Daily Archives: May 20, 2022

As the fear of Covid wanes with its news coverage, one of the remaining vestiges of the narrative involves face coverings. The premier journal Science recently published the largest cluster-randomized trial to date on masks, a massive study that the science community had been calling for since the start of the pandemic.

This study divided rural villages in Bangladesh into those encouraged to wear either medical or cloth masks, or no mask. At the conclusion of the trial, participants volunteered information on whether they experienced COVID-like symptoms.

Villagers with self-diagnosed Covid-like symptoms were asked to take an antibody test to determine if they carried SARS-CoV2 antibodies, suggesting they had been infected at some point (i.e., were seropositive). The authors concluded that masks reduced symptomatic seropositivity by 9.5 percent. In response, The Washington Post triumphantly declared: We conducted the largest study on masks and COVID-19: They work.

As with almost everything, the truth is more complicated. In a series of blog posts, University of California at Berkeley engineering professor Ben Recht meticulously detailed why he believes the findings more accurately reflect statistical sleight of hand rather than actionable data: One of the dark tricks of biostatistics is moving away from absolute case counts to measures of risk such as relative risk reduction, efficacy all these measures are relative, and they tend to exaggerate effects.

The Bangladesh study authors did not include the total number of symptomatic seropositive villagers in their paper, forcing Recht to calculate those numbers. There were1,106 symptomatic individuals confirmed seropositive in the control group (i.e., unmasked) and1,086 such individuals in the treatment (i.e., cloth or medical mask) group. The difference between the two groups was small: only20 casesout of over 340,000 individuals over a span of 8 weeks. I have a hard time going from these numbers to the assured conclusions that masks work.

Even the prestigious journal Nature reported the study findings in a deceptive way, with a large bold title stating: Face masks for COVID pass their largest test yet. However, below the bold title is a less enthusiastic, small-print interpretation of the findings: A rigorous study finds that surgical masks are highly protective, but cloth masks fall short.

Alarmingly, the Bangladesh study authors doubled down on their findings: we persuaded only about a third of the population to change their masking behavior. It is possible that more aggressive efforts could lead to even more change and produce greater health benefits. Was more persuasion (i.e., coercion) really what was lacking in our pandemic response?

A quick look at data from New York City in 2020 reveals their epidemic curve was already falling before mask mandates were in place, and that coercion in the form of hefty fines did nothing to prevent the next wave, whose peak was higher than that of the previous waves pre-mask mandate peak and lasted longer despite the coercive measures.

The bottom line: any policy so intrusive and divisive as forced masking should have significant, indisputable effectiveness in real-world application. The largest mask study to date failed in this regard, yet public health authorities and most scientists continue to cling to reflexive health policies, while politicized journalists are complicit in amplifying their one-sided message.

Pat Fidopiastis, Ph.D., is a professor of microbiology at California State Polytechnic University.

See the article here:

Why That Big Study On Face Covers Didn't Find What News Claimed - The Federalist

AsBuzzFeed contemplates its future, the website should reconsider its approach to motherhood.

The media outlet is rethinking its news division because it loses money, offering voluntary buyouts.BuzzFeed would likely gain some mom consumers if it changed its tune on motherhood.

In April, BuzzFeed ran an article headlined,Mothers Are Revealing How They Realized They Regret Having Children And How Theyre Coping Now, And Theyre Such Nuanced And Valid Feelings. The first mom the article quotes said, I regret having children because of whats going on in the world. I feel a SEVERE feeling of doom and anxiety when I think about her future. She will probably never be able to afford a house and struggle with debt, climate change, scarce resources, and inequality. I am truly terrified, and I feel so guilty. If I was childless today, I would 100% not have any children.

This is such a pessimistic view of motherhood and society. Yet it is a view that is getting more attention. Prince Harry made headlines when he said he wouldlimit his family to two childrenbecause of environmental concerns. Prince Harry is not alone in his thinking.

