Dem Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand Blames “Gender Bias” For Her Faltering Presidential Campaign….

How well has that excuse worked for Hillary?

Weasel Zippers

"Yeah, no.

"Via Fox News:

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., said Saturday she feels like she’s being underestimated in the race for the Democratic nomination for president, who will likely go up against President Trump in 2020.

Gillibrand is one of nearly two dozen major candidates who have declared their intention to run for president. She spoke about her campaign during her trip to New Hampshire.

“I think it’s just gender bias. I think people are generally biased against women. I think also biased against young women,” she said in an interview, according to CNN. “There’s just bias and it’s real and it exists, but you have to overcome it.”

Eighth Place: A High School Girl’s Life After Transgender Students Joined Her Sport

Daily Signal  "A growing number of school administrators want to silence women and girls who dare speak out about the ways transgender policies are harming them—but these brave young women refuse to be bullied or made to believe their concerns are hateful."

Journalism is Dead—Long Live the Media!

CNN’s Jake Tapper finally had to remind his television audience that, contra to the Joe Biden rollout campaign video and the progressive gospel, Donald Trump did not excuse white nationalists and Klansmen during the 2017 Charlottesville violence.

Victor Davis Hanson

"There still exists a physical media in the sense of airing current events. But it is not journalism as we once understood the disinterested reporting of the news. Journalism is now dead. The media lives on.

"Reporters today believe that their coverage serves higher agendas of social justice, identity politics, “equality” and diversity. To the degree a news account is expanded or ignored, praised or blasted, depends on its supposed utility to the effort to fundamentally transform the country into something unlike its founding.

"At the recent third president-less White House Correspondents’ Dinner, passive-aggressive journalists whined that they were victims, standing on the barricades against the all-powerful, all-evil—and all absent—Donald Trump. If the attempt was to return professionalism to the evening and eschew the pathological celebrity obsessions of the past, the result was only more confirmation of the self-referential and narcissistic culture of the Washington press corps.

"Why should we believe reporters suddenly worried about ethics, and free inquiry and speech?

"No journalist who pontificates now about the supposedly First Amendment-violating Trump ever mentions that Barack Obama had Fox News’s James Rosen (and his relatives) monitored, surveilled the communications records of Associated Press reporters, spoke with the press far less often than did Trump, and often fixated on Fox News.

"Journalists themselves had no problem with colleagues colluding with the Clinton campaign as evidenced in the Wikileaks Podesta trove. There was never much introspection about why the elite press and media corps—loudly progressive and feminist—was decimated by Me Too Movement allegations of long-standing sexual harassment and assault." . . .

Rand Paul: Americans Will Be ‘Shocked’ to Know What Biden’s Son Was Up To

Breitbart  "Sunday on ABC’s “Meet the Press,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) discussed a report from The New York Times on questions of former vice president Joe Biden’s potential conflict of interest.

"Partial transcript as follows:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Good morning, lets start where Chairman Schiff just left off right there that perhaps Congress should consider making it illegal to engage foreign governments, foreign assistance in campaigns. You agree?

PAUL: Well I think the American people will be shocked and dismayed to know that Joe Biden’s son was making $50,000 a month just a couple of months after he was dishonorably discharged from the military for drugs. $50,000 a month, I think most Americans will be dismayed that the president’s son was doing this while Joe Biden was actually lobbying to have this company, you know, go free of prosecution. My understanding, this was reported in the New York Times, Joe Biden was asking the prosecutor to lay off of the company that Hunter Biden was working for for $50,000 a month –

STEPHANOPOULOS: That’s – that’s not – that’s –

PAUL: — kicked out of the military, that’s extraordinary.

STEPHANOPOULOS: That’s not what – that’s not what was reported, in fact he was on an anti-corruption drive.

PAUL: Well actually that’s exactly what was reported, yes, that he got $50,000 a month right after he was kicked out of the military. That’s exactly true and nobody disputes that.

STEPHANOPOULOS: That’s very separate from what you just said about what the vice president was saying right there.

Should he say these things about Biden out of respect for his national leadership?

Frank Miniter: Student walkout at Colorado shooting vigil is a good sign. Media seems to lose interest.

Via Lucianne, which commented, "Not all millennials are brain dead. Hooray.".

Lucianne"The very public scene of hundreds of Colorado students and their parents walking out of a vigil that was turned into political theater by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence was so embarrassing that the gun control group actually issued an apology.
"Before leaving the Wednesday night event, students shouted, in front of journalists who the Brady Campaign invited: “this is not for us,” “political stunt” and “we are people, not a statement.”
"The Brady Campaign had portrayed the event as a vigil in memory of Kendrick Castillo, a student hero who died from gunshot wounds after he and two other students charged one of the attackers Tuesday at the Highlands Ranch STEM School in Colorado.
"Eight other students were injured in the shooting. Two students were arrested and accused of the attack.
"Instead of putting together an event to bring people together to mourn, the gun control group brought in activists and Colorado politicians – Democratic presidential contender U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet and Democratic U.S. Rep. Jason Crow – to push a one-sided political agenda.
"The speakers said they weren’t there to just offer thoughts and prayers, but that they instead were there to push for more restrictions on the right to bear arms.
"We saw this with events after the shooting at Parkland High School in Florida. The events, including a CNN town hall, weren’t open forums or vigils. [It was] "orchestrated propaganda designed to push a political cause." . . .

