Thursday, June 10, 2021

Don’t Forget That We Need Fathers

There’s a question to ask with the statement, “I need ….” Why do you need it? What do you need it in order to do? You might find out, by exploring the question, that you may only want something, but not really require it. Or you may find that you do require something, and you’ll come to understand why that thing is essential.

The other day Andrew Klavan (how many times have I quoted him at the top of a post lately? It’s from 7 minutes onward in this clip) suggested that one trouble with woke, or leftist, culture is that it is forgetting obvious things that have always been known. He says,

Every great civilization dies by forgetting the obvious thing…. And they want to make sure that your children forget it too. The culture war is the war.

I believe that among these forgotten things is the fact that we need fathers.

Why do we need fathers? What do we need them in order to do?

We need them to fill the role in the basic unit of civilization—the family—that fathers must do.

Dennis Prager recently put out one of his 5-minute videos asking and answering the question, “Are Fathers Necessary?” Yes, is the answer. Yes, fathers are essential.


screenshot from Dennis Prager's PragerU video "Are Fathers Necessary?"

After listing several publications showing the answer has been forgotten, Prager quotes Barack Obama, from a 2008 speech, saying fathers are “critical” to families, that “they are teachers and coaches; they are mentors and role models; they are examples of success; and they are the men who constantly push us toward it.”

That speech wasn’t disqualifying to Obama as a candidate, so that must mean, as recently as 2008, this basic truth was in the public consciousness. So it’s only recently that it has been forgotten.

But it’s still true.

Prager goes through some of what we know through social science data[i], showing that both boys and girls need fathers. First, for boys:

A boy has no built-in understanding about how to be a man—meaning a good and responsible man. Male nature is wild—most obviously regarding sex and violence. If a boy does not have a father who models how a man controls himself, he will most likely not know how to control himself—let alone want to. That's why most males in prison for violent crimes grew up without a father.

After days of riots in the UK in 2011, quite like the 2020 riots in America, Cristina Odone wrote a column for The London Telegraph whose title says it all: “London riots: Absent fathers have a lot to answer for.” In the column, she wrote, “The majority of rioters are gang members…. Like the overwhelming majority of youth offenders behind bars, these gang members have one thing in common: no father at home.”

The way social science data works is, it’s about the odds. It doesn’t mean that mothers never successfully raise boys on their own. It means the odds are against them. It means that, if you take a large number of people where boys are raised without fathers and compare them to large numbers of boys with both parents, the fatherless boys have a much higher likelihood of bad outcomes than boys raised with both mother and father.

According to family researcher Glenn T. Stanton, in Secure Daughters, Confident Sons,

Anthropologists tell us that the primary problem in every human community throughout time and place is always the same: the unattached, undisciplined male. His male nature—with its raw physical strength and energies, appetite for food, drink, and sex and even violence—needs to be domesticated and even socialized.

Next, for girls, Prager says this about fathers and daughters:

Mr. Spherical Model and granddaughter.
Masks are still required on the tram ride at
Space Center Houston, but we had fun
taking yet another generation there.

As regards daughters, the father is the man girls learn to relate to. Without a father to relate to and bond with, there are at least two destructive consequences. First, she will not know how to choose a man wisely. She will not know how a man should treat her, and she may well end up with a man who mistreats her. Second, to fulfill her desire to bond with a man—as primal a yearning in most women as bonding with a woman is in most men—she will go from man to man. Girls without fathers in their lives are far more likely to be sexually promiscuous, and to begin sexual activity at an earlier age, which in turn are reasons many young women are depressed. Few women find sleeping with man after man fulfilling. Most find it ultimately depressing.

It isn’t a matter of simply having two parents—of whatever sex—to help with the parenting; it is that fathers and mothers contribute particular things to the family. Some of this is borne out in data surrounding children raised by two same-sex parents. There’s this summary of the data from 2013, in a piece by Michael Bauman: 

Compared to children who were raised in intact homes with both the biological father and mother present to raise them, the children of homosexual parents grow up to:

                   Be Much more likely to receive welfare.

                   Have lower educational attainment.

                   Report more ongoing “negative impact” from their family of origin.

                   Be more likely to suffer from depression.

                   Have been arrested more often.

