Did The MRC Inflame Anti-CRT Emotions At School Board Meeting? Topic: Media Research Center
In a June 20 post, the Media Research Center's Nicholas Fondacaro asserted that NBC's Chuck Todd "tried to lie to viewers by claiming that parental opposition and outrage to Critical Race Theory was “manufactured at Fox [News]," claiming that the claim was "even more obviously untrue" because Todd had on a reporter who "had covered the 'dozens and dozens and dozens of parents' that turned out the Loudon Country school board meeting in Virginia to speak out against the racism inherent in Critical Race Theory."
Well, Todd's not completely right, just not in the way that Fondacaro wants you to think. Not only is anti-CRT outrage manufactured by Fox News, it's also manufactured by the MRC.
On JUne 22, the day of a Loudon County school board meeing, the MRC sent out an email to subscribers declaring that the "MRC will be at the Loudoun County school board meeting today as teachers and parents fight Critical Race Theory, 'Trans' In Any Bathroom, and 'Genderless Pronouns' In Loudoun County, Virginia Schools." The email went on to rant (random bolding in original):
On Tuesday, June 22, staff from the Media Research Center (MRC) will be on hand to cover the incendiary Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS) Board meeting, in Ashburn, VA, as concerned parents, teachers, and students fight the leftist agenda to cement Critical Race Theory, the admission of “trans” students into any bathroom or locker room, and the banning of “gendered speech” in all district schools.
The LCSB meeting begins at 4pm ET, and its agenda includes “adoption of Policy 8040” as well as discussion of the bathroom/locker-room policy, and word is spreading that this will be a powerful moment for the kids, parents, teachers, and ALL taxpayers forced to pay for the increasingly progressive agenda being pushed by the bureaucracy.
As an MRC Action member, we want you to know what the MRC team is doing, right there, on the scene, to keep families and friends informed about this very important battle, and the ideology against which the Loudoun residents fight.
Transgenderism, the claims of “inherent racism” leveled against innocent people by the pushers of Critical Race Theory, the destruction of the language, and even the inclusion of biological males in girl’s bathrooms — it’s all being exposed, today, at Ashburn.
Thanks to you, the MRC will be there.
Please keep us and the good folks who fight for their kids and their tax dollars in your prayers.
The MRC went on to tout one of the people who spoke out against the school board:
You also might have seen MRC chatting, in person, with Lilit Vanetsyan, a Fairfax County-based teacher who, at a recent Loudoun board meeting, also railed against the LCPS policy proposals, especially Critical Race Theory, explicitly saying that the proposed policies will push a radical lesson plan prompting kids to “root for socialism by the time they get to middle school."
Now, Vanetsyan and others are pushing for the removal of six LCPS Board members and the vanquishing of these anti-family, anti-reality, collectivist agendas, this afternoon, at 4pm ET.
The MRC didn't tell you that Vanetsyan is no mere school teacher -- if she is that; it's unclear which school, if any, in the Fairfax County district Vanetsyan actually teaches at -- she's a right-wing activist who's affiliated with Turning Point USA and is a former reporter for the highly biased Right Side Broadcasting Network. (Also: Why is a teacher in one school district trying to speak out against policies in another school district? Isn't that out of her jurisdiction?)
The MRC got the provocation it was seeking at that meeting -- chaos reigned, and at least one arrest was made. But the MRC couldn't have been more delighted, as an email it sent out the next day showed (typographical effects in original):
Leftist Local VA School Board SHUTS DOWN Dissent Over Critical Race Theory, Trans In Bathrooms - AND The MRC Was There
Local Loudoun, Virginia, residents who have become national heroes turned out in the hundreds on June 22 to oppose the Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS) Board plan to adopt Critical Race Theory and perverse sexual “identity” rules in schools across Loudoun County, Virginia, and the Media Research Center (MRC) was on the scene.
As MRC Action members likely are aware, both CNS News and MRCTV have focused time and manpower to bring tell the nation about the plight of Loudoun County taxpayers, children, and numerous teachers, as the LCPS board prepared plans to force racist Critical Race Theory ideology into classrooms and as it prepped its scheme called “Policy 8040.”
Policy 8040 would require schools to admit “trans” students into any bathroom or locker room, and would ban “gendered speech” — i.e. pronouns that conform to the correct biological sex of the individual being addressed — in all district schools.
On Tuesday, June 22, the board abruptly ended the public comment period, even as taxpayers lined up to add their voices to the scant number that the bureaucrats allowed to speak. Tuesday also saw Sheriff’s Department police ARREST individuals who tried to be heard while the board members walked off.
But Tuesday saw the courage that is lighting fires nationwide — fires that could help others stop Marxist Critical Race Theory and Trans-permissive bathroom, locker room, and speech policies from being imposed on them, other taxpayers, and kids.
MRCTV’s Libby Kreiger Tuesday also reported on the meeting, revealing how these bureaucrats — formerly insulated from public outcries by COVID-related lockouts of the public — shut down dissent, and police cuffed and arrested citizens who tried to voice their protestations, claiming they were engaging in “unlawful assembly.” Which is curious, since the First Amendment prohibits the government from infringing on the right to peaceably assemble for redress of grievances…
Clearly, the leftist Loudoun way is not the American way.
This story is receiving far less national news attention than it is from conservative and libertarian talk radio hosts and web commentators, and MRC Action and the Media Research Center will follow this, thanks to YOU.