Among Americans aged 18 to 49 who dont have children yet, 44 percent in a Pew survey say they dont think its likely they ever will. Of these, 5 percent attribute their reluctance to climate change or the environment, while 56 percent said they just dont feel like it. Another 9 percent attribute their attitude to the state of the world.

In the article, another mom lamented that she did not have time for herself because of her kids: I have a preschooler. Things I dont like: I cant go anywhere alone. I cant have quiet time to myself unless theyre sleeping. Im always being touched. Im always being asked to do things that they cant do on their own. I have to do daily care tasks for them like bathing and making meals.

When I read this, my mind quickly turned to my children climbing on my lap asking for one more bite, please, mama of my oatmeal while I was trying to eat it that morning. This little routine is inconvenient but is such a happy memory for me.

Some responsibilities of parenthood are more challenging than others. I write this as a parent of small children who wakes up physically sore from holding and carrying my children. Yet very little of what we see elevated in popular culture focuses on the joy and satisfaction that nurturing children brings mothers also.

It seems like popular culture spends more time promoting the wine mom narrative that women need alcohol to get through mothering and less time honoring women for the work they put into mothering. Just because caregiving can be tough doesnt mean it is not worth our time, shouldnt be done, or is bad. While not the same, no one would say that about other pursuits, such as making a scientific discovery, accomplishing major health or fitness goals, or taking on a challenging career.

For our society to exist, children need caregivers willing to teach them everything from the ABCs to how to get dressed. Whats missing from the regretful parenting genre of articles is the joy of parentingthe first steps, the first hugs, and so much more.

This negative coverage of motherhood is not new to BuzzFeed. In February, BuzzFeed ran a story headlined,Women Who Regret Giving Birth Are Sharing Why, And Its Sparking A Much Needed Conversation.

In 2021, BuzzFeed published articles including,Parents Who Regret Having Children Are Making Anonymous Confessions Online, And Its Taboo But Important;15 Parents Shared Why They Regret Having Kids, And Their Reasons Why Are 100% Valid; and19 Women Got Brutally Honest About Why They Dont Want Kids.

We get it, BuzzFeed wants its readers to know that not everyone is happy with her decision to have children. But BuzzFeed is doing more than this. It is promoting a narrative that conflicts with what Americans want.

A huge majority of Americans have or want children. Only5 percent of American adultsdo not want children. Among Americans aged 45 and older, only 7 percent with children said if they could do it over again, they would not have children. And 50 percent of those who didnt have kids said they would have had at least one.

Stories about parental regret might get clicks, but BuzzFeed acting as a PR machine against motherhood might also influence the decision some people make about parenthood. And BuzzFeed isnt alone.

For more examples: The Atlantic ran an article headlined,The Two Reasons Parents Regret Having Kids. Womens magazineElle published a piece,My Biggest Regret In Life Is Having My Daughter.Self magazine published,10 Women Look Back on Living Childfree by Choice.

Part of the coverage issue on motherhood might be that the women who opt-in to motherhood are opting out of working at popular publications to care for their children, so their voice is missing. What is left are more voices of regretful moms or women who have chosen to live childfree.

American moms should speak up to make sure that regretful motherhood doesnt become the dominant narrative of our time. One of the most countercultural actions a mom can take, it seems, is to write about how she likes motherhoodand maybe tag BuzzFeed.

Editors note: We welcome submissions about experiencing the joys and rising to the challenges of motherhood here at The Federalist. See submissions instructions here.

Read the original here:

BuzzFeed Should Stop Publishing Only Negative Takes On Motherhood - The Federalist

Mega-billionaire Elon Musk confessed on Wednesday that the Democrat partys penchant for division & hate is pushing him to vote for Republicans.

In the past I voted Democrat, because they were (mostly) the kindness party, the worlds richest man tweeted. But they have become the party of division & hate, so I can no longer support them and will vote Republican. Now, watch their dirty tricks campaign against me unfold .