                   (If they are female) Have had more sexual partners—both male and female.

If they were the children of lesbian mothers, they are:

                   More likely to be currently cohabiting.

                   Almost 4 times more likely to be currently on public assistance.

                   Less likely to be currently employed full-time.

                   More than 3 times more likely to be unemployed.

                   Nearly 4 times more likely to identify as something other than entirely heterosexual.

                   Three times as likely to have had an affair while married or cohabiting.

                   An astonishing 10 times more likely to have been “touched sexually by a parent or other adult caregiver.”

                   Nearly 4 times as likely to have been “physically forced” to have sex against their will.

                   More likely to have “attachment” problems related to the ability to depend on others.

                   Use marijuana more frequently.

                   Smoke more frequently.

                   Have more often pled guilty to a non-minor offense.

Whenever a family is missing a mother or a father, the children are missing something essential to their upbringing. If we recognize that this father-shaped piece is missing, we might be able to compensate—with another father figure, maybe a grandfather, uncle, coach, teacher, or minister.

There’s a dad who saw what was lacking, and took it upon himself to fill in a bit. He teaches people, through short videos, how to do basic skills that typically a father would teach. “Dad, How Do I?” shows how to tie a tie, how to iron a dress shirt, how to shave, how to jumpstart a car, how to fix a toilet, and even something as important as how to have integrity. A video might not make up for the absence of the father, but at least it’s a resource to help out the moms, who can’t teach it all.


screenshot from "Dad, How Do I" video on how to iron a dress shirt

But if we fail to notice what has been obvious to civilizations for millennia—that children need a mother and a father—and suddenly think we know better, we leave that gap. And it’s the children who suffer.

We’ve looked here at what happens with a missing father. But, in honor of Father’s Day coming up soon (a week from Sunday), let’s also list what fathers-doing-the-dad-thing-right provide. I offered this list in 2019. And when I wrote it, I had adapted it from this article

·       Children who come into families with loving fathers know they were wanted, planned on, and welcomed. If affects their identity in positive ways today’s society should know better than to take for granted.

·       Fathers fill a need. Without a father in that role, there’s a father-shaped hole in the child’s life that good mother can’t fill.[ii] It’s not just about love; it’s about the security and protection that a good father represents, allowing a child to feel secure enough to explore the world and grow to potential.

·       Fathers work to generate the wealth necessary to provide for a wife and children—far beyond the typical earnings of non-fathers, and also far beyond what non-resident fathers provide even when required by law. These good fathers create a sense of worth in the child that some other resource—such as welfare or even charity—could provide.

·       These good fathers modify their behavior; they become more civilized personally. They control their anger, their language, their aggression around the woman and children they love—thus modeling civilization for that next generation.

·       Good fathers have a particular effect on their daughters. Daughters need the respect and love of a father to know to value themselves with the men in their lives. This helps daughters grow socially, with self-respect, better able to accomplish their personal goals and better able to resist men who would not be good partners in marriage.

·       Good fathers have a particular effect on their sons. Boys in particular need the example of male role models in order to grow into civilized, socialized men.

·       Good fathers channel the use of power toward defense and protection, rather than toward aggression. They protect the family both physically and morally. This eliminates male predatory behavior toward women and children. And it eliminates aggressive force among larger societies—nations—for any reason but defense.

 I heard earlier this week, on Glenn Beck radio, a parent complain that their child was given the writing prompt on an AP exam, “Explain the benefits to society if marriage didn’t exist.” The answer is easy—a blank page. But that doesn’t get you any kind of passing grade on such an exam. That question could only be asked by those who have forgotten obvious things—and are insisting no one else should remember those things either. Because the culture war is the war. 

The forgetful—those pressuring for some experiment that doesn’t include mother-father families—ought to try a better experiment. As I said in 2019 and still stand by:

 

If all men were living civilized lives within families, many of the world’s ills would disappear: war, famine, poverty, tyranny, bullying, abuse. We would still have illness, accident, and natural disasters. But we’d also have the strong help to face those things.

 


[i] I suggest this compilation of social science data: “Why Marriage Matters, Third Edition: Thirty Conclusions from the Social Sciences” by family scholars, for the Institute of American Values, 2011. 

