least a foothold in the labour force even when their children are very young. But that strategy still does not protect mothers very well against the risk of the four deadly Ds: disrespect for non-market work; divorce; disadvantages in the workplace for anyone who takes time out; and the destitution that afflicts so many female-headed households.”

Having men do half the caregiving and other domestic work, as advocated by mainstream feminists, could never remove these risks because of the deep “asymmetry” (not simply “difference”) between their reproductive roles. Like Mary Wollstonecraft, Glendon advocated not strict equality but, as Bachiochi puts it,

“an equal dignity that admits the special ‘power’ and ‘privilege,’ and ‘disability’ too, of childbearing and childrearing, seeking not the erasure of these facts of life, but a reconciliation of them within reciprocal relationships of mutual respect, interdependence, and collaboration in all realms of life.”

To make this dignitarian vision a reality for women Glendon called for a cultural turn towards the family, in recognition of the fundamental importance of stable, self-governing families to public order and a flourishing society.

As Wollstonecraft insisted: “If you wish to make good citizens, you must first exercise the affections of a son and a brother. This is the only way to expand the heart; for public affections as well as public virtue must ever grow out of private character…”

Familism, communities and society

This would entail a “social ecology” in which smaller groups and systems (“communities of memory and mutual aid”) would play their supportive role in the neglected space between the state and the family or individual.

With others, she proposed to the Clinton administration in the early 1990s that society should:

  • Support infant-parent bonding in the home until the age of one year. This through a combination paid leave (for six months at least) flexitime and work-from-home arrangements.
  • Provide a generous, European-style child allowance, and tax policies which did not favour those who work outside the home.
  • Foster a culture of familism to shore up the essential work parents do and reaffirm the value of children over “excessive careerism or acquisitiveness”, so parents could put their children first.

The aim, here, was not some kind of “work-family balance”, but a fundamental change in the way parents in the workforce – both men and women – are seen: not as employees first and caregivers second, but as caregivers first and employees second. The economy should serve families and not vice-versa.

Coming to the present, the fate of those ideas can be judged, perhaps, by President Biden’s recent (failed) attempt to spend more than $200 billion on subsidising childcare for millions of poor and middle-class families where both parents work, while offering nothing to families who would like to have one parent stay at home with their young children – as many would.

Reimagining feminism

Yes, despite more flexibility in the workplace and diversity in familial arrangements in the direction of “gender equality”, Glendon’s call for a family-friendly culture remains unfulfilled. And some things are worse.

College-educated fathers may be doing a larger share of caregiving and domestic work, but further down the social scale they are often simply missing. More than a third of children in the US live without their father in the home, Bachiochi notes. Marriage rates and fertility are at historic lows, and the happiness of women has also fallen. Where there are two spouses or partners, they often both need to work full-time to keep the small family afloat.

In the face of all this, most feminists remain obsessed with the gender pay gap and abortion rights.

However, there is nothing inevitable about the present, and Bachiochi concludes her historical study of the rights of women by imagining a 21st century feminism shaped by the dignitarian values of Wollstonecraft and Glendon.

The new feminism, while preserving the real gains for women of the last two centuries, would correct mistakes and carry forward the work of harmonising marriage, parenthood and the social and economic equality of women.

Importantly, it would disentangle the sexual revolution from the movement for women’s rights. Given the role abortion has played in enabling the sexual chaos and in delaying proper recognition of the work of the home, repudiating abortion would be a good place to start, Bachiochi suggests.

It’s a big ask, but Bachiochi’s own history is proof that it is possible. She was a pro-choice feminist when, at 20, she read Mary Ann Glendon’s Rights Talk, with its appeal to human dignity as the basis for human rights, and could not shake off its arguments.

Later, when she started her research on theories of women’s rights, she was stunned to discover Mary Wollstonecraft’s view that male chastity was the precondition for equality between the sexes.

There is much, much more in her book, but by bringing the thought of these two women to light for today’s scholars and students, Bachiochi has done them a great service. And the timeliness of her work is only enhanced by the pending Roe and Casey decision, since it lays out the terms of the discussion that should follow.

While Abortion Activists Vandalize Pro-Life Clinics, Senate Dems Want Google to Ban Them

The political and terrorist arms of the American Left are in sync.

