PowerLine – Gender Ideology Harms Children
- Today is the first day of the rest of the GOP race
- Three Ways to Think About Trump
- The ugly reality of contemporary Brussels
- Bill Clinton Unplugged
|Today is the first day of the rest of the GOP race
Posted: 22 Mar 2016 02:16 PM PDT
Ready or not, the battle for the Republican presidential nomination heats up again today with contests in Utah and Arizona. Ted Cruz is expected to win the vast majority, if not all, of Utah’s 44 delegates. Donald Trump is likely to capture all 58 of Arizona’s.
American Samoa will also dole out nine delegates. I have no idea how they will be divided.
Meanwhile, the crew at FiveThirtyEight surveyed political experts on the question of how many delegates they expect Trump to win going forward. In addition to Henry Silver and Harry Enten of FiveThirtyEight, the experts included Steve Hayward’s friend Henry Olsen, Patrick Ruffini, a star of the Bush-Cheney reelection effort in 2004, David Wasserman of the Cook Political Report, Adam Geller, Chris Christie’s lead pollster, and two others with whom I am not familiar.
Right now, Trump has 695 delegates. On average, those surveyed by FiveThirtyEight estimate that he will have added 513 more when the final primary results are tabulated on June 7. This would give him a total of 1,208, 29 delegates short of the 1,237 required for the nomination.
If the experts surveyed are even slightly off on the low side, Trump will get to 1,237 via the primaries and caucuses. Moreover, if, collectively, they have it right, Trump will be close enough that he might well pick up the delegates he needs during the six weeks or so before the convention.
However, the FiveThirtyEight survey shows that Trump doesn’t have the nomination the bag. The experts might be off on the high side in their estimate of Trump’s delegate count. In this scenario, the tycoon might be hard pressed to get to 1,237 given what is likely to be strong resistance to his candidacy.
According to the FiveThirtyEight crew, the biggest variable is the Kasich effect. Will Governor “Reward Me” help Trump by preventing Cruz from getting the vote he needs in winner-take-all primaries and/or congressional district? Or will he hurt Trump by actually winning congressional districts in states like New York that otherwise would go to Trump?
My guess is that the former (pro-Trump) effect will outweigh the latter, but who knows?
As for key states, FiveThirtyEight highlights several. California, with 172 delegates, is seen as critical. Nate Silver notes that it is the state with the largest standard deviation among the experts surveyed. “It has a lot of delegates, and we don’t have a great idea of what’s going to happen there,” he says.
Indiana could also be key. The experts, collectively, see Trump winning 37 of that state’s 57 delegates. However, like Missouri, Indiana could be a very close race, and it’s not difficult to imagine Cruz winning statewide and collecting 45 delegates, according to Wasserman.
In any event, it seems unlikely that we’ll know whether Trump gets to 1,237 via the primaries and caucuses until June 7, the last day of voting. So tonight is just one chapter in a drama that has a long time left to run.
Posted: 22 Mar 2016 11:30 AM PDT
My great teacher Harry Jaffa used to say that the heart of post-modernism was the proposition that the subjectivity of one’s convictions matters more than their objective validity. To which he also observed, “Whether you want to belong to the human race is now a matter of personal preference.”
This comes to mind with this statement out yesterday from the American College of Pediatricians:
March 21, 2016 – a temporary statement with references. A full statement will be published in summer 2016.
The American College of Pediatricians urges educators and legislators to reject all policies that condition children to accept as normal a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex. Facts – not ideology – determine reality.
1. Human sexuality is an objective biological binary trait: “XY” and “XX” are genetic markers of health – not genetic markers of a disorder. The norm for human design is to be conceived either male or female. Human sexuality is binary by design with the obvious purpose being the reproduction and flourishing of our species. This principle is self-evident. The exceedingly rare disorders of sex development (DSDs), including but not limited to testicular feminization and congenital adrenal hyperplasia, are all medically identifiable deviations from the sexual binary norm, and are rightly recognized as disorders of human design. Individuals with DSDs do not constitute a third sex.
2. No one is born with a gender. Everyone is born with a biological sex. Gender (an awareness and sense of oneself as male or female) is a sociological and psychological concept; not an objective biological one. No one is born with an awareness of themselves as male or female; this awareness develops over time and, like all developmental processes, may be derailed by a child’s subjective perceptions, relationships, and adverse experiences from infancy forward. People who identify as “feeling like the opposite sex” or “somewhere in between” do not comprise a third sex. They remain biological men or biological women.
3. A person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking. When an otherwise healthy biological boy believes he is a girl, or an otherwise healthy biological girl believes she is a boy, an objective psychological problem exists that lies in the mind not the body, and it should be treated as such. These children suffer from gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria (GD), formerly listed as Gender Identity Disorder (GID), is a recognized mental disorder in the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-V). The psychodynamic and social learning theories of GD/GID have never been disproved.
4. Puberty is not a disease and puberty-blocking hormones can be dangerous. Reversible or not, puberty- blocking hormones induce a state of disease – the absence of puberty – and inhibit growth and fertility in a previously biologically healthy child.