Political attacks on me will escalate dramatically in coming months, he noted hours before disclosing his new party affiliation.

Musks admission comes just two days after he told the All-In podcast that despite overwhelmingly and historically voting for Democrats, which he said are overly controlled by the unions and by the trial lawyers, particularly class-action lawyers, he will be voting red in the next election.

I might never have voted for a Republican, just to be clear, Musk said. Now this election I will.

The Tesla CEO also took several jabs at President Joe Biden for failing to get anything done compared to the Trump administration.

The real president is whoever controls the teleprompter, Musk said. The path to power is the path to the teleprompter.

Musk is in the process of purchasing Twitter, owning the libs, and correcting Big Techs very far-left bias after making a $44 billion offer.

The Tesla CEO revealed this week that he will not go through with the deal unless Twitter can show proof of <5% spam accounts.

My offer was based on Twitters SEC filings being accurate. Yesterday, Twitters CEO publicly refused to show proof of <5% [spam accounts]. This deal cannot move forward until he does, Musk wrote on Tuesday morning.

When Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal claimed the company has a system designed to curb online bots, Musk replied with a poop emoji.

Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and co-producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire and Fox News. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @jordanboydtx.

Read this article:

Elon Musk: Democrat Hate Drives Me To Vote Republican - The Federalist

Assuming the gunman who shot up the Buffalo, New York, grocery store really was motivated by anti-black racism, lets do what the media do when faced with an Islamic terrorist who goes on a killing spree in America and just refer to him as a lone wolf, a mentally unstable individual who in no way reflects any broader phenomenon or trend.

Except, unlike with violent Muslim extremism, that characterization in this case would be true.

Despite what the media, Democrats, leftists, and, of course, the permanent Washington bureaucracy say (over, and over, and over again), there is no imminent, large-scale threat from white nationalists. It doesnt exist outside of Joe Bidens TelePrompter.

To that claim, leftists would surely point to news reports and declarations by the U.S. Justice Department and Homeland Security. The New York Times has been all over it.

Top law enforcement officials say the biggest domestic terror threat comes from white supremacists. New York Times, June 15, 2021

Homeland Security Dept. Affirms Threat of White Supremacy After Years of Prodding.New York Times, Oct. 1, 2019

The Grave Threats of White Supremacy and Far-Right Extremism.New York Times, Feb. 22, 2019

Even under Donald Trumpespecially under Donald Trumpthe permanent bureaucracy had been hyperventilating about white supremacy and the existential threat it supposedly represented to every American, and even democracy itself.

Strangely enough, though, there isnt a ton of publicly available government data on the topic. More often than not, a government agency or official makes an assertion about white supremacists on a rampage and were just supposed to take it as fact without hearing any specifics.

For a threat so pervasive, prolific, and prominent, wouldnt you expect there to be a nearly unlimited body of work readily available for the public to consume and understand just how grave it is?

Its not there. Youre supposed to believe it anyway.

Sorry, government, but would you mind showing me your work on this thing youre telling me is imminently deadly?

Shut your racist mouth!

In the final months of Trumps term, Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf released a report titled Homeland Threat Assessment. In that report, Wolf said he was particularly concerned about white supremacist violent extremists who have been exceptionally lethal in their abhorrent, targeted attacks in recent years.

The report said that domestic violent extremists, specifically white supremacist extremists (WSEs) were and would continue to be the most persistent and lethal threat in the Homeland. It made all kinds of claims about WSEs: that they have demonstrated longstanding intent to target racial and religious minorities, members of the LGBTQ+ community, politicians, and those they believe promote multi-culturalism and globalization; and have conducted more lethal attacks in the United States than any other DVE (domestic violent extremist) movement; and have engaged in outreach and networking opportunities abroad.