[ii] The piece I adapted my list from included this anecdote: “And that longing can hardly be extinguished: a never-married San Francisco professional with a young child was stunned by it: ‘My son began asking for his father before he was two. I’ll never forget it. He said, “Why no daddy?” with the reference to Maggie Gallagher, The Abolition of Marriage, pp. 54-56.

Monday, June 7, 2021

End of Session

The biannual 140-day legislative session in the State of Texas ended last Monday, May 31st (yes, on a holiday, and they worked Sunday as well). So it’s probably timely to go over what got done, and what didn’t.


Lt. Governor Dan Patrick gavels the close of the 87th Texas Legislative Session,
screenshot from KVUE news video

Last summer, at the state Republican convention, the delegates chose eight legislative priorities. This was done in a creative way, which actually worked out OK with the convention converted to online. During the committee working days, in person, ahead of the convention, the Legislative Priorities Committee took input from around the state and narrowed that down to (as I recall) 16. The delegates then prioritized their top 8, and weighted their votes accordingly, letting the math come up with the final 8 priorities.

The Republican Party of Texas convention is bigger than the national GOP convention. Bigger than any other state convention. This was input from over 7,000 people around the entire state of Texas, declaring what they wanted the legislature to work on.

These are the eight, each of which had wording to clarify:

1.      Election Integrity: Require citizenship verification of each voter, and felony penalties for Election Code violations that threaten election integrity.

2.      Religious Freedom: Restore the rights of individuals, organizations and businesses, to exercise their sincerely held religious beliefs by prohibiting local ordinances, state laws, or executive orders that violate those rights.

3.      Children and Gender Modification: Abolish the following practices for minors: intervention to prevent natural progression of puberty; administration of opposite sex hormones; and performance of any type of gender reassignment surgery.

4.      Abolition of Abortion: Abolish abortion by ensuring the right to life and equal protection of the laws to all preborn children from the moment of fertilization.

5.      Constitutional Carry: Restore legal Texas firearms owners’ rights to carry them openly or concealed without a permit, while maintaining the option of a permit for reciprocity purposes.

6.      Monument Protection: All monuments or markers in our state shall be protected by law from being removed, defaced, destroyed, or otherwise dishonored. In particular, specific protection shall be given to the Alamo Cenotaph which shall not be removed from its current location off the Alamo Battlefield footprint.

7.      School Choice: Empower parents and guardians to choose from public, private, charter, or homeschool options for their children’s education using tax credits or exemptions without government restraint or intrusion.

8.      Ban Taxpayer-Funded Lobbying: Abolish all forms of taxpayer-funded lobbying.


This is all in addition to the state Republican Party Platform, which is also used to tell legislators what to work on—but it is bigger, with around 340 planks, categorized by senatorial committee titles, and a lot of detail, but without priorities. Except that, at the front of the platform document is a list of ten permanent guiding principles of the party:

Principles at the beginning of the Republican Party of Texas 2020 Platform

We Texans are in a state where the Republican Party controls the majority in the House, the Senate, and the Governor—along with Lt. Governor, Attorney General, and any other statewide office. This has been the case for beyond the past two decades.

So you would think it would occur to lawmakers to consider the will of the people who elected them.

Rotunda at the Texas State Capitol, from 2018
But one thing we learned this legislative session—in which we had more grassroots support, more awareness, more participation than in any past session—is that the legislative staffs are woefully uninformed about the will of the people. We can understand, maybe, a Democrat legislator’s staff not knowing where to find the Republican Party Platform and Legislative Priorities. We have a hard time understanding why a Republican legislator’s staff would not only be unfamiliar with the platform, but unaware that such a thing as Legislative Priorities existed, let alone where to find such priorities.

They were familiar with the Governor’s list of priorities. And they were aware of their own legislator’s priorities, if such a list had been made. That was the extent of the knowledge in far too many offices.

Going forward, educating staff ahead of the session will be an additional task Republicans will have to undertake in order to be heard and not dismissed as just those pesky demanding grassroots whose votes can be taken for granted.

I’ll take the priorities in order and say what was and wasn’t accomplished with each.