A few weeks after the Buffalo mass shooting, another domestic terrorist attack occurred in the upstate New York city. CompassCare, a pregnancy care clinic guiding new mothers away from abortion, was firebombed by the pro-abortion hate group, Jane’s Revenge. The group has been linked to the firebombing of at least two other pro-life offices and organizations last month.

Its threatening graffiti included the warning, “If abortions aren’t safe, then you aren’t either.”

“We demand the disbanding of all anti-choice establishments, fake clinics, and violent anti-choice groups within the next thirty days,” the Jane’s Revenge communique threatened. “We are forced to adopt the minimum military requirement for a political struggle.”

Since then the abortion domestic terror group has claimed responsibility for more attacks. And Senate Dems appear to be working in tandem with it.

A group of Democratic senators and representatives called on Google to look into search results and ads tied to “anti-abortion ‘fake clinics’” amid a recent report that showed their prevalence in 13 states with so-called “trigger laws” that would almost immediately ban or severely restrict abortion should Roe v. Wade be overturned by the Supreme Court.

Thirteen senators and eight representatives signed a letter to Sundar Pichai, the CEO of Google parent company Alphabet Inc., dated Friday in which they highlighted a report by the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) that showed that in 13 states with trigger laws, searches for “abortion pill” or “abortion clinic near me” showed clinics that did not provide those services 11 percent of the time.

CCDH, as I’ve noted in the past, is a ridiculous organization.

The Center for Countering Digital Hate is a British leftist group run by Imran Ahmed, a former adviser to future London Mayor Sadiq Khan, now operating out of Washington D.C. CCDH Senior researcher Sophie Wilkinson used to write pieces for Vice and The Guardian. Samples include “I Posed as a Man Online for Sex”, “Slutdropping: the Dancefloor Move That’s Bringing Women Together”, and, “I Got My Faeces Tested to See If It’s ‘Super-Poo’”.

Absolutely the folks that Senate Dems should be relying on for intel, instead, they want Google to get rid of pro-life pregnancy centers from its search results.

This is the same agenda as their domestic terrorist allies are following, except they’re using Big Tech allies to do the destroying.


EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Ho Chi Minh, Che Guevara, Stalin: Leftists Give Away Game with Chants

Boston Mayor Appoints Former Head of Jihad Terror-linked Mosque as Her Deputy Chief of Staff

The Islamic Society of Boston was founded by al-Qaeda financier Abrurrahman Alamoudi and had the Hitler-admiring Jew-hater Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi on its Board. It has recommended (in accord with Qur’an 4:34) that men beat their wives. Convicted jihadis Tarek Mehanna and Aafia Siddiqui went there. So did Ahmad Abousamra, the Islamic State’s “social media guru.” Oh, and the Boston Marathon jihad bombers, the Tsarnaev brothers.

Ironically, Michelle Wu wouldn’t dream of appointing someone who had spoken critically of jihad violence and Sharia oppression as deputy chief of staff. But this is fine.

“Massachusetts Politicians Enable Boston’s Islamists,” by Sam Westrop, Focus on Western Islamism, June 13, 2022:

In May, Boston’s progressivist Mayor, Michelle Wu, appointed Yusufi Vali as her Deputy Chief of Staff. Vali is the former head of the Islamic Society of Boston (ISB), an institution once considered to be among the most radical mosques on the East Coast. Vali’s appointment appears to be yet another case of a graduate of Boston’s Islamist institutions finding a powerful foothold in Massachusetts politics.

Vali certainly has some explaining to do. He is a former trustee of the Boston branch of the Muslim American Society (MAS), one of America’s most notorious Islamist institutions and a designated terrorist organization in the United Arab Emirates.

In 2008, federal prosecutors wrote that “MAS was founded as the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.” Speakers at MAS conference have often openly glorified terrorism. In 2019, the Philadelphia branch of MAS made national headlines after it ran an event in which children sang about torturing and beheading Jews.

MAS’s Boston branch oversaw the management of ISB’s flagship mosque for many years, where Vali became executive director. Before Vali’s time, early trustees of the ISB’s first mosque, over the river in Cambridge, included Yusuf Al Qaradawi, the infamously-extreme spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and admirer of Adolf Hitler; as well as Abdulrahman Alamoudi, an Al Qaeda fundraiser who was jailed in 2004 for conspiring with the Libyan regime to assassinate the Saudi Crown Prince….