Your care about freedom and the generations to come are the fuel for our never-ending efforts.
The MRC, meanwhile, cares about fomenting and exploiting chaos to advance its right-wing political agenda.
P.S.: It's not like the MRC went through any huge effort to turn this school board meeting into a launching pad for activism. Loudon County is just a few miles from the MRC's headquarters in the Washington, D.C., suburbs, so it just cost MRC employees a little gas money.
Newsmax Massages Ratings Numbers To Claim Trump Speech Was Popular Topic: Newsmax
Anthony Rizzo enthused in a June 8 Newsmax article:
Former President Donald Trump's speech to the North Carolina Republican Convention last Saturday drew more than 1.8 million viewers to Newsmax as the network beat Fox News in a key demo rating.
Newsmax reported Trump's 8 p.m. ET speech, his second major address since leaving the White House, drew a total audience reach of 1.1 million viewers across traditional cable platforms, according to Nielsen.
But Newsmax also drew a massive OTT audience as well, with the company reporting its streaming audience exceeded 700,000 total viewers during Trump's speech.
"OTT" stands for "over the top," TV industry parlance for streaming platforms (because they go "over the top" of cable boxes).
But Newsmax's version of the speech's ratings may be more corporate puffery than actual reality. The Associated Press reported:
Former President Donald Trump reached less than a million measurable television viewers over the weekend in his return to the public stage at a North Carolina political event.
Newsmax averaged just under 700,000 viewers between 8 p.m. and 9:30 p.m. Saturday when Trump spoke, the Nielsen company said. His speech was also carried live on One America News Network and C-SPAN, but their audience is not measured by Nielsen.
Fox News Channel did not carry the speech by the former president beloved by many of its viewers. The network averaged more than 1.5 million viewers for its typical Saturday night fare of Jesse Watters and Jeanine Pirro.
Although Trump couldn't eclipse Fox's regular lineup, at least for Newsmax, showing the former president live appeared to be a good business decision for the network. So far this year, Newsmax has averaged 202,000 viewers in prime time, including the more heavily trafficked weeknights, Nielsen said.
Later on Saturday, Fox's debut hour with conservative media personality Dan Bongino reached 1.8 million people, making it the most-watched cable news show of the weekend.
Rizzo seemed to be conceding Fox News' overall ratings victory during the speech, because he selectively reported on an alleged demographic win: "Nielsen reports Newsmax beat Fox in the coverage rating for the key 35-64 demo, taking a .56 to Fox News' .46 during the speech." He did admit that "Newsmax drew a .58 for total P2 audience, close to Fox News' .77 for the same time period," then immediately tried to qualify that victory by complaining that "Fox News is available in 56% more television homes than Newsmax. The coverage rating shows audience penetration against total households available for a network."
CNS Parrots MRC Parent In Attacking Teen Who Gave Speech On Abortion Topic: CNSNews.com
The Media Research Center's "news" division, CNSNews.com, is even more blatantly abandoning any pretense that it's a legitimate journalism orgniazation and is simply the MRC in inverted-pyramid format -- what with the corporatewhoring and parroting of what the MRC writes about -- and the latter has happened again.
We've noted how the MRC went on the attack against a teenager who gave a graduation speech about a new, onerous anti-abortion law in Texas. CNS intern Julia Johnson did the same in a June 4 article:
Paxton Smith, valedictorian of her class at Lake Highlands High School in Dallas, Texas, delivered a pro-abortion speech in lieu of her previously approved remarks on Sunday, an unexpected speech that went viral on social media.
“I am terrified that if my contraceptives fail, I am terrified that if I'm raped, then my hopes and aspirations and dreams and efforts for my future will no longer matter,” Smith said.
D Magazine reported that Smith was originally planning on speaking about media and perception but felt compelled to speak about the recently passed Texas “heartbeat bill.”
Her school had approved her speech on media and had no idea what they were in for next. Smith prepared the second speech ahead of time, even sharing it with her parents, according to D Magazine.
“I hope you can feel how gut-wrenching it is, how dehumanizing it is, to have the autonomy over your own body taken from you,” Smith said.
Before the speech, students were warned that if they deviated from the pre-approved remarks, their microphones would be cut off, Advocate Lake Highlandsmreported.
But that didn’t happen to Paxton Smith. It is unclear why this particular speech was allowed, or whether a conservative version would’ve received the same discretion.
Johnson used biased language throughout her article, calling Smith's speech "pro-abortion" while describing the anti-abortion bills as "pro-life." She showed her bias again by complaining that "Smith has received an onslaught of fawning reactions from the leftist media, including glowing coverage from Vice, NowThis, and Teen Vogue. The teenager told Advocate Lake Highlands that she was 'overwhelmed' by the positive response." Johnson offered no evidence that any of those publications are "leftist."
The original headline on Johnson's article -- "High School Valedictorian Deceives Officials and Delivers Pro-Abortion Screed" -- was just as biased. The headline was later changed without explanation to the more bland (yet still biased) "High School Valedictorian Delivers Pro-Abortion Speech."