ELECTION INTEGRITY

Of the bills I followed, two passed: SB 1113 on cleaning voter rolls, authored by my state senator, Paul Bettencourt, and also Sen. Lois Kolkhorst just to the north of here; and HB 574 making certain election offenses criminal offenses. Both were useful.

But the bill that we really needed was SB 7 which was an omnibus election integrity bill, containing multiple improvements, many of them reinforcing current law that was flouted during the past election season, using the pandemic as a pretext for the lawlessness.

It passed in the Senate and then the House, with amendments. There was a reconciliation committee, and the Senate approved the committee’s reconciliation. Late at night, on the last day to legally finish business, the House Democrats were instructed by text to discretely leave the chamber, denying a quorum so that a final vote could not be taken in the House on the reconciliation.

There’s argument about who to blame. Certainly the Democrats who participated in the walkout. But the House Speaker, Republican Dade Phelan, could have called the Sergeant-at-Arms to bring them back into the chamber. He didn’t. And there’s speculation about his indicating to them ahead of time that he wouldn’t.

Phelan replaces a Republican House Speaker who was caught making deals against Republicans. We were hopeful that we would finally have a better session. I’m sure we’re going to be told it was better. But, seriously, Republicans seem to be unable to wield power, and instead seem overly eager to conspire with the enemies of freedom against the free people of Texas.

Governor Abbott has declared he will take action in response to these shenanigans:

·       He plans to have a special session to handle this bill. It is unknown whether that will be soon or in the fall when the redistricting special session will happen. So far he hasn’t scheduled it.

·       He has promised to veto Article 10 of the budget, to deny funding to pay legislators until they fulfill their obligations. (As far as I know, he hasn’t yet followed through on this threat.)

You can view Lt. Governor Dan Patrick on Fox News talking about this event, here. Senator Paul Bettencourt comments on what happened here

It seems to me, if there’s a will to pass a bill, it passes. If there isn’t, it doesn’t. But there’s always plenty of cover—that there wasn’t time, that there was too much opposition. This is what frustrates so many of us.

 

RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

There were several minor religious freedom bills that passed. That’s good, but they mostly reiterated freedoms already guaranteed to us in our state and federal constitutions. These are:

 

·       SB 581 Bettencourt: HOAs must allow homeowners to have religious displays.

·       HB 525 Shaheen: Protect religious organizations.

·       SB 797 Hughes: The national motto is to be displayed in schools and institutes of higher education.

·       HCR 1  Stephenson: Support Prayer at public gatherings.

·       HB 1239 Sanford: Prohibit suspension of religious freedom. (This is in relation to the pandemic response.)

·       SJR 27 Hancock: Proposing a constitutional amendment to prohibit limiting religious service. 

 

GENDER MODIFICATION

This priority was an abject failure. SB 1646 would have changed the definition of child abuse to include permanent gender modification. It passed in the Senate and was assigned to the House Public Health Committee but did not receive a hearing—where the committee is chaired by Republican Stephanie Klick. SB 1311 went about the issue through an insurance angle. It passed in the Senate and was eventually assigned—late, but seemed to be given a deadline exception—again, to the House Public Health Committee, but did not receive a hearing. 

There’s a case in Texas, a boy named James, a twin, whose mother treats him as a girl and wants to permanently transition him, but he claims to be a boy with his father and doesn’t want to be a girl. (I wrote about this here and here.) This is a very confused child—and it appears to me the confusion is caused by a mother I would consider abusive. James is not safe from this permanent mutilation, nor are other confused Texas children. And now it will be another two years before there’s an opportunity for the legislature to deal with the issue.

 

ABORTION

A couple of relatively positive abortion bills passed. SB 8 prevents abortion after the heartbeat is detected. Similar bills in other states have so far failed to prevent abortions, due to lawsuits and skirting the law. (An ultrasound technician admits that it’s possible to find or not find a heartbeat at will, at least up to a point.) The Texas bill has the innovation that individual civilians can file suit against an abortion provider, rather than depending on a district attorney to decide to prosecute.

HB 1280 is called a trigger bill, meaning it comes into play, abolishing abortion in Texas, if/when Roe v. Wade is reversed in the US Supreme Court.