NYC: Muslim stabs woman in neck, attacks two others, is repeatedly released, charges with rape in Baltimore

Woke tech company Slack bans Federation for American Immigration Reform

While Abortion Activists Vandalize Pro-Life Clinics, Senate Dems Want Google to Ban Them

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Building a Culture of Hope and Beauty

Robert Royal: Programs at Houston’s University of St. Thomas seek to bolster Western civilization and, perhaps, bring about a new and needed Catholic renaissance.

People often ask: What can we do, given all the problems that exist in the Church and the world? Most of what we’re thinking of when we pose that question has to do with specific things like liturgy and bad shepherds – or abortion, family breakdown, crime, and the widespread distrust of leaders and institutions. We have to keep at these specific problems, and many others, without letup and without allowing them, heavy as they are taken singly or together, to lead to despair.

But we’re the Catholic Church. Not only can we walk and chew gum at the same time, but we also have a tradition-rich enough to provide answers and concrete help in any and all human circumstances. We can’t save the world, of course. Only God can do that. But we can do what we can in the here and now, which means not solely focusing on problems and what’s negative around us. And not even only continuing longstanding good works, but actively imagining and pursuing new possibilities.

Deo volente – and the airlines co-operating – I’ll be in Houston at one such hopeful initiative today and for the next few days at a Summer Literary Series organized by our columnist James Matthew Wilson and Joshua Hren, who together head a new Master’s in Fine Arts program at the University of St. Thomas. (You can read about the Series and the MFA program by clicking here.) Houston’s Cardinal DiNardo will celebrate Mass this morning at the university on behalf of the program.

Fine Arts, which means encouraging creative writing by younger and not-so-young aspirants, may seem a long distance from many of the concrete concerns we address here at The Catholic Thing. But we have said since this site began that we have to recover the fullness of the Catholic cultural tradition – and extend it – if we are going to avoid the error of trying to deal with our situation merely with the blunt tools that have produced it. There’s much more in the past of our Christian civilization – and ready to be born in the future.

There’s no easy path out of our cultural malaise. But as James Matthew Wilson has explained:

We intend for the Summer Literary Series to be the University of Saint Thomas’s gift to the people of Houston, of the country, and around the world, as we feature great artists and scholars who are building a culture of hope and beauty even now. We live in tumultuous times, but also times of tremendous energy and inventiveness, both in our culture as a whole and in the Catholic Church in particular.

It’s worth adding that it’s not enough to notice that good things are being done by individuals and organizations. To build such a culture requires cultivation – and we can’t expect the secular culture, troubled as it is from Hollywood to newsrooms, university campuses to social media, to find its way to better waters without organized effort.

This is clearly a long-term prospect, and all proper praise to our friends at the University of St. Thomas for being willing to take that long view at a time when it seems that most universities are chasing after the latest thing on Twitter or Instagram. It’s an uncertain investment in a way, because there are no guarantees that we can prevail against various countercurrents. But then again, you don’t produce a cultural renaissance by waiting until all the conditions are right. You plunge ahead with a solid vision– and make it happen.

James Matthew Wilson points to one such vision: “The great [20th-century] philosopher Jacques Maritain once wrote that ‘to civilize is to spiritualize.’ We hope to be a source and servant of such a spirit.”

You can watch the live-streaming of a public dialogue that my friend Dana Gioia and I will have Tuesday evening about an earlier Catholic renaissance that gave us St. John Henry Newman and Gerard Manley Hopkins, Chesterton and Belloc, Evelyn Waugh and Graham Greene, Jacques Maritain and Etienne Gilson, Charles Péguy, Paul Claudel, Francois Mauriac and George Bernanos, and here in America Thomas Merton, Paul Horgan, Flannery O’Connor, Walker Percy, and many more.

Dana Gioia is himself a prominent American poet (by some miracle, from 2015 to 2018 poet laureate of his home state of California ), the former chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts (when the better guys were in the White House), a successful businessman in his earlier life, and a long-time cultural entrepreneur not only in poetry but opera and film. His essay “Can Poetry Matter?” is must reading for anyone interested in contemporary culture. Among many valuable insights, he urges writers to take it to heart that they have great responsibilities and should pursue larger goals than the typical writing for one another in writing programs. We’ll also be discussing the prospects for a new renaissance and what it would take to make that happen.