WND's Kupelian Uses Fear to Accuse Democrats Of Spreading Fear Topic: WorldNetDaily
The theme of last month's issue of WorldNetDaily's sparsely read Whistleblower magazine is "Merchants of Fear," and if you thought it was being critical of itself or it sfellow right-wingers, you would be quite wrong. David Kupelian summed up the premise in his opening piece published at WND proper on June 8:
During Joe Biden’s appallingly divisive speech in Tulsa last week, he basically claimed little has changed in America since a century ago when millions of white supremacist Ku Klux Klansmen routinely lynched innocent black people for fun. “Millions of white Americans belonged to the Klan,” Biden insisted, and their “hate became embedded systematically and systemically in our laws and our culture.”
Got that? America is still a bastion of hateful, low-IQ, white-supremacist terrorists – and people of color aren’t safe anywhere.
Biden’s comments were carefully crafted by his handlers to stir up and incite racial guilt, resentment, fear and loathing in today’s Americans, who live in the least racist nation on earth.
Why do our elites keep doing this? There is a pattern.
Kupelian, of course, is not going to give Biden credit for accurately stating Klan membership over the years -- he has a narrative to push and some blame to throw around -- and fear to peddle -- like blaming Democrats for pointing that a scary pandemic was, yes, scary:
There’s the COVID-19 pandemic and its attendant lockdown and mask mandates, plus the relentless campaign to pressure everyone to be vaccinated with an experimental drug even if they’re young and healthy and have virtually no risk from the virus, or are pregnant, or have recovered from COVID and thus already possess superior immunity to that which a vaccine could confer. Likewise, there’s the official demonization of early outpatient COVID treatments, including repurposed proven-safe-and-effective drugs like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, currently being successfully used by physicians and governments around the world to treat COVID patients and save countless lives, but officially disparaged and demonized in America;
uring the 2020 presidential campaign, many pundits astutely observed that Biden’s real running mate was not the shallow, dishonest, cackling and uniquely repellant Kamala Harris, but COVID-19. The pandemic allowed Biden to hide in his Delaware home and avoid answering questions that would easily have exposed his excruciatingly evident physical and cognitive decline, while subjecting him to inquiries about his decades-long history of lying and serial plagiarism, as well as his epic personal and family corruption. The public might also have discovered why Biden manages to be almost preternaturally wrong about everything. As Robert Gates, secretary of Defense for both Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, put it: “I think he has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.”
Instead, the coronavirus pandemic allowed the Democrat-Media Complex to shield Biden from public scrutiny under cover of COVID – while simultaneously stoking fears of then-President Donald Trump, whom they continually compared to Hitler – and essentially to pick Biden up, hold him high overhead and carry him across the finish line without his ever really having to come face-to-face with the American people.
Since his January inauguration, Team Biden has done its very best to keep Americans in a constant state of fear and confusion with regard to COVID. In the name of “fighting COVID” or “COVID relief,” the Biden administration and the Democrat-controlled Congress are pushing astronomical spending bills, Democrat-socialist wish lists, big payoffs to Democratic constituent groups and a never-ending list of perverse, reckless, revolutionary, unconstitutional, corrupt and just plain stupid initiatives – all by invoking the fear-inducing magic word, “COVID!”
Actually, WND has a history of lying to its readers about the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin and about the supposed dangers of COVID vaccines. It seems Kupelian actually wants you to believe that a virus that has killed more than 600,000 people in the U.S. alone is safer than the vaccine to protect against it.
Kupelian also wants you to have fear about the election process, peddling the Big Lie that Trump actually won:
Many – perhaps most – Americans today are afraid of honestly expressing what they really think. Last November’s presidential election was likely the most fraudulent of our lifetime – and yet, no one in the media is supposed to say that anymore. If a news or opinion host says “the election was rigged,” he or she is likely to be censored or banned. Pretty soon, most people in such an environment become self-censoring: If they know they’re going to be shut down, they never say it in the first place.
We've caught WND spreading lies about the election results and never-proven claims it was rigged. Perhaps that alleged "fear" is the knowledge that lies are being spread and fear that they will be held accountable for spreading them.
How ironic that Kupelian used a fear-mongering screed to accuse Democrats of spreading fear. No wonder nobody trusts WND.
MRC's Graham Whines That Its Attacks On 'Liberal Media' Are Considered 'Bad Faith' Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center has long beem afraid of criticism of its work -- particularly that they're a bunch of partisan hacks who care more about scoring political points than contributing to journalism. They're especially sensitive to the argument that they're bad-faith critics.
MRC executive Tim Graham complained in his June 4 column about how CNN's Brian Stelter believes right-wingers like Graham will respond to the idea that the news media should receive government subsidies:
As for critics? Stelter writes: "Billions in funding for local news?! I can hear the bad-faith mockery on Fox News at the same time I type these words." Stelter is so unsubtle that every conservative critique of the liberal media is a "bad-faith mockery."
One problem, say the liberals, is "less local news meant more polarization" in communities. But anyone can see that hot issues like transgender "girls" in school sports or teaching "critical race theory" are inherently polarizing on a local level, and, in each case, the left sees only one "civic" opinion worth hearing. The other should be discouraged if not crushed.
Does anyone think Stelter's CNN demonstrates a concern about "polarization" in its national product? Does it offer conservatives a "good-faith" platform for discussion?
Ah, but conservative media criticism is done in bad faith, because its goal is to demonize and destroy, not improve. Can Graham argue with a straight face that every single criticism the MRC has made in the past three decades lacked partisan intent, that it wasn't done to brand the media as "liberal" in order to advance a political narrative? Of course he can't -- he knows what his employer is all about.