We had a good bill to actually abolish abortion, HB 3326. It didn’t even get a hearing in the supposedly Republican-led House; this was, once again, the committee led by Rep. Stephanie Klick.

 

CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY

This is being hailed as the brightest success of this legislative session. HB 1927 passed and has been sent to the Governor for signature.

This isn’t as clean a win as you would suppose. The original bill, passed in the House without amendment, had numerous serious issues. These ranged from minor (repetition, and contradiction between sections within the bill) to major (eliminating illegal carry for violent gang members age 21 or over, and some probable cause issues). The Senate attempted to correct the problems. One solution was an entirely new bill; that didn’t fly, so they had to amend. 

The amendments were a pretty reasonable attempt to solve the issues. But they were met with cries of “attempted sabotage” and "poison pill amendments" from the writers of the bill and supporting organizations (mainly GOA Texas). Nevertheless, the Senate passed the amended bill, which meant there would be a committee to reconcile. This meant ending up with an OK-for-the-most-part bill. It ends up granting the ability for felons legitimately convicted of illegal carry to have their records expunged. Not good. But we can hope the remaining problems can be dealt with in courts. 

The lesson here is, read the bill. Most of those crying their strong support hadn’t read the actual wording or considered the legitimate issues law enforcement has to face. A constitutional carry bill in the free state of Texas shouldn’t have caused that kind of rift in the party that is soundly pro-Second Amendment.

 

MONUMENT PROTECTION

There was a minor victory in this priority. HB 3584 to protect monuments and markers by the Texas Historical Commission was able to pass.

Then there was a bill directing the General Land Office to maintain the Alamo that didn’t pass.

 

ASIDE

Meanwhile, the General Land Commissioner, George P. Bush (yes, a relative of that family) is leaving that job. He was much maligned for his attempts to protect and improve the Alamo site—much of which I thought was good, but which included relocating the Cenotaph to another location in the compound; that got a lot of people very upset—but he was nevertheless qualified by education and background to be Land Commissioner. He has announced he is running for Attorney General, a position I don’t see that he is qualified for, and it’s against a Republican incumbent, Ken Paxton, who may not be as stellar as Governor Abbott had previously been in that position, but who is generally well regarded.

While we’re interrupting to mention job endings and political campaigns, just days after the close of session Republican Party of Texas Chair Allen West announced he will be stepping down—less than a year into his first term; he was elected at the state convention last July. West, I think, has been good at public messaging. He has been less good at the nitty-gritty duties of the party chair, which have in the past included working with the legislature. It’s a fundraising and administrative position. I don’t think that is what holds his interests. It’s unfortunate that his campaign ousted a chair who was particularly good at those things.

Speculation is that West will run for governor. Governor Abbott has already received the endorsement of Donald Trump. But he has upset a great many former supporters (myself included) this past year by failing to uphold our constitutional rights during the pandemic response. And he attempted (but failed) during the legislative session to institutionalize the executive powers he usurped during this past year. That makes him vulnerable, and West probably sees that. But, if West can’t do the administrative work of the party for even a year—and he’s pretty cavalier about leaving us in the lurch—why would we think he’d be good at administration of this very large state? We would probably speculate that he has his sites set on running for US president in 2026, with barely a term as governor under his belt, but the governor title would help him in such a campaign.

OK, the aside is over.

 

EDUCATION/SCHOOL CHOICE

We had one very excellent school choice bill: SB 1968 The Family Educational Relief Program, authored by my state senator, Sen. Paul Bettencourt. It allowed low-income families to be granted a portion of their child’s allotment to be used for educational purposes, with the parents as trustees over their child’s fund. It would have taken zero dollars from public schooling, and it added funding in a creative way, related to business insurance premium taxes, that actually added to the education budget.

Each of these legislative priorities had a statewide committee from the SREC (State Republican Executive Committee) to work on getting legislation passed. I was invited to help out with this one, as a citizen (I am not on the SREC, which has just one man and one woman from each senatorial district). Anyway, I got very familiar with this bill, and I’m extremely disappointed with its failure.

