Our Books

If you enjoy this site, please consider purchasing one of our books (as low as $2.99). Click here to visit our Amazon page.
Showing posts with label propaganda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label propaganda. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 7, 2023

The SPLC Hates the Truth

The left-wing propaganda group known as the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has come out with its annual “Year in Hate and Extremism” report. This latest report is for 2022. This year’s report supposedly documents “1,225 hate and antigovernment extremist groups across the United States.” According to Fox News, this is up from 733 “hate groups” in 2021. As has been widely reported, even the pro-family, parental rights group “Moms for Liberty” made this year’s list.

Since 1990, the SPLC has published a so-called “hate map.” The “hate map” has devolved into a “hate and anti-government” map. So, note that, with its current map, if you merely oppose the government in a manner that the SPLC doesn’t approve—e.g. the Moms for Liberty—you could end up as an ugly dot on their map.

These days, opposing the government in a manner the SPLC doesn’t approve simply means speaking out against the evils of Critical Race Theory, the grooming of children, the genital mutilation of children, Drag Queen Story Hour, or boys in girls’ sports and locker rooms.

Opposing the government in a manner that displeases the SPLC also means standing against all the immorality of the evil LGBT agenda. It means standing up for the truth on marriage, family, and sex. It means speaking out against the invasion of illegal immigrants at our southern border. And it also means treating criminals as they deserve to be treated.

As they have done with the word “racism,” the left—aided and abetted by the likes of the SPLC—has turned “hate” into a near-meaningless word. Much of what the SPLC labels as “hate” is merely opposition to the Democrat Party’s immoral agenda.

Though they once stood for something decent, today the SPLC is nothing more than a group of truth-hating well-heeled leftist shills who operate to further the agenda of the Democrat Party. They deserve no one’s attention or money.

(See this post at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2023, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the 
The Miracle and Magnificence of America
trevorgrantthomas@gmail.com

 

Sunday, March 19, 2023

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution Peddles Pro-Trans Propaganda

As numerous right-minded (note: those not led by Democrats!) states take legal steps—my home state of Georgia being one of those—to protect children from radical and irreversible medical “transgender” procedures, this past Friday (3/17/2023) the largest newspaper in Georgia, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC) published an article that is littered with pro-transgender propaganda.

Of course, this is completely unsurprising. Like almost every large newspaper across the U.S., the AJC has long been little more than a left-wing rag. However, it is noteworthy the steps the left across America is taking to further the evil transgender agenda.

The article is entitled, “Trans kids say they have target on their back with GOP initiative.” The authors spend many of their words detailing the lives of several “transgender” youths in Georgia, who supposedly would be harmed by legislation aimed at protecting vulnerable children. The article does rightly note that the Georgia bill “would ban health care professionals from giving hormones such as estrogen or testosterone to transgender minors. Doctors also would not be allowed to perform surgeries on children seeking to align with their gender identity.”

One of the biggest bits of propaganda that runs throughout the piece is the idea that giving hormone treatments and radical cosmetic surgery to children is “healthcare.” Few things are further from the truth. In other words, it is not “healthcare” to mutilate and disfigure children. It is child abuse and should be treated as such.

The article details children as young five years old whose foolish parents subjected them to a “gender transition.” The authors write:

Jen Slipakoff, a Kennesaw resident, said her daughter first started talking about being transgender when she was 5. Up until then she had been raised as a boy. She’s 15 now.

“We already knew exactly what was happening before she ever said anything,” Slipakoff said. “She has an older brother, so our house was full of traditional boys toys. And our daughter would play with those toys in a very different way than our son was. She would take her little soldiers shopping instead of putting them on the battlefield. She was always drawn to what we would consider traditional girls toys and traditional female clothing.”

When she turned 5, she asked her mother to change her name.

The article also reports on a family with two “transgender” children:

Someone who is nonbinary doesn’t identify as strictly male or female. Dare, a 16-year-old from Dacula who uses “they” as their pronoun, said they were about 10 when they started to think they may be nonbinary.