Why the Media Suddenly Lost Interest in the Latest School Shooting  . . . "After the shooting, other than some virtue signaling by the media, the story has left the front pages, as the narrative may be inconvenient for the leftist agenda. CNN and MSNBC have lived up to their reputation as “drive-by media” by quickly moving on. No interviews with David Hogg or other gun control fanatics. So, what are some of the inconvenient aspects to this story that the media would prefer to drive by without any discussion or analysis?

"Let’s start with the weapons. The two shooters, “opened fire with handguns that were concealed in a guitar case”, as reported by the Daily Mail in an unexpected good faith effort at honest journalism. Handguns? What happened to those evil AR-15’s or “assault weapons” that Democrats and the media constantly warn about? These are what the Huffington Post calls “weapons of war.”

"The reality is that most gun crimes are committed with handguns not rifles. But this doesn’t fit the media narrative and it’s better to drive-by the story rather than explain this inconvenient truth."

It would have been so much more convenient for Morning Joe or Jake Tapper if the Colorado school shooters were cis-gendered, white, Christian males, members of the NRA, wearing MAGA hats while brandishing AR-15s. But since that wasn’t the case, don’t expect the media to linger on this shooting. Instead they will focus on Trump’s real estate tax losses from 30 years ago.

‘Transgender woman’ stripped of victory in powerlifting competition

Tony Branco

Thomas Lifson  "The future for female athletes in competitions is grim if biological males are allowed to compete with them under the theory that one can choose to be female, take some hormones and/or other treatment, and become a woman. Men are born with many advantages that make it impossible for women to compete successfully in many, probably most, sports.

"One sports federation is fighting back, and just stripped championship awards from a “transgender woman” who dominated a competition held in April. Pink News (a “Daily LGBT+ Newsletter”) is not pleased: . . .

. . . 

. . . "Since the “transgender” competitor was taking testosterone-blockers, this may be the tripwire -- or legal defense -- for rescinding the championship.

"My guess is that because transgenderism reigns so powerfully in the media, educational and government establishments, they will try to ignore or dismiss this move, on the ground that the federation involved is “one of dozens” or maybe a fringe group.

"But there are girls and women out there who train hard every day seeking athletic excellence. Their dreams competitive triumph are being dashed by men who desperately want to be women despite sporting an X-chromosome in every cell of their bodies. We shall see whether propaganda and intimidation can overcome nature and common sense when it comes to women’s athletics. " 

More on this at the Daily Wire:    . . . “Men naturally have a larger bone structure, higher bone density, stronger connective tissue and higher muscle density than women," the board wrote. "These traits, even with reduced levels of testosterone do not go away. While MTF may be weaker and less muscle than they once were, the biological benefits given them at birth still remain over than of a female.”
"Transgender athletes competing against the gender of their choice has become a prominent issue in the world of sports, particularly in the world of high school sports. Several transgender athletes have taken women's titles in lifting and track and field, leaving hardworking, biologically female athletes out in the cold, even decades after feminists finally won recognition for women-only athletic competition." . . .

When it comes to media dishonesty, people are starting to notice

Bookworm Room

"I was heartened when my assiduously apolitical sister spontaneously offered that today’s media is so corrupt and dishonest it can’t be taken seriously."

. . . "So it was that my sister told me yesterday that she really hates the way Trump exaggerates. I asked her what had ticked her off, and she told me it was the way that Trump lied when he said the new abortion bills popping up in Democrat-run states — with abortion legal up until the minute birth — would allow doctors to execute living babies.

"But that’s true, I said, at least according to the Virginia governor.

"What?

"Yup, he was on a radio show and was asked about a bill coming up in Virginia to allow third trimester abortion.

QUESTION: There was a very contentious committee hearing yesterday when Fairfax County delegate Cathy Tran made her case for lifting restrictions on third trimester abortions as well as other restrictions now in place and she was pressed by a Republican delegate about whether her bill would permit an abortion even as a woman is essentially dilating ready to give birth and she answered that it would permit an abortion at that stage of labor. Do you support her measure and explain her answer.NORTHAM: You know, I wasn’t there, Julie, and I certainly can’t speak for Delegate Tran, but I would tell you — one, the first thing I would say is this is why decisions such as this should be made by [healthcare] providers, physicians, and the mothers and fathers that are involved. There are — you know when we talk about third-trimester abortions, these are done with the consent of, obviously, the mother, with the consent of the physicians, more than one physician by the way. And it’s done in cases where there may be severe deformities, there may be a fetus that’s non-viable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother. So I think this was really blown out of proportion.

"In other words, Northam speaks approvingly of a scenario in which a baby is born alive, and kept alive, only to have the mother and doctor engage in a subsequent conversation about whether the baby so defective it should subsequently be executed. This viewpoint is right out of Sparta." . . .

American Thinker.