The bill was filed on the last possible day of filing. It got a committee hearing on nearly the last possible day, and got voted out of committee—where there was plenty of good pro-school choice testimony and no opposition testimony—at the last possible moment. There was still time for a floor vote, but it didn’t get one. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said it didn’t have the votes. We had one Democrat who voted for the bill in committee, but Sen. Perry, a Republican voted against, so I’m assuming he’s one of the four who indicated to Patrick that they would vote against. Others may know some of the other names, but I do not; when we find out, we should get the word out to get them primaried next year.

There was much opposition to school choice in the House—if it had gotten that far. This was displayed in a vote on the budget, which had an amendment slipped in to disallow any funding for any type of school choice of any kind whatsoever. The amendment passed with a vote of 115 to 29. That means a whole lot of Republicans voted with all the Democrats to keep low-income students in failing schools with no way out. And this was a policy amendment, which has no place in a budget; it circumvents the committee hearing process. I’ve kept the record of the vote so we know who to target in the primary. (Note: We were promised by senators on the conference committee that it would be removed during reconciliation. I’ve gone through the final budget, here, and it does appear this anti-school choice amendment was removed.)

In testimony on this amendment, Rep. Steve Toth brought up the polling data: all over Texas, among every demographic and party, no less than 70% approve of school choice. It’s one of our 8 legislative priorities; and it’s one of our 10 party principles. And yet a majority of Republican lawmakers—along with nearly all Democrat lawmakers, who claim compassion for the poor and underprivileged—refuse to support anything that would give families a way out of failing public schools. These lawmakers are sorely out of touch with the people of Texas. I imagine it’s because teacher’s unions are in touch with their campaign coffers.

One significant education bright spot is HB 3979, by Rep. Toth, requiring that civics teaching must include the moral, political, and educational foundations of America. It’s an anti-critical race theory law. And this is great news.

 

BAN TAXPAYER-FUNDED LOBBYING

This was another failed priority. The Senate passed SB 10, Senator Bettencourt’s bill to ban taxpayer-funded lobbying. It got sent to House State Affairs Committee, where it was voted favorably out of committee. But the House floor vote was postponed multiple times and ultimately did not get a vote. So, unless this is handled in a special session, we’ll go on paying tax money to have lobbyists go to Austin and lobby our elected officials to go against our will. The very idea rankles thinking Texans.


EXTRA OPINIONS

Here are some additional opinions on the wind up of the legislative session:

·       Legislative Priorities Report 6.6.21” by Jill Glover, posted at the RPT website. 

·       Did Lawmakers Really ‘Run Out of Time’?” by Jeramy Kitchen for Texas Scorecard, June 1, 2021. 

·       Mediocre 87th Texas Legislature Gavels To Close; Special Session Coming” by admin at The Golden Hammer, Montgomery, TX, June 1, 2021. 

 

 



Friday, June 4, 2021

Who Can You Trust?

A friend posted on Facebook, without comment, a very long Vanity Fair article on the possible origins of the COVID-10 virus. In the midst of news about Anthony Fauci’s emails and the administration’s sudden-but-very-late interest in the origins, I thought I’d read it.


image from the Vanity Fair article

As you’d expect from Vanity Fair, they slip in blame on Trump at every opportunity—and there doesn’t have to be an opportunity; they will make one.

Example 1—in reference to a group of researchers called DRASTIC [Decentralized Radical Autonomous Search Team Investigating COVID-19], who were looking into the virus origins, doubting the wet market story:

At times, it seemed the only other people entertaining the lab-leak theory were crackpots or political hacks hoping to wield COVID-19 as a cudgel against China. President Donald Trump’s former political adviser Steve Bannon, for instance, joined forces with an exiled Chinese billionaire named Guo Wengui to fuel claims that China had developed the disease as a bioweapon and purposefully unleashed it on the world. As proof, they paraded a Hong Kong scientist around right-wing media outlets until her manifest lack of expertise doomed the charade.

With disreputable wing nuts on one side of them and scornful experts on the other, the DRASTIC researchers often felt as if they were on their own in the wilderness, working on the world’s most urgent mystery.

This is several years after Bannon’s advisory role in the Trump campaign.

Example 2—in reference to the February 19, 2020 statement by the medical journal The Lancet, signed by 27 scientists saying, “We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin,” which shut down open discussions on the issue:

And yet, in the wake of the Lancet statement and under the cloud of Donald Trump’s toxic racism, which contributed to an alarming wave of anti-Asian violence in the U.S., one possible answer to this all-important question remained largely off-limits until the spring of 2021.