Dana will give a reading from his work in the same time slot Monday evening, and I’ll be discussing the poetry of St. John Paul II – believe me, worth some attention – on Wednesday (These won’t be livestreamed but here’s hoping that at some point we can connect you to recorded versions.) And Cynthia Haven, author of a stunning book – in both cultural and spiritual terms – on the Polish poet Czeslaw Milosz, who won the Nobel Prize in 1984 and lived for decades in California, will be speaking Thursday evening.

And these are just the public lectures. There are multiple daily workshops for students over the next week and a program during the year that draw on work by the faculty of the program, which includes names such as Sohrab Ahmari, Randy Boyagoda, Rod Dreher, Ron Hansen, Jessica Hooten Wilson, etc.

In short, here’s a novel initiative that is ambitious but not naïve about the present, and which deserves your attention and support. May our tribe increase.

You may also enjoy:

Robert Royal’s The Catholic Thing (our inaugural column)

James Matthew Wilson’s Our Virgilian Civilization (Or, the Devil Was the First Whig)


Robert Royal

Robert Royal is editor-in-chief of The Catholic Thing and president of the Faith & Reason Institute in Washington, D.C. His most recent books are Columbus and the Crisis of the West and A Deeper Vision: The Catholic Intellectual Tradition in the Twentieth Century.

EDITORS NOTE: This The Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2022 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Why Bill Maher Can’t Kick His Democrat Party Addiction

Comedian-cum-commentator Bill Maher has of late been making some new friends and enemies and raising many an eyebrow. At issue are his Real Time monologues in which he has taken his “side,” the Left, to task for “woke” insanity ranging from canceling people over innocent quips to convincing children they can be the opposite sex to whiny “millennial” entitlement. It reminds many of the #WalkAway movement and of billionaire industrialist Elon Musk’s recent resolution to vote Republican. Nonetheless, Maher never actually becomes “red pilled”; one way or another, he makes clear he’s firmly on the Democrat plantation. There’s a good reason for this, too — a psychological reason.

On a simple level, going GOP could be disastrous for Maher’s career and social life, perhaps resulting in eventual show cancellation and expulsion from the cocktail party set. He can dissent from the party line to an extent, perhaps (unless and until leftists cement even more control), and remain relatively unscathed only as long as he remains a hoplite in the leftist phalanx

Yet there’s a deeper reason, I’m virtually sure, for Maher’s Democrat addiction. Many have noted how supercilious leftists can be, seemingly convinced of their own intellectual superiority despite obvious intellectual vacuity. They revel in mocking conservatives for being mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging, humorless scientific obscurantists. Maher has displayed this conceit, too, though in recent years it appears to have been tempered via exposure to conservatives whose scholarly heft he can’t deny (e.g., Ben Shapiro, whom Maher interviewed).

Now, one appeal of supremacist ideologies concerns self-image. No matter how insecure or lacking one may be, no matter how “small” he may feel, he can always hang his hat on being part of an “elite” group. “Hey, at least I’m not like these other people,” the thinking goes, on some level. “I’m special, superior, in the ether.”

Realize, too, that while supremacism is generally associated with racial feelings, it can involve a host of different orientations such as nationality, class or religion — or ideology. And, generally speaking, leftists absolutely do exhibit this phenomenon.

Coming to mind here is the liberal neighbor who told me years ago, perhaps trying to couch a put-down in pseudo-compassion or exhibiting a perverse sort of charitableness, that it wasn’t that I was bad. I just wasn’t as “evolved” as he was (thankfully, since I later realized he was a narcissist).

What this means is that leftists’ self-esteem, their self-image, their conception of self-worth, is tied in with their pseudo-ideology and group association. This is one reason disabusing them of their misguided notions can sometimes be impossible: You’re not merely combating intellectual error but emotional dependence. In many cases, relinquishing liberalism would collapse leftists’ whole world; their self-image and ego would implode. They’d feel lower than dirt.

I suspect this is the case with Maher. Related to this, he also wants to be one of the “cool kids.” This was hinted at when, while mounting a left-handed defense of the Boy Scouts many years ago (before the group fell from grace), he said that the “nerds” needed some place to go. (Pro tip, Bill: The nerds are the people who run to a safe space with a comfort animal just because they heard a joke they didn’t like.)