(Also, it's quite rich to hear Graham rant about evil government subsidies when the MRC sought and received as much as $2 million in pandemic relief money last year.)
So irked by Stelter's statement that Graham spent his June 16 column ranting about being accused of bad-faith criticism:
The arrogance of the liberal media can be measured by their dismissal of all conservative criticism as "bad faith" attacks on the press. Assuming that conservative critics are dishonest and disreputable cynics is a common trope of CNN's Brian Stelter when liberal journalists become mired in scandal.
In a June 15 "Academic Minute" podcast, Marist College professor Kevin Lerner explicitly defined the entire conservative movement as bad-faith media critics.
"These bad-faith attacks on the press began to rise most recently in the 1960s and '70s, led by a concerted effort among conservative journalists and critics," Lerner argued. "Along with efforts to create a conservative counterbalance to the mainstream press, they engaged in attempts to delegitimize legacy news organizations by painting them as irredeemably biased. This strain of bad-faith criticism is alive and well today."
"Good-faith" criticism, he insisted, is "based on the premise that a strong, independent press, responsive to the needs of an engaged citizenry, is essential to the functioning of a democratic society."
There are several obvious flaws in this argument.
First, conservatives don't see "legacy news organizations" as "independent." They are not watchdogs of both parties. They are savage destroyers of one party and cuddly defenders of the other. They are not "responsive to the needs" of all citizens but to the political needs of one party. This argument is somehow in "bad faith," regardless of the evidence.
Second, conservatives dare to argue that the "press" is not synonymous with the "mainstream press." Lerner's side always implies that there is not a liberal media and conservative media, but a mainstream media and an extreme media.
Third, criticizing liberal news organizations is part of the "functioning of a democratic society." We want a vibrant press, but media criticism is not anti-democracy. It defines democracy. Liberals like Lerner believe that democracy functions best when "legacy media" never lose public trust, no matter what kind of partisan hackery they foist on the public.
Notice that Graham cites criticism of onbly "liberal news organizations" as essential -- he does not see criticism of, say, Fox News as valid. And given that the MRC is dedicated to the destruction of media that doesn't act like Fox News, it's entirely fair to assume that Graham and his boss, Brent Bozell, have no interest in maintaining "a strong, independent press, responsive to the needs of an engaged citizenry."
And as much as Graham gets paid to lash out at the "liberal media," it's clear that he believes there is no such thing as "conservative media" -- not even the MRC's own "news" division, CNSNews.com, which has an unmistakable right-wing bias and refuses to publish any columnists who aren't conservative.
Graham, by the way, will not hold Fox News responsible for even the most egregious issues of bias and ethics. So unbothered was he by Bill O'Reilly's history of sexual harassment that he appeared on the final episode of what was his show on Fox News and didn't mention O'Reilly's sleaze at all.
Graham and the MRC attacks the "liberal media" for things it would never dream of criticizing Fox News for (lest it jeopardize future appearances on the channel). That's the essence of bad-faith criticism.
Meanwhile, in neither of those columns does Graham made a coherent argument that the MRC's attacks on "liberal media" -- funded by millions of dollars in nonprofit money every year -- are done in good faith and only the best of intentions. That's because he can't.
Newsmax Columnist Likens Trump To John The Baptist Topic: Newsmax
Until today thugs like Antonio Gramsci and Saul Alinsky and so many have invaded schools and colleges with a dark program to undermine the American legacy whoring word games like original sin and systemic racism, designed to shift power to them!
On the contrary, The Trump Phenomenon was more significant than the left or right or even the conservatives and RINOs (Republicans in Name Only). RINOs were the same old Establishment first enriching themselves.
Trump, as I explain in my new book, "Citizen Trump," is not a Jesus but more like a John the Baptist. We don't like him eating locusts and lives in the desert, but to paraphrase Jesus, "what did you expect a reed tossed by the sea?" So you ask him to do the dirty work but complain it got dirty?
The Far Left (not traditional liberals) has forfeited its place in our free society and shown its true colors. They have become cancer in the political body in need of severe radiation treatments.
Cancer has created slow leprosy for the innocent and creeping blindness in our children.
Jesus spoke in metaphors and parables. John the Baptist called his greatest enemies whitewashed sepulchers — in other words, phonies, frauds and fakes!
Yes, Trump performed his role as candidate and president; that's why he succeeded but just ran out of TV time.
Forget heaven. You're in a white noise reality.
Winning an election is one battle, but winning back your country from the media's control is all-out war!
WND's Zumwalt Tries 'Manchurian Candidate' Smear Against Biden Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily particularly loved to smear President Obama with the "Manchurian candidate" tag -- so much, in fact, that then-reporter Aaron Klein wrote an entire book about Obama called "The Manchurian President." WND columnist tried that smear against President Biden in a June 16 column praising Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin for standing in the way of Biden White House initiatives:
As a man of great political courage looking to impact such change and encourage more bipartisan discussion, it seems Manchin could play a much more effective role simply by surrendering his Democratic Party credentials and declaring himself an Independent. The move would cause those Senate Democrats lacking the courage to voice their own concerns about their party's sharp turn to the left to realize it is time to speak up and work with their Republican counterparts in the best interests of the people.