There was no alarming wave of anti-Asian violence—although that was a storyline invented by the legacy media. Dennis Prager goes through the actual facts here. And anything Donald Trump said against China was clearly against the CCP, not the people. Nor is there any evidence cited (because there wasn’t any to cite) of his “toxic racism.”

Example 3—in reference to former CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield’s report—after leaving his position as Trump left office—to the threats and ostracizing he received for trying to voice an opinion that didn’t align with the prescribed narrative as stated in the Lancet:

With President Trump out of office, it should be possible to reject his xenophobic agenda and still ask why, in all places in the world, did the outbreak begin in the city with a laboratory housing one of the world’s most extensive collection of bat viruses, doing some of the most aggressive research?

The fact is that President Trump didn’t have a xenophobic agenda, and reference to such a statement has nothing to do with the subject of this article.

Example 4—in reference to a dossier showing problems with the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s research, compiled by Miles Yu, the State Department’s principal China strategist, who had given it to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who had made it public, following which the Director of National Security attempted to put out an ambiguous statement in support of the “it was natural” narrative:

Then, the bomb-thrower-in-chief weighed in. At a press briefing just hours later, Trump contradicted his own intelligence officials and claimed that he had seen classified information indicating that the virus had come from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Asked what the evidence was, he said, “I can’t tell you that. I’m not allowed to tell you that.”

Trump’s premature statement poisoned the waters for anyone seeking an honest answer to the question of where COVID-19 came from. According to Pottinger, there was an “antibody response” within the government, in which any discussion of a possible lab origin was linked to destructive nativist posturing.


Worker inside the P4 laboratory in Wuhan, China, on Feb. 23, 2017.
(Johannes Eisele/AFP via Getty Images), image found here

Oddly, the point of the article, in short, is that Deep State operatives prevented the truth from being sought or revealed.

So, if you get past the obvious toxic bias, you can glean some actual facts.

The facts were available a year ago, and were presented accurately, and with good substantiation, in the Epoch Times documentary Tracking Down the Origin of Wuhan Coronavirus, from April 2020. I re-watched it after reading the article. It has held up well. I prefer the straight news of the maligned-as-biased-but-actually-accurate Epoch Times to the snarky, Trump-derangement-syndrome perspective of the Vanity Fair writer. And it was also good to know in April 2020, instead of waiting until June 2021.


Joshua Philipp discusses Fauci emails on Crossroads

The point here is, if you are just now suddenly learning that the virus very likely came from a Wuhan lab just up the street from that wet market they blamed, then you’re listening to the wrong news sources.

Dr. Anthony Fauci on Capitol Hill, May 26, 2021
(Sarah Silbiger-Pool/Getty Images), image found here
One thing the Anthony Fauci emails have been showing is—what we already knew—his willingness to lie to the American people in order to get behavior that he wants to elicit, rather than simply showing the science and letting the people make decisions.

That willingness of officials to lie to us has been a real plague.

I’m still struggling to know for certain when I’m getting accurate information, as I assume everyone is. So, since you can’t get good information from regular news sources, you might as well experiment with some other sources and practice using your discernment. With that in mind, here are some articles and videos that caught my attention lately. Even the most unconventional sources, where you ought to be skeptical, are likely to bring you more truth than the media that conforms to some propaganda narrative. And whatever is true is likely to come out even in the biased MSM eventually.


·        Live Q&A: Fauci Emails Suggest Lab Coverup; Gain-of-Function Research Enters Spotlight” Joshua Philipp on Crossroads, EpochTV  (may require subscription). Philipp speaks about the Vanity Fair article and his documentary from last year. He also covers the Fauci emails. The first ¾ of the program are available on YouTube

 

·        Fauci Team Scrambled in January 2020 to Respond to Lab Leak Allegations, Emails Show” by Jeff Carlson and Hans Mahncke for The Epoch Times, June 3, 2021. 

 

·        Dr. Fauci Under Fire for Sending $600K in Funding to Wuhan Lab; ‘Virus Origin’ Theory Getting Traction” Roman Balmakov on Facts Matter, EpochTV, May 29, 2021. 