The upshot is that I don’t think Maher will anytime soon follow Ronald Reagan and so many others in realizing that he doesn’t have to leave the Democrat Party — the Democrat Party long ago left him.

But there is a bright side here. While bedding down with evil and enabling its errors certainly isn’t good for Maher’s soul (and we should care about that), politically speaking, it may be valuable having him mock and condemn Leftism 87.0 (the Woke version) “from the inside.” Proclaiming Republicanism, after all, would mean that many liberals would just tune him out. This way, he has their ear.

In fact, maybe he’s winning the GOP more votes, especially among Independents, by being a liberal “voice of reason” (an oxymoron, I know). And if nothing else, perhaps he’ll just inspire a few more disaffected liberals to stay home on Election Day.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on MeWe, Gettr or Parler, or log on to

©Selwyn Duke. All rights reserved.

You Know the Violence Is Wrong — Speak Out and Leave the Left

The FBI opened an investigation into attacks on pro-life pregnancy centers and faith-based organizations around the country, after 52 attacks in 46 days.  Last week, Jane’s Revenge – the pro-abortion militant group claiming responsibility for some of the attacks – pledged to step up the violence.  In one incident, two masked individuals broke a window and threw a lit flare into a pro-life state legislator’s office in Washington state.  Why were they wearing masks?  If they were proud of their position, wouldn’t they want the whole world to know who they are?  If they felt compelled to mask up, they must have known what they were doing was wrong.  For its part, the White House has refused to condemn the most recent pro-abortion violence or the assassination attempt against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, which makes the White House complicit in the violence, as far as I’m concerned.

Abortion isn’t the only issue provoking attacks from the increasingly violent Left, these days.  A Florida Democrat was arrested and charged with five felonies for threatening to kill Republican Congresswoman Lauren Boebert.  Republican Congressman Barry Loudermilk received death threats after he was falsely accused of helping January 6th rioters by giving them a tour of tunnels and other key places on Capitol Hill the day before.  The people issuing the death threats didn’t leave their names.  They must have known it was wrong.  A man driving a car with an anti-Trump bumper sticker crashed it into a Trump merchandise store in Massachusetts.

Anti-Trump violence caused YouTuber Keri Smith to leave the Left.  She was troubled by videos showing Leftists attacking Trump supporters.   “There was one video where this mob surrounded this woman, a Trump supporter, and threw eggs at her,” she says. “There was another where they were chasing these guys down the street and throwing bricks at them. They bloodied this guy’s head. This was jarring to me.”  Her friends made light of these attacks, saying things like, ‘Well, some old white men are going to have to die.’” “That was a shock to my system,” she says.  “I started to see all of these think pieces from my social justice echo chamber saying that all Trump supporters are Nazis and that we should not feel empathy toward them,” Smith says.

So she started questioning the Left’s entire belief system.  But when she spoke up, her friends would tell her to sit down and shut up, ‘‘it’s just your white privilege coming through.’

She likens the techniques her Leftist friends were using on her to cult methodology.  Cults control the information environment and tell their members not to investigate anything beyond the slogans the cult gives them.  Everyone in the outside world is wrong. ‘Don’t listen to them, WE’RE your family now, the slogans are all you need.’  Cults also gaslight, that is, try to convince people they’re crazy if they dare to think different – ‘it’s just your white privilege coming through.’  Cults also shun people who try to leave and threaten the members they’ll be frozen out and lose their entire support network if they do.  Keri Smith calls it ‘The Great Unfriending’ where her so-called Leftist friends smeared her online after she spoke up.

This is what thought control looks like.  It’s cult methodology from start to finish.  Keri Smith was a victim of it, until she summoned the courage to leave the Left.  She has a warning for others and offers hope.  “If people don’t speak up in the early stages of an authoritarian belief system, an evil belief system—and I do call it evil—there’s going to come a time when you’re not allowed to speak at all,” she says.  So people trapped in the Left’s authoritarian environment must overcome their fear.  You can do it.  “You don’t have to have a podcast or shout it from a soapbox,” she says. “Just don’t be afraid in your daily life to say what you really think. Then maybe one day you’ll get a message from someone saying, ‘Thank you, I feel comfortable saying this now knowing I’m not alone.’”

If your Leftist so-called friends are doing these things to you, leave them behind and find new friends.  Others have done it before you.  You won’t be the first and you won’t be the last.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.