Biden's leftist actions since taking office raise concerns he is giving reality to the concept of the "Manchurian Candidate" – the politician whose disloyalty to country is influenced by others harboring undemocratic intentions. In Biden's rush to socialism, assisted by a Senate under Democratic Party control, it is comforting to know a "Manchinian Candidate" – a politician loyal to the republic established by our Founding Fathers – stands in his way of implementing such an agenda.
Zumwalt, of course, offers no evidence to back up his claim that Biden's a "Manchurian candidate."
Zumwalt also praised John McCain for his bipartisan approach that enabled him "to walk a bipartisan political tightrope for 31 years until his 2018 death," further touting Manchin as "the Democratic Party's equivalent to John McCain." But Zumwalt seems to have forgotten that McCain himself was smeared as a "Manchurian candidate" but right-wingers who didn't like his bipartisanship. Ironic, eh?
CNS Echoes MRC Parent With LGBT Freakouts Over Plastic Bricks, Cereal Topic: CNSNews.com
The Media Research Center's "news" division, CNSNews.com, parroted its parent in having an anti-LGBT freakout over plastic bricks and cereal. Craig Bannister complained in a May 20 article:
On Thursday, the LEGO Group announced that its new LGBTQIA+ set “goes on sale on June 1, to mark the start of Pride Month.”
“Inspired by the iconic rainbow flag,” the 346-piece set “features 11 monochrome minifigures each with its own individual hairstyle and rainbow colour” LEGO says in an announcementtouting the new product.
“I wanted to create a model that symbolises inclusivity and celebrates everyone, no matter how they identify or who they love,” set designer and Vice President of Design Matthew Ashton said, adding that the set is also a celebration of the LGBTQIA+ community within the LEGO Group and amongst the brand’s adult fans.
Each of the LEGO characters was designed to be gender-neutral, so it’s up to the builder to assign the gender of every character, Ashton says in LEGO’s promo video:
This was followed by a June 1 commentary by Monica Cole of One Million Moms, who brought the homophobic hate (and shilled for her petition):
Lego is confusing our innocent children by attempting to normalize this lifestyle choice, which is not only irresponsible but also dangerous to the well-being of our children. Toy manufacturers need to remain neutral and should avoid aiming to please a small percentage of customers while pushing away conservative customers.
It is crystal clear that Lego is attempting to desensitize our youth, so my group, One Million Moms, believes it’s urgent to warn parents of the company’s agenda.
We must remain diligent and stand up for biblical values and truth. Scripture says multiple times that homosexuality is wrong, and God will not tolerate this sinful nature.
Sign our petition urging Lego to stop the release of its “Everyone is Awesome” rainbow LGBTQ building set immediately.
Meanwhile, Susan Jones was CNS' designated lasher-outer at cereal in a May 27 article:
Would you like a little milk with your cereal? Or do you prefer a heaping helping of liberal activism?
Now available on grocer shelves -- Kellogg's limited edition "Together With Pride" cereal, a collaboration between the cereal-maker and GLAAD, an LGBTQ+ advocacy group.
"Our delicious new recipe features berry-flavored, rainbow hearts dusted with edible glitter," said Kellogg General Manager Doug VanDeVelde. "We can't wait for fans to try our latest limited run."
The outreach effort includes "correct" pronouns:
"Kellogg is not only building on an ongoing commitment to support the LGBTQ+ community, but initiatives that spotlight the importance of using correct pronouns to create safe and welcoming spaces for trans and nonbinary people," Ellis said.
"Together With Pride" cereal follows Kellogg's earlier collaboration with GLAAD to produce "All Together" cereal, which was available only online for a limited time.
Jones also added a list of other products Kellogg's makes, presumably as a way to help would-be boycotting homophobes like One Million Moms.
Another MRC Anti-LGBT Freakout, 'Gay, Inc.' Edition Topic: Media Research Center
One thing Media Research Center writer Elise Ehrhard lovesto do is blame any non-hateful depiction of LGBT characters on TV as the work of "Gay, Inc." She never really explains what that is -- all the better to make it sound as nefarious as possible, even though it's clear she works for "Anti-Gay, Inc." -- the notoriously homophobic MRC. Now Ehrhard is complaining about a show being a "Gay, Inc." despite lacking much in the way of actual gay content. She complained in a May 3 post:
Do you have no desire for homosexual sex, but really think your same sex best friend is amazing? Do you wish you could be called anything but "straight"? Gay Inc. is here to save the day!
Freeform's Everything's Gonna Be Okay introduced a Gay Inc. term for what used to be called "Best Friends Forever."
In the episode, "California Banana Slugs," on April 29, Drea (Lillian Carrier), the best friend of main character Matilda (Kayla Cromer), announces that she identifies as a "homo-romantic asexual". What on earth is that, you ask? Let me explain. But first, a little background.
You see, Drea and Matilda have been friends for years. In fact, at the end of their senior year of high school they liked each other so much they tried to be lesbians. (At first, they tried a threesome with a fellow student, but the guy ran away before it began.)
Now that they have graduated and entered adulthood, they realize they are not lesbians and have no sexual attraction to each other whatsoever. In fact, they find intercourse with the same sex icky. Matilda decides she wants to have casual sexual intercourse with men. Drea decides she is just not feeling it for anybody. But they both agree to still call each other "girlfriend" which is something many female friends do anyway.