 

·        US government officials helped China cover up COVID origins” Tucker Carlson Tonight, June 2, 2021. 

 

·        Study Claims Mask Mandates Didn’t Slow Pandemic” by Dr. Rebecca Deurlein, Katy Christian Magazine, June 3, 2021.  In summary, data shows that “states that mandated masks saw no discernable difference in the spread of Covid-19 from those that did not.”

 

·       "Lawsuit Filed Against Houston Methodist Hospital System for Illegally Requiring Employees to Take Experimental COVID-19 'Vaccine'” by Dr. Steven Hotze, Katy Christian Magazine, May 31, 2021. Here are the concluding paragraphs of this fact-based opinion piece:  

o   This is the first time in the history of the United States that an employer is coercing and forcing its employees to participate in an experimental “vaccine” trial as a condition for continued employment. Methodist Hospital is forcing its employees to be human guinea pigs for this experimental “vaccine.” / In writing to his Methodist employees, David Bernard, CEO of Houston Methodist, Baytown Hospital stated, “100% vaccination is more important than your individual freedom. Every one of you is replaceable. If you do not like what you’re doing you can leave, and we will replace your spot.” This is coercion and it is illegal.

 

·        117 employees sue Houston Methodist over COVID-19 vaccine requirement” by Janelle Bludau, KHOU 11 News, May 28, 2021.  This is a news piece on the same issue as above.

 

·        Vaccine researcher admits ‘big mistake,’ saysspike protein is dangerous ‘toxin’” by Celeste McGovern for LifeSite News, May 31, 2021.  The piece begins with this:


o   New research shows that the coronavirus spike protein from COVID-19 vaccination unexpectedly enters the bloodstream, which is a plausible explanation for thousands of reported side-effects from blood clots and heart disease to brain damage and reproductive issues, a Canadian cancer vaccine researcher said last week.

 

·        Urgent Warning—Teens Experiencing Heart Problems After Jab—Dr. Jane Ruby” on the Stew Peters Show, May 30, 2021.  Dr. Ruby points out that there is nothing “mild” about myocarditis. The numbers that the CDC considers “small” are 148 and growing—higher than a usual trigger for concern and possibly ending a vaccination program—with a surge in cases under 18, now that there is a push for vaccinating teens, who are at very low risk from COVID-19.

 

·        CDC investigates dozens of reports of heartinflammation in teenagers and young adults that occur four days after theirsecond dose of Moderna or Pfizer vaccines” by James Gordon for The Daily Mail, May 22 (updated May 23), 2021.  This is the story referred to in the video above. While much of the story tries to press the importance of vaccination and the danger of the disease, one paragraph says this:


o   Children generally face low risks of Covid, with the fatality rate well below zero, which has raised questions about whether getting them vaccinated against COVID-19 is for kids' own protection or to protect more at-risk adults.

 

·        Dr. Hodkinson Interview—Covid-19 Vaccines, Infertility & Spike Protein Dangers” Independent journalist Taylor Hudak interviews Dr. Roger Hodkinson, uploaded to BitChute May 30, 2021.  Dr. Hodkinson claims to be pro-vaccine, but he fears dangers to young people, and risks of permanent infertility in males and females from the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines.

 

·        The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: a review of SARS Lab Escapes” by Gilles Demaneuf, Nov. 16, 2020. This is the DRASTIC report referred to in the Vanity Fair piece referenced in today’s post. 

 

·        How Trump’s Vaccines Prevent the Great Reset and Save Humanity” James Fetzer blog post April 30, 2021.  The part that connects the pandemic to what is called the Great Reset, an intentional collapse of world economies in order to replace them with a controlled (socialist) economy is at least an explanation worth examining. Much of the rest of this—the plan to modify humans to be part robots, for example—is too far-fetched for me to entertain as a possibility at this time. But there are bits of information mixed in here. It’s a long read. It also links to this:

o   FULL REPORT: The Plan To Control The Whole World” by David Sörensen for Stop World Control, which looks to be a blog or website. Again, the “take over the world” conspiracy seems far-fetched, but many of the things he talks about I have observed, and he does provide a pretty good list of citations at the end.