There was even a tally alleging that nearly 40 people had been killed in attacks perpetrated by WSEs from 2018 and 2019. WSEs conducted half of all lethal attacks (8 of 16), resulting in the majority of deaths (39 of 48), the report said.

But there was a problem with the report. There were precisely zero citations showing where the Department of Homeland Security had derived its conclusionsno news articles or academic papers. Just an assurance by the acting secretary, who was particularly concerned about white supremacist violent extremists of late.

Hmm might there be information elsewhere? A document published the previous year by the same department said the agency looked at the years from 2000 to mid-2016 and counted 28 attacks in the United States committed by WSEs, which collectively resulted in 51 fatalities.

That factoid came with a citation, so thats good. But this was the corresponding footnote: Based on a review of US Government information, law enforcement reporting, and open source. There was no link to specific incidents or verifiable data. There was no cross reference. That wouldnt fly in a high school English paper, but the feds apparently think theyre above having to back up their wild claims with any actual evidence.

Theres more publicly available information about the government spending millions of dollars to investigate the prevalence of obesity in lesbians than there is about an allegedly serious and fatal threat were facing from white supremacists.

What about at the state level? In 2019, Democrat New Jersey Gov. Philip Murphys administration published a report on individual episodes of domestic terrorism that purportedly took place across the nation throughout the previous year. To the departments credit, it was highly transparent about what it was counting as an incident of terrorism, including names, dates, and locations of the perpetrators.

There were, the report said, a total of 32 domestic terrorist attacks, disrupted plots, threats of violence, and weapons stockpiling by individuals with a radical political or social agenda. Of that 32, the office said the overwhelming majority, 25, were carried out by white supremacists.

The report listed each individual incident of white supremacist-linked terrorism, with the name of the perpetrator, his age, and the location of the incident, but without references to where it drew the data. Additional information requires looking up each episode on your own.

One of the incidents involved Benjamin Morro, a 28-year-old Wisconsin man who accidentally killed himself by mishandling explosives in his apartment. No motive has ever been established as to why Morro had the combustible items but law enforcement claimed to have found white supremacist material, i.e., literature in pamphlets or books, in his home.

Is a dummy who accidentally blows himself up what comes to mind when you hear the phrase white supremacist terrorist attack?

Another one involved Ronnie Wilson, a 32-year-old Tennessee man who was charged with shooting a cop during a traffic stop. Wilson was allegedly a member of the white supremacist gang Aryan Nations, but the officer he shot was also white.

When a white man shoots another white man, is that what comes to mind when you hear the phrase white supremacist terrorist attack?

One other incident involved a homeless man who was yelling racial epithets in public. (To which I ask, has anyone seen or heard from Chris Matthews lately?)

Yet another pertained to a black man who was burned alive by his white housemate. The two of them lived at Frazier Young Supportive Living, a residence in Tennessee for the mentally impaired.

A homeless man and a literal mental patient. Is that what comes to mind when you hear the phrase white supremacist terrorist attacks?

If those four incidents dont fill you with fear that white supremacists lurk in the shadows to commit random acts of violence, I dont know what to tell you. You should be deathly afraid!

To be sure, not all of the entries in the New Jersey governments report are a reach. A few appear to be legitimate, racially motivated attacks on ethnic minorities.

One involved Natasha Bowers, a 33-year-old woman who, along with five other skinheads, beat up a black man in the back of a bar in Pennsylvania. But the odd thing about that solitary episode is that it was counted by the report as six separate attacks, one for each of the attackers charged by police.

The authors of the report did the same thing with the assault of a black man at a bar in Washington state. Eight attackers identified by law enforcement were believed to be affiliated with the Aryan Brotherhood. Each suspect was listed in the report as an individual white supremacist attack, even though there was only one incident.

This would be like saying we had 19 separate September 11s because thats the number of hijackers who participated. No, we had just the one carried out by multiple people. That more than one attacker was involved doesnt mean we count each one as an individual event.

To recap: of the 25 attacks labeled in the New Jersey governments report as white supremacy, 14 were related to only two separate incidents. One of them involved a man who accidentally killed himself, another was perpetrated by a homeless guy, and yet another was committed by a mental patient in a home for the intellectually disabled. That brings the total attacks in 2018 down to more like eightacross our entire nation of 330 million people.

Fewer than ten white supremacy attacks doesnt exactly sound like something the FBI should be busying itself with. The numbers on white supremacy couldnt have been more padded if they were on their period.

Yet the president is scheduled to visit Buffalo this week, where he will most certainly talk up white supremacy as an all-consuming force that can only be beaten back by voting for more Democrats. Its a lie.

More here:

Congrats To The Media For Finally Finding A White Supremacist - The Federalist

A large majority of Americans think the country is headed in the wrong direction, and much of their blame for the nations woes rests on President Joe Biden and the worsening economic crisis.

A new poll from NBC News found that 75 percent of U.S. adults think the nation is on the wrong track. Thats the highest number of unsatisfied Americans since the nations last notable recession in 2008. Its also up nearly 20 percentage points since this time last year and up two percentage points from January 2021 when Biden was inaugurated.

Most of these Americans concerns can be traced to federal spending and lockdown-induced economic problems such as inflation, which is taking a far greater toll on Americans than whats reflected in the 8 percent figure, and record-high gas prices, which recently reached a $4.48 per gallon national average.

Since Biden assumed office, the financial toll these crises have taken on pocketbooks has only worsened and made it difficult for hardworking Americans to keep up.

In the NBC poll, 65 percent of U.S. adults claimed their current paychecks are falling behind their rapidly rising costs of living. Only 6 percent said their familys income is going up faster than the cost of living.

Thats one of the many reasons why, according to NBC, Bidens approval among U.S. adults recently sank to 39 percent. His disapproval rose to a whopping 56 percent.

A recent Federalist and Susquehanna poll found that 56 percent of U.S. adults specifically disapproved of Bidens handling of record-high gas prices, and 61 percent disapproved of Bidens handling of inflation.

As the midterms quickly approach, the countrys economic state and Bidens flailing track record are a cause for concern for Democrats who were 10 points behind Republicans in The Federalist polls generic ballot test. Yet despite significant evidence that the Biden administration and Democrats excessive spending has exacerbated inflation, the White House and legislators are still hyperfocused on passing expensive legislation to send aid to Ukraine and other causes.

All the while, Biden is refusing to take responsibility for his role in the nations intensifying crisis and instead repeatedly blames Russias Vladimir Putin for problems that started long before the Russia-Ukraine war began.

Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and co-producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire and Fox News. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @jordanboydtx.

See the original post:

75% Of Americans Think Biden's US Is Headed In The Wrong Direction - The Federalist

Todays academic landscape is littered with the dry bones of academic freedom. This is true of my own religious university, Concordia University Wisconsin (CUW), from which I have been suspended and put under threat of termination for publishing an academic essay critiquing identity politics.

As reported by The Federalist in March, soon after I published that essay, I was banned from campus and put on administrative leave. There I remain three months later, with no clear path to restoration to my post.

This brings to light the adulterous affair with cultural Marxism by CUWs interim president, its Executive Committee of the Board of Regents (BoR), and various professors and staff at my Lutheran Christian university. The presence of this ideology is most notable in the publicly posted desires of the regents search for a new university president who believes in and is committed to inclusion and equity as well as diversity in all its myriad forms. In other words, they seek a president who supports or is willing to compromise with woke ideology instead of staking everything on Christ and the text of the Bible.

Concordias attack on academic freedom has been publicly denounced in letters from the Academic Freedom Alliance (AFA) and from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE). Its also been put on alert by The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty and The Federalist.

Stubborn as sin, closemouthed as a grave, our administration and regents have not responded. Nor have they responded to 6,000 pastors and laity online or to the scores of students on campus who have petitioned them to respect academic freedom and reinstate me.

The faculty as a whole has also been deathly silent about this widely reported transgression against academic freedom. Theres also been no statement on academic freedom from the church authorities in the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS) responsible for safeguarding the rights of church workers and pastors such as me. Theres not been a whisper about the national scandal of CUWs frontal assault on academic freedom, as far as I can tell, from the faculties of other universities of the LCMS. No rattlin bones.

So why should anyone care? Let me sketch out for you what academic freedom should mean. I will identify this problem of dry, silent bones as a moral failure, using Ronald Dworkins book Freedoms Law. In his obituary, Dworkin was acknowledged as the most important and powerful philosopher of law in the English-speaking world.

First, there is the urgent need for academic freedom in our context. As Dworkin puts it: Academic freedom is often defended on the ground that scholars must be free if they are to discover objective truth. But the very possibility of objective truth is now itself under attack from an anti-truth-squad of relativists, subjectivists, neo-Pragmatists, post-modernists, and similar critics now powerful in the unconfident departments of American universities.

Dworkin is not saying we should give up the search for absolute truth. Rather, he means that we today have to reckon with the dominance of relativism in higher education. He says relativism provides a pervasive but deeply confused challenge to academics and freedom.

Wokeism is a case in point. In my essay that triggered my suspension, Woke Dysphoria at Concordia, I describe wokeism as a potent cocktail of Progressivism, Neo-Pragmatism, and Marxism, an ideology that replaces Christ and biblical authority with an alien politics. For others it is educational foolishness, but in Lutheran circles it is educational heresy, a denial of Christ and his authority by professors, administrators, and board members who heretically trade the priceless inheritance of the Lutheran Reformation for the Soylent Green of Marxist ideology.

Dworkins observation that the relativism most professors at most Western universities teach and assume today is deeply confused is illustrated by the deeply confused manner in which Concordias interim president speaks about the ideological terms of diversity, inclusion, and equity. Youll notice that Christ and His authoritative Word is simply not part of his daily administrators vocabulary. His thinking and speaking are not framed by the text of the Bible, nor any other texts. As a consequence, it is deeply confused.

Jesus tells us in no uncertain terms, Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters (Matthew 12:30). In times of persecution and intense cultural pressure, as the Lutheran pastor-professor Dietrich Bonhoeffer taught during the Holocaust, Christians must speak up regarding the universal authority of Jesus in every area of life. Otherwise, they are manifestly against Him and are responsible for scattering the flock.

I regret to point out an obvious conclusion: This administrators manner of responding to serious questions about my case is just what you would expect if my call for the regents and administration to repent of wokism is on target.

Dworkin points out that there are two levels to academic freedom, historically and conceptually speaking: First, it insulates universities, colleges, and other institutions of higher learning from political institutions Second, academic freedom insulates scholars from the administrators of their universities.

Academic freedom is a way to ensure that administrators and entire universities act morally and do no harm to academic work. The everyday level of academic freedom keeps administrators from silencing genuine, practicing professors from teaching and preaching with censorship, suspensions, terminations, or other power moves of intimidation and retribution. To paraphrase Wittgensteins Tractatus, Proposition 7, Whatever can be said authoritatively can be said clearly; whatever cannot be said authoritatively by an administrator, of such matters administrators ought to remain silent.

You can assault academic freedom, but then you will be doing immoral things. Also, you will be making academiaat your university and beyondinaccessible, unfathomable, and undoable. You will be making the case for potential students and parents, and for taxpayers and pundits who already suspect that higher education is a sham, that universities are in fact irrelevant, a waste of time and money, and thus harmful to everyone.

What my administration is doing to meand, by extension what it is doing to my students, to my academic colleagues in every Concordia university and beyondis being visited upon me contrary to the written procedures available to them, without reason, and without appeal to any legitimate authority, but purely on the basis of administrative power. They are doing it because they can.

The first level of academic freedom, insulation from political institutions, has everything to do with what we are as a religious institution. The exercise of our institutional academic freedom, a moral imperative, intersects with the exercise of our constitutional right of free exercise of religion, a legal right articulated in an authoritative American text, the First Amendment.

As Dworkin concludes: Academic freedom and a right to free speech are closely related in a different way: they form important parts of a system of ideas and institutions that creates a culture of individual intellectual responsibility, and that protects it from disintegrating into a culture of intellectual conformity.

A religious university exists to take a stand against a culture of intellectual conformity. The executive committees fond wishes for a woke diversity to take the place of our Concordia Lutheran University will come to pass if the administration keeps this up.

Maybe its already too late. Likely their addiction to government funding and perks, and to the alien politics of Caesar that come along with that funding, is not something they even want to recover from.

Gregory Schulz has earned black belts both in the martial art of philosophy and in the martial art of theology and ministry. His online dojo is http://www.lutheranphilosopher.com. You can share your thoughts and concerns for academic freedom at teachingthedeviltodeath@gmail.com. (His Gmail prefix is from Martin Luthers longer preface to his Large Catechism.)

Here is the original post:

University Won't Hear Professor It Kicked Out After Criticizing Wokeness - The Federalist

On Wednesday, Disney announced it added only 1.5 million domestic subscribers this spring to its flagship streaming service, with anticipated higher costs in the year ahead. The companys market value quickly dipped to a two-year low.

Such weak results seem to confirm the power of a movement among conservative parents to cancel Disney after surreptitiously recorded remarks by Disney creative executives about their not-so-secret gay agenda spread online. Relaying what he has heard from Christian families about those comments, Erick Goss, head of faith-based streamer Minno, called it a real breach of trust in a statement.

Adam Holz, director of Focus on the Familys Plugged In, which provides parental reviews of popular entertainment, said Disneys embrace of a progressive agenda has made some families willing to sacrifice Marvel, Star Wars, and even Disney classics. Weve heard from many people who are ready to cut the Mouse House cord, even though its still home to some really big franchises, stated Holz via email. I say bravo to that.

Top streamer Netflix, for years a target of parents ire due to titles such as Cuties among others, has also faced subscriber losses and massive stock declines in recent weeks.Yet streaming services are expected to pick up about 80 million subscribers this year. Will family-friendly streaming alternatives get a chunk of that projected growth?

Popular blogger Entertainment Strategy Guy, a former Hollywood professional who now writes about the industry, said via email that low barriers to entry have resulted in a proliferation of smaller streamers. Oftentimes they start with a clear niche, but they need to go broad and have hit shows and films to survive.

Backed by major studio Sony, which acquired it in late 2020, Pure Flix has the highest name awareness among faith-and-family streamers.

Pure Flix ($8 per month) has been improving under Sony, as originals like crime drama Vindication and military chaplain biopic Indivisible are rounded out by licensed titles such as comedy Moms Night Out featuring Patricia Heaton, UPtvs Heartland (also popular on Netflix), early 90s action flicks 3 Ninjas, and even Mike Rowes Somebodys Gotta Do It. For young kids, theres VeggieTales and Superbook along with lots of animal-centric titles.

This is an exciting time for us because people are really responding to our content, said Michael Scott, CEO of Pure Flix, in a statement. They have 13 original films and series rolling out this year (with a Karen Kingsbury TV series also in production), a small fraction of what major streamers have planned.

Households seeking innocent-enough romance-centric, inspirational content have other options. UP Faith & Family ($6 per month) has what critics have called a stellar selection of original movies including Janette Okes popular Love Comes Softly film series and some music specials from artists like Carrie Underwood. Or go to the fountainhead of this genre, as Hallmark Movies Now ($4.99 per month) has hundreds of titles although note some families are wary of a few LGBTQ-centered plotlines present in recent titles.

For a surprisingly wide selection of classic TV shows and faith-based films (alongside some mature titles), consider ad-supported streamer Crackle (free), owned by Chicken Soup for the Soul. Crackle has become known as a hub of forgotten decades-old programs, a rarity in this age of short-shelf-life entertainment. But theres almost nothing on Crackle for young children.

If toddlers and grade-schoolers are a familys primary streaming need, two players offer solid options. Minno ($7 per month) focuses exclusively on Christian-based childrens titles, although its kids library is only marginally larger than Pure Flix. CEO Goss, a former Amazon executive, told me they are working with seasoned Christian creatives whose shows are on Netflix, Disney, Amazon, and Apple TV Plus on a dozen new shows in production.

Meanwhile, to expand its selection for youngsters, Yippee ($8 per month) has inked deals with a couple dozen YouTube creators into Minecraft and outdoor adventures to complement its VeggieTales and faith-based programs.

Even experts like Holz of Plugged In have trouble telling apart all these similar brands. I dont think theres a one-stop shop of family-friendly, Christian content that rivals the overall spread of genres and content that Disney can, he said.

But wait theres more! A handful of content producers have built streaming services around their small selection of quality programs. Edging into Disneys strength in musicals, Sight & Sound TV ($10 per rental) features elaborate staged productions with impressive sets, dynamic original songs, and live animals.

Similarly, for those seeking to stream classic Anne of Green Gables films and the Road to Avonlea TV series, Sullivan Productions Gazebo TV ($8 per rental) offers those beloved titles. And RedeemTV (free) from Christian History Institute features their documentaries and animated The Pilgrims Progress, alongside a few other titles.

Other players target conservative families with differing models. FrndlyTV ($9 per month) is more like a DVR app, allowing users to quickly build up a library of favorite shows from 35 family-targeted channels. While Angel Studios (free) currently has a small slate of shows, several like The Chosen and Dry Bar Comedy are bona fide hits and they help build a community around each brand followers who also crowdfund and share in the success.

Even news networks are testing the waters. Driven by current events shows,Fox Nation($6 per month) features documentaries including Hero Dogs and for-the-whole-family sports entries.Meanwhile,Daily Wire($14 per month), with its own news analysis shows alongside a fewdramatic films, plans toinvest $100 millionin kids entertainment over the next three years.

Looking broadly at the streaming marketplace, industry pro Entertainment Strategy Guy contends that only four to eight major services with critical mass will last. Could one of those be a family-focused rival to Disney Plus? Maybe, he says.

Would a family-and-faith service be able to stand up to Netflix, Disney, Paramount Plus (Nickelodeon), PBS Kids, and HBO Max? Thats a tough proposition, says the blogger. Could it make money and have a core fanbase? Probably.

Sources familiar with these niche streamers say most are content to serve a small segment of families rather than pursue mergers or other critical-mass strategies. Still, to that end, three well-funded entities have recently made plays in faith-and-family entertainment.

Early this year, Angel Studios (distributors of The Chosen) announced that Gigafund a firm that boosted Elon Musks SpaceX venture has backed Angel in an investment round raising $47 million. However, rather than building a streamer, the studio distributes programs to niche and major partners (like Amazon). Angels next projects will be previewed soon.

GAC Media, led by former Crown Media president Bill Abbott, made headlines recently by bringing on Candace Cameron Bure to head up show development for GAC Family, which already features Fuller House (formerly a Netflix exclusive), When Hope Calls, (a spin-off of Hallmarks runaway hit When Calls the Heart), and other programs in production.

While Abbott has said GAC intends to be the leader in this space, its unclear whether the network will venture beyond its Hallmark-genre roots into childrens and faith-conscious titles. GAC Media plans for streaming will roll out over the next year, according to a company rep.

Lastly, Roma Downey and her husband Mark Burnett have discussed the need for a major faith-and-family streamer since Disney