Nobody told Drea that the entire history of same-sex friendship, in both real life and fiction, from the Gospel of John to the Lord of the Ring's Sam and Frodo, has involved intense bonds of love that someone could erroneously label as "romantic." Of course, in order to define it as romantic you would have to be immersed in a homosexual culture that eroticizes or romanticizes everything.
And that is exactly what the LGBTQUIABCDEFG world has done. With a new magic trick, Gay Inc. has now found a term to bring even straight people into its tent. You have to give Big Gay credit. They never cease to find ways to convince young people they are really somehow, some way, kinda sorta gay.
Or, maybe, people would like the space to figure out exactly what their relationship is with each other without hateful moral scolds like Ehrhard denigrating and mocking them every step of the way.
Ehrhard returned for more scolding and denigration (and more blaming of "Gay, Inc.") in a June 6 post after the episode in which these characters formalized their relationship:
Make way for the first television wedding between platonic same-sex best friends.
Last month, the Freeform show, Everything's Gonna Be Okay, introduced the first "homo-romantic asexual character," the latest iteration in LGBTQIA "identities." Basically, it is someone who has no sexual attraction to anyone, but really likes a best friend of the same sex. Gay, Inc. will create an identity foranything nowadays.
Believe it or not, this same-sex "best friend marriage" insanity is now being promoted by the left. The New York Times, a newspaper of emotionally immature writers that regularly pushes stupid ideas about marriage and relationships, recently published an article titled "From Best Friends to Platonic Spouses=." "Some people are taking their friendships to the next level by saying 'I do' to marriages without sex," the subheading announced. Actually, only lonely people living in an atomized society who no longer recognize the nature of either friendship or marriage would do any such thing.
And Hollywood needs to stop pushing these confused LGBTQIA narratives rooted in unhealed trauma or loneliness. There really are people in the world who know how to separate platonic friendships from marriage. There are also people who know how to create healthy, enduring families rooted in the monogamous love of a husband and wife.
Unfortunately, G.L.A.A.D. signs-off on most Hollywood scripts nowadays and is the arbiter of an increasingly extreme Gay, Inc. agenda. Therefore, these ludicrous storylines will only increase. And as they do, Americans will increasingly tune them out.
Is it emotionally mature for Ehrhard to obsess about the sex lives (or not) between fictional characters? Hard to say. Is sneering at and denigrating relationships that aren't floridly heterosexual a stupid idea? Perhaps. Is it "extreme" for LGBT people to not want to be hated and for media depictions of them to not be universally negative? Ehrhard seems to think so.
Perhaps Ehrhard needs to spend a little more time deconstruting her fictitious "Gay, Inc." and stop whining so much -- especially since "Anti-Gay, Inc." will pay her handsomely to noodle around like that.
NEW ARTICLE -- CNS' COVID Coverage: Biden-Bashing and Reverse Mask-Shaming Topic: CNSNews.com
CNSNews.com has switched from downplaying coronavirus deaths under Trump to playing mask gotcha with the Biden administration. Read more >>
Clinton Derangement Syndrome Continues At The MRC Topic: Media Research Center
Bill Clinton hasn't been president for more than 20 years, but that's not keeping the Media Research Center from continuing to have meltdowns every time he appears on TV. Which brings us to a June 7 post by Scott Whitlock:
Given that a former Bill Clinton operative, George Stephanopoulos, is a co-host of Good Morning America, it’s no surprise that the morning show asked the controversial Democrat zero tough questions. But even for ABC, this was insane. Co-host Michael Strahan offered no follow-up when Clinton fantasized about being president for life.
Strahan offered this softball: “Do you miss being president?” The man who exemplified Me Too before the term existed, rhapsodized, “The real answer is I loved being president.” He offered his bizarre admission: “I loved the job. It's a good thing we had a two-term limit or I would have forced the American people to defeat me or take me out in a pine box.”
No follow-up from Strahan. Instead, the co-host acted as a stenographer for the Democrat, touting the new novel he has written with James Patterson: “The President and Patterson wrote their latest thriller over the course of the pandemic, using their time in quarantine for some self-reflection.”
What was the self reflection? Was it about his treatment of Monica Lewinsky or the numerous other women who have accused him of sexual harassment or abuse? Strahan didn't ask.
Once again, liberal journalists don’t really care about Me Too abuses, so long as a Democrat is involved.
WND's Cashill Sides With More Of The Worst People Topic: WorldNetDaily
WorldNetDaily columnist Jack Cashill remainsdetermined to stay on the wrong side of history by choosing to defend, um, certain people.
In his May 26 column, Cashill complained that attorney Benjamin Crump "cleverly framed George Zimmerman in the 2012 Florida death of Trayvon Martin" -- never mind that nobody has ever disputed that Zimmerman killed Martin. Cashill went on to rant that "Crump flagrantly corrupted the most racially charged trial since O.J. Simpson's," repeating the uncorroborated claim from charlatan filmmaker Joel Gilbert that a witness on behalf of Martin was an imposter. He then complained that Gilbert's film got no tractiion in right-wing media:
Having no vested interest in the success of Gilbert's film, I persuaded Gilbert that I could make a more objective case to the media, especially in Florida, than he could. So I tried.
I should have recorded the conversations. They would have dashed any hope anyone might have that the mainstream media can be reformed. The fear I encountered, often covered by hostility, was palpable.