“I’ve always been gender neutral my whole life,” Dare said. “My mom talks about how, when I was really little, I would pick toys from the boys aisle and the girls aisle.”

Dare and their sibling, a 13-year-old transgender boy named Jay, told their parents about their gender identities about the same time in 2020. 

Imagine that! Two “transgender” kids from the same family! As historically rare as is “transgenderism,” this would be a near statistical impossibility. Unless, of course, something else is up, which of course the AJC completely ignores. On the occurrence of “transgenderism,” Kimberly Klacik recently asked an important question with a telling answer. She asked, “Why aren’t kids in the hood transitioning to the opposite sex? I know the answer, just wanted to see if you knew.”

Interestingly, an excellent answer came from Sara Higdon, a self-described “transexual, Catholic, Veteran, minarchist/voluntaryist” who also happens to be a contributor to “Gays Against Groomers.” Answering Mrs. Klacik, Higdon writes:

Well because the typical demographic is upper middle class white kids of progressive parents. for two reasons. They have time and money to worry about such things, and have been conditioned to believe through Critical Theory that they are an oppressor and there is no way they can ever escape that status, so they see this as a way to join an oppressed class for which they are celebrated for instead of condemned. It’s the relationship between CRT and Queer theory.

Want to guess in what demographic Jen Slipakoff resides? (This will give you some clues.) The transgender craze sweeping America and various other parts of the world is not a medical phenomena but rather a social contagion, fueled by the evil LGBT arm of the radical left, and aided and abetted by the likes of the AJC.

Of course, the biggest lie behind the transgender agenda is the notion that one can change one’s sex. Almost nothing is further from the truth than the grotesque lie that sex-change is merely a medical process. The facts on who is a male and who is a female is one of the oldest truths in the history of humanity. We shouldn’t need legislation to protect children from the wicked lie that sex change is possible, but the left has brought us to this point.

Lastly, as Mrs. Slipakoff spoke before the Georgia Senate regarding the legislation, the AJC reported her saying,  

“I’m happy to report, she has never been bullied by her classmates,” Slipakoff said. “That’s not to say she doesn’t have bullies. Here in this room right now, they sponsored this bill and they’re the ones that are going to vote for it. ... She doesn’t want and she doesn’t need your protection. She wants you to leave her alone.”

Likewise, in one of the comments on the AJC article—which was a response to another comment—someone identified as “Benjamin McKoon” wrote, “Ever thought, hmmm... I wonder if this is any of my business??? Nope? Then shut the f*ck [without the asterisk] up and leave the kids alone inbred idiot.”

As the evil LGBT agenda has progressed throughout the U.S. the last several decades, “Just leave us alone!” or something similar, has been a frequent cry from LGBT activists. However, as I’ve often pointed out, “live and let live” has never been a hallmark of the LGBT agenda. This is quite evident if we only look at what’s occurred recently on the issue of “transgenderism.”

“Just deal with it,” was how a deluded Massachusetts male who’s competing as a female—and helping his school win a state title this year—put it when asked about boys competing against girls in sanctioned competitions. To help paint “transgenders” as being “targeted” in Georgia, the AJC article makes mention of how GA law, and the Georgia High School Association, requires athletes “to compete based on their biological sex.” How do you think Atlanta LGBT activists would respond to being told to “just deal with it” when it comes to this policy?

As was recently reported at Twitchy, the American left is filled with LGBT “mind your own business” hypocrites:

The radical trans Left loves to tell anyone who raises moral and ethical questions about the movement to mind their own business. Meanwhile, it’s the radical trans Left that insists on making themselves a part of everyone’s business — literally:

Georgia’s legislators, and our Governor, Brian Kemp, need to stand strong in the face of the AJC’s transgender propaganda and protect children from the hideous lies of the transgender agenda.

(See this column at American Thinker.) 