5. According to the DSM-V, as many as 98% of gender confused boys and 88% of gender confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty.
6. Children who use puberty blockers to impersonate the opposite sex will require cross-sex hormones in late adolescence. Cross-sex hormones (testosterone and estrogen) are associated with dangerous health risks including but not limited to high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke and cancer.
7. Rates of suicide are twenty times greater among adults who use cross-sex hormones and undergo sex reassignment surgery, even in Sweden which is among the most LGBQT – affirming countries. What compassionate and reasonable person would condemn young children to this fate knowing that after puberty as many as 88% of girls and 98% of boys will eventually accept reality and achieve a state of mental and physical health?
8. Conditioning children into believing a lifetime of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex is normal and healthful is child abuse. Endorsing gender discordance as normal via public education and legal policies will confuse children and parents, leading more children to present to “gender clinics” where they will be given puberty-blocking drugs. This, in turn, virtually ensures that they will “choose” a lifetime of carcinogenic and otherwise toxic cross-sex hormones, and likely consider unnecessary surgical mutilation of their healthy body parts as young adults.
I’ve omitted the footnotes and references for each numbered proposition, but if you click on the link you can chase them down for yourselves. Point number 2 seems a bit muddled to me, but I’ll leave that for another time.
Prediction: the well-organized forces of identity politics will bring enormous pressure on the American College of Pediatricians to withdraw this statement or amend it to conform to political correct ideology about “gender,” because political patricians know more than pediatricians.
A chaser from Harry Jaffa:
Human nature, for those of us who believe what our eyes tell us, is partitioned into men and women. Moreover, the differences between men and women are the differences that instruct us in the reality of the whole of nature. . . Man the maker is not the maker of man, because he is not the maker of nature.
|Three Ways to Think About Trump
Posted: 22 Mar 2016 08:59 AM PDT
Yesterday on the Bill Bennett show I opened with a monologue on “five ways to think about Trump,” but only had to make it through three of them. Anyway, here are the first three, the first being why professional wrestling is a marker for Trumpenthusiasm. That’s not meant as an attack! Professional wrestling is a small-c conservative cultural phenomenon, like NASCAR, tractor-pulls, dwarf-tossing, and hunting. (Okay, I’m not sure about the dwarf-tossing, but I am sure there’s a liberal out there somewhere I can offend by mentioning it.) Professional wrestling is a morality play, without the deliberate moral ambiguity or nihilism of an off-Broadway Dadaist play.
And immediately below is the great pro-wresting video with Trump that I reference in the sound clip here:
|The ugly reality of contemporary Brussels
Posted: 22 Mar 2016 08:52 AM PDT
The fact that today’s terrorist attacks in Brussels occurred just days after the capture of Salah Abdeslam has fueled speculation that this was revenge. Alternatively, some suggest that the perpetrators wanted to show they still are on the front foot.
However, Abdeslam reportedly told his captors that a set of attacks was in the works. That the attacks followed the capture so closely may be due to fear by the terrorists that Abdeslam might provide information which would enable authorities to thwart the next wave of attacks.
For me, the main lesson of recent events in Brussels is that the terrorists there must have considerable support, and even more sympathy, from local Muslims. Abdeslam was able not just to hide for months in Brussels, but also apparently to plan new attacks.
In addition, Mohamed Abrini, another Belgian terrorist, has been on the loose since the November attacks in Paris. A childhood friend of Abdeslam, he is accused of playing a major role in the planning and logistics of those attacks.
Similarly, Najim Laachraoui, known as Soufiane Kayal, has evaded capture. He is known to have traveled, using false papers, with Abdeslam and Mohamed Belkaïd, the Algerian who was killed in the raid that captured Abdeslam.
The Guardian concludes:
It is clear from the amount of time Abdeslam spent on the run that he was looked after by dozens, if not scores of contacts. This is the reality of contemporary Islamic extremism in Europe. It is not about so-called lone wolves or solitary actors, but about a small but significant number of people who are deeply embedded in broader communities or neighbourhoods.
Given how deeply embedded the terrorists appear to be, it is doubtful that the number of local Muslims who support and/or sympathize with them is small.
As Scott observes, even “Islamophobics” have real enemies. More than a few of them.
|Bill Clinton Unplugged
Posted: 22 Mar 2016 07:45 AM PDT
We know the Clintons privately despise Barack Obama, because he blocked Hillary’s path to the White House in 2008. Obama made her secretary of state for the old Machiavellian reason that you should keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Hillary might have challenged him for the 2012 Democratic nomination if he had been in trouble, which he was of course, but as the first black president no ordinary Democrat dared to take him on. She was the only person who could have conceivably done so. But not from a cabinet position.
Yesterday, the Big Dog who is looking and sounding more like an old dog on the back porch growling at squirrels he’s no longer able to chase, let slip the objective reality of things: the “awful legacy of the last eight years.” And just who has been president during this awful time? People should relentlessly hound Hillary about her hound-dog husband’s “gaffe,” which, remember, is defined in Washington as when someone inadvertently tells the truth.