I wish I could say the higher-level conservative media filled the void, but I cannot. From what I can tell, they are just as frightened as Big Media, maybe more so.
So the story of the greatest judicial fraud of the last half-century remains unknown to the vast majority of the American people. And if the president knows, as Crump might say, he ain't tellin'.
Cashill is lying about having "no vested interest in the success of Gilbert's film" -- he said himself he served as a consultant on the film and he heavily promoted it upon its release, as well as having written a book lionizing Zimmerman as a martyr and martin as a scary black thug in training, a narrative Gilbert's film reinforces. He's also delusional if he thought he could "make a more objective case" about the film; Gilbert's sleazy reputation precedes him, and there's no real way to overcome that, and Cashill would have to stay in serious denial of that in order to attempt to make that case. Not to mention Cashill's own reputation as a conspiracy-mongerer, making it even less likely anyone would consider anything he says as "objective."
In his June 2 column, Cashill took the side of a creepy cult leader:
"Some injustices are so heinous, so horrific, so grievous they can't be buried no matter how hard people try," said President Joe Biden in Tulsa on Tuesday.
Biden knows something about burying injustice. On April 19, 1993, he was serving on the Senate Judiciary Committee when a Democrat-controlled, FBI-led tank assault on the Mount Carmel religious community outside of Waco, Texas, left 74 people dead, more than half of them racial minorities.
As chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Biden had the responsibility to redress the injustice that took place at Waco. He passed on that responsibility.
Of the 74 killed that day, six were Hispanic. Six were of Asian descent. And 27 were black. The victims ranged in age from 6 to 61. And no, this is not something I read on the internet. I found a verifiable list of the dead, broken out by age and ethnicity, and counted them.
Truth be told, Waco represented the single greatest federally orchestrated one-day slaughter of racial minorities on American soil since Wounded Knee in 1890, and there, at least, the Indians fought back, killing more than 30 American cavalry.
Cashill gives only a single, end-of-column mention of the person who led that group, David Koresh, who was a cult leader whom people who grew up in the compound said he molested them as children -- and to whom his followers, regardless of ethnicity, were so in thrall they apparently didn't have the common sense to flee a burning building.
MRC Downplays 'Bachelor' Host's Missteps To Claim He's A Victim Of 'Woke Mob' Topic: Media Research Center
The last time we checked on the Media Research Center's weird fixation on "The Bachelor," Curtis Houck was sympathizing with contestant Rachel Kirkconnell over the exposure of her racially charged past (and support for QAnon) and with host Chris Harrison for making the mistake of rushing to Kirkconnell's defense before knowing the full story.
When Chris Harrison officially left the show after the incident, Houck went on a June 11 tirade agains the "woke mob" that supposedly got him fired:
On Tuesday, ABC and Warner Brothers Television announced that it had officially cut ties with Chris Harrison, the longtime host of ABC’s The Bachelor and The Bachelorette following a truly childish and pathetic act of cancel culture.
However, Harrison may have had the last laugh thanks to numerous reports revealing that he demanded (and fetched) an eight-figure buyout or risk Harrison exhuming any and all bodies the franchise, network, and production company had buried.
To recap, Harrison found himself being burned at the stake by the woke mob in February when he insisted on there be grace for Bachelor contestant Rachael Kirkconnell when it was discovered that, among other sins, attended an antebellum-themed party in college. And because he said these things to an incensed Rachel Lindsey on Extra (who was the first Black Bachelorette), Harrison had to go.
Worse yet, he spoke out against the “woke police” that seemed hellbent on permanently ruining Kirkconnell’s life. And when the mob wants to make someone miserable, they’ll stop at nothing to do so.
Along the way, Harrison provided a textbook example of how the cancel culture mob will never be satisfied and thus anything from genuine apologies to public self-flagellation will remain a waste of time.
Note that Houck dishonestly, um, whitewashed Kirkconnell's offenses to mention only the most benign one, censoring that she also allegedly bullied girls in high school for liking black men and spread far-right QAnon memes on social media. Also it's quite rich that Houck bashed the "woke mob" for "cancel culture" and "never be satisfied and thus anything from genuine apologies to public self-flagellation will remain a waste of time" -- because those are the exact same tactics he and his MRC co-workers use against anyone in the "liberal media" who doesn't sound or behave like they're working for Fox News or OAN. It has never treated, say, Dan Rather or Brian Williams with the same spirit of forgiveness that Houck is demandingfrom everyone regarding Harrison. In other words, they actually are the "woke mob" they pretend to warn others about.
Houck also expressed glee that Harrison got an eight-figure payout to kee quiet about "the motherload of dirt" he supposedly had on the show and was "willing to dish as a final screw-you to the mob unless they ponied up to meet his demands." So Harrison is getting well paid to go away, so he doesn't really need anyone's sympathy.
A few days later, Houck found a weird thing to be proud of in the new season of "The Bachelorette," while still not able to let go of the past:
ABC’s Bachelor and Bachelorette franchises have been in the headlines quite a bit as of late as the woke mob had decided to infiltrate one of reality TV’s earliest shows, turning what’s already a dumpster fire of drama and adding a side of wokeism.
But on Monday’s Bachelorette, conservatives achieved a small victory when contestant Mike Planeta revealed his virginity during a group date that challenged each guy to be “sex-positive” in a skit meant to woo lead Katie Thurston and, despite Thurston’s outspokenness on sex, gave him first place for the date.
So the "woke mob" "infiltrated" the show and forced Kirkconnell to do stupidly racist stuff?That's a bizarre interpretation of what happened.
Meanwhile, the MRC's homophobic wing weighed in on another show-related issue. Take it away, Veronica Hays:
Queerness is so en vogue at the moment! So trendy and cool — now a former Bachelor is cashing in and coming out. Wednesday on ABC's Good Morning America, former Bachelor Colton Underwood did just that. Of course, the public will be dying to know every ounce of detail regarding his incredible story of self-realization. Fortunately for the culture, Netflix will be providing just what the world so desperately needs, a new reality series starring Underwood, the latest gay man.
And predictably, GMA co-host Robin Roberts treaded lightly in all-but ignoring Underwood's creeper and stalker-like behavior toward now-ex-girlfriend Cassie Randolph.
Underwood sent shockwaves when he came out as gay to Roberts, who's a lesbian: “I’ve ran from myself for a long time. I’ve hated myself for a long time, and I’m gay. I came to terms with that earlier this year and have been processing it and the next step in all of this was sort of letting people know. Still nervous but, yeah, it's been a journey for sure.”
Would Hays be bringing up Underwood's alleged "creeper and stalker-like behavior" if he hadn't come out? Doubtful. And Hays is especially hateful and ignorant if she thinks people reveal who they are sexually only because of the possibility of "cashing in."
Hays completed her screed by huffing, "Unfortunately, the time when The Bachelor features an out member of the LGBTQ community may not be far off." Um, so what? It's on her that she hates LGBT people much that this possibility squicks her out so much.
CNS' Hot Pestering Intern Summer, Round 1 Topic: CNSNews.com
It's summer intern time again, and CNSNews.com is doing what it usually does: sending those interns to the Capitol to pester members of Congress with gotcha questions designed to feed right-wing narratives. This year's first round of gotcha questions centered on the federal budget, with a two-part question:
“President Biden has presented Congress with a budget that proposes running $14.5 trillion in deficits over the next decade. Will Congress ever balance the budget?”
"What year will Congress balance the budget?"
Articles detailing the answer included this biased boilerplate:
Under Biden's budget proposal, the federal government will continue to deficit spend (accumulate debt) for at least the next 10 years, with total borrowing hitting a combined $14.5 trillion in 2031.
The New York Times has reported, "President Biden would like the federal government to spend $6 trillion in the 2022 fiscal year, and for total spending to rise to $8.2 trillion by 2031. That would take the United States to its highest sustained levels of federal spending since World War II, while running deficits above $1.3 trillion through the next decade." (Emphasis added.)
Of course, this is all a biased partisan exercise, designed to give Republicans a platform to virtue-signal on the evils of budget deficits and to shame Democrats for realistically noting that ending federal deficits isn't like flipping a switch and that taxes may need to be raised. Helpfully, Craig Bannister pointed this out in a June 16 summary:
Generally, Republicans said that the U.S. definitely should balance its budget, but they were less certain about when that might happen.
Democrats – such as Senators Dianne Feinstein, Elizabeth Warren and Mark Kelly – said it would take more tax revenue to balance the budget. Others tended to be more skeptical, with some saying the budget will never be balanced and others saying that, if it ever is, it won’t be balanced any time soon.
Needless to say, none of these articles mentioned the role of a Republican president and a Republican-controlled Senate in running up deficits in the previous four years.
MRC Lashes Out At Taylor Swift (Again) For Not Hating LGBT People Topic: Media Research Center
The Media Research Center likes to make a big show about supporting "free speech," but it just can't handle it when Taylor Swift exercises her First Amendment rights -- particularly when she uses that right to not hate LGBT people. Abigail Streetman is the latest in a long line of MRC writers melting down over Swift saying something, in a June 2 post:
On June 1, the first day of “Pride Month,” Taylor Swift announced that the next brave step in her journey as a left-wing propagandist is to join GLAAD in it’s #summerofequality. Of course, this is just another phrase to describe the ongoing efforts of the Democrats to force the Equality Act through the Senate. How courageous of Swift to use her voice to support every other Hollywood celebrity who has been screeching about H.R. 5 for the past several months.
GLAAD is the speech police for all things gay, and it spends a lot of time demanding that gays and the rest of the alphabet be outrageously over-represented on TV and in movies. One of its recent projects includes a documentary on transgender athletes that seeks to demonize conservative politicians who don’t support males being permitted to participate in female sports.
Of course, Streetman is the one who is acting as speech police, lashing out at Swift for saying something. Or, as Streetman snidely put it: "Swift tweeted how “proud” she is to be joining GLAAD. Someone should ask her how comfortable she would be in a private restroom with a full grown male who’s pretending to be a woman." That's not how transgenderism works, but Streetmen advancing a narrative, not telling the truth.
Streetman concluded with a homophobic screed against the H.R.5:
Calling this insane piece of legislation the “Equality Act” is just the left manipulating emotions and obfuscating its true aims. How are we supposed to protect our First Amendment right to freedom of religion if citizens are forced to accept beliefs that go against their morals? Not only is it unconstitutional but it also flies in the face of the science that leftists have been telling us to trust.
There are only two genders, and biology agrees with that.
And we can all agree that Streetman is pushing an agenda rather than engaging in any sort of reasoned discussion.