Copyright 2023, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the 
The Miracle and Magnificence of America
trevorgrantthomas@gmail.com

 

Thursday, February 24, 2022

Why is Fox’s America’s Newsroom Promoting the Left’s Gender Propaganda?

On Tuesday of this week, Megan Fox at PJ Media reported on Fox News’ correspondent Bill Melugin’s somewhat foolish account of child rapist James Tubbs. While Melugin gets the heinous nature of Tubbs’ crime and the terrible response to it by the Los Angeles County District Attorney correct, he plays into the lefts’ hands when it comes to their perverse gender ideology. As Mrs. Fox notes,
While reporting on a gruesome story in which child rapist James Tubbs (who calls himself “Hannah”) has been caught on tape bragging about the light sentence he got after sexually assaulting a ten-year-old in a bathroom, Fox News correspondent Bill Melugin went out of his way to call Tubbs “she” and “her” multiple times on America’s Newsroom. It’s not only wrong but confusing to the audience. Why would Fox News join the woke gender bullies who demand that everyone gets their preferred pronouns no matter what our eyes tell us or despite whatever heinous crime they’ve committed?
Mrs. Fox goes on to note that,
Strangely, Melugin did not call Tubbs “she” and “her” on Tucker Carlson’s show, seeming to know the audience wouldn’t appreciate calling the convicted child rapist “she.” So what’s the story? Is Melugin required to use the preferred pronouns of psychopaths, or is it a personal choice?
Sadly, it seems that Melguin’s ignorant use of the English language is indeed an indication of policy on America’s Newsroom. Yesterday, in order to again discuss Tubbs’ case, the day after Melguin’s appearance, America’s Newsroom co-host Bill Hemmer had on Alex Bastian, a special advisor to inept Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon. In the segment, multiple times Hemmer referred to Tubbs using the female pronouns “she” and “her.” 


This is a shameful display and plays right into the hands of the evil LGBT agenda. To her credit, Dana Perino—the other America’s Newsroom co-host—read a quote from Tubbs’ victim. It declared,
The things he did to me and made me do that day were beyond horrible for a 10-year-old girl to have to go through. That man was very clear minded and old enough to know what he did that day was wrong and still did it anyway.
Perhaps this was Perino’s way of sticking it to the pronoun propagandists at Fox, and rightfully pointing out the truth on who exactly is James Tubbs. If that’s the case, then good for her. However, it shouldn’t be necessary, especially not when almost every other mainstream news organization in America long ago abandoned the truth on who is a male and who is a female.

Mrs. Fox sums up the Tubbs’ case well:


In order to defeat the wicked gender-deluded mob, we need as many agents for the truth as possible. It would be nice if we—those on the side of truth—could count America’s Newsroom as an ally this fight.

(See this post at American Thinker.)  

Copyright 2022, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith and Reason.
www.TrevorGrantThomas.com 
Trevor is the author of The Miracle and Magnificence of America
trevorgrantthomas@gmail.com

Thursday, April 18, 2019

Georgia Media Engages in Polling Propaganda

In order to further the liberal agenda on the legalized killing of children still in their mothers’ wombs and to help elect more democrats, the largest newspaper in the state of Georgia—The Atlanta-Journal Constitution (AJC)—has engaged in polling propaganda. Of course, like virtually all U.S. newspapers, given that the AJC is dominated by those with a liberal worldview, this should surprise no one. However, it doesn’t mean we should let them get away with it.

As I noted in a recent column, earlier this year the Georgia legislature passed the LIFE Act—often dubbed a “fetal heartbeat” bill. Georgia Governor Brian Kemp has yet to sign the bill, but he is widely expected to do so. Given that protecting the so-called “right” to kill the unborn is sacred to the modern left, liberals across my home state of Georgia have gone to great lengths to demonize and discourage anyone willing to stand up for the most helpless and innocent among us.

In an effort to discourage the pro-life movement and to paint the U.S. as more pro-abortion than it really is, for years now abortion apologists—especially those in the media and the Democrat Party—have promoted polls that supposedly show overwhelming support for the infamous Roe v. Wade decision. For example, late last summer, after President Trump nominated Brett Kavanaugh for a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court, a Wall Street Journal (WSJ)/NBC News poll purported to show 71 percent of Americans were against “completely overturn[ing]” Roe.

However, such polls are almost always seriously flawed. As Michael J. New noted at the time,

The survey question began by stating that Roe v. Wade established a right to an abortion, “at least in the first three months of pregnancy.” It then asked respondents if they would like to see the Supreme Court “completely overturn” Roe v. Wade. As such, many respondents likely concluded that Roe v. Wade only legalized abortion in the first trimester and a reversal of Roe would ban first-trimester abortions.

On the question of overturning Roe, the recent AJC poll uses the exact same deceptive language as the WSJ/NBC poll. The question reads,
In 1973 the Roe versus Wade decision established a woman's constitutional right to an abortion, at least in the first three months of pregnancy. Would you like to see the Supreme Court completely overturn its Roe versus Wade decision or not?
Unsurprisingly, poll results showed that, to the above question, 70 percent answered “no.” Subsequently, on its website (and I’m assuming in the print edition as well) the AJC ran the headline “AJC poll: Strong support for Roe.” The first sentence of the article declared, “Seven of 10 Georgia voters say they oppose overturning the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that guaranteed the right to an abortion, according to a new Atlanta Journal-Constitution poll.”

The article made no mention of how polling subjects were asked about the Roe decision. To warn readers about this, I noted as much in the comments section of the article. Shortly thereafter, my comment was deleted, and soon after that, the AJC website posted an article that contained the poll questions and results.

Given that we are 46 years removed from the Supreme Court’s ruling on Roe, many Americans are ignorant about the fact that Roe v. Wade deals with abortion. Thus, pollsters are left to try to explain the decision in one or two sentences. Therefore, we get inaccurate polling results on the Roe decision and on abortion. As was noted in National Review last year,
A Pew Research Center poll taken in 2013 found that only 62 percent of respondents were aware that Roe v. Wade dealt with abortion. Seventeen percent thought Roe v. Wade dealt with some other public-policy issue and 20 percent were unfamiliar with the decision. Furthermore, even many who realize Roe v. Wade dealt with abortion fail to understand the full implications of the decision. Many wrongly think that overturning Roe v. Wade would result in [a] national ban on abortion, instead a reversal of Roe would return the issue to the states.
What’s more, while the recent AJC poll supposedly showed overwhelming support for the Roe decision, respondents were about evenly split on their support for Georgia’s LIFE Act. Forty-three percent said they somewhat or strongly supported the bill while 48 percent said they somewhat or strongly opposed it. These results are more in line with what more sophisticated abortion polling reveals.

For example, consider last year’s Gallup poll on abortion. On the question of whether the Supreme Court should overturn Roe, 28 percent said yes and 64 percent said no. However, more detailed questioning reveals that Americans are not as much in favor of Roe as a simple question on overturning Roe might indicate. When asked whether an abortion should be legal in the first three months of pregnancy, “When the woman does not want the child for any reason” (the vast majority of abortions are performed because the child would be an inconvenience), 45 percent said it should be legal, while 53 percent said it should not be legal.

When the same question is asked about the last three months of pregnancy, only 20 percent said abortion should be legal, while 77 percent said it should not be legal. Likewise, in the last three months of pregnancy, when asked about whether abortion should be legal if the child would be “born mentally disabled” or “born with Down Syndrome,” the vast majority thought abortion should be illegal (61 percent to 35 percent and 68 percent to 29 percent, respectively) in such cases.

However, under the court’s current interpretation of Roe—a legal and moral abomination— laws that would restrict abortion according to the above opinions would almost certainly be struck down. In other words, because of the pro-abortion hyperbole regularly thrown around by liberals, many Americans simply don’t understand that for U.S. laws to reflect such opinions, Roe would have to go.

(See this column at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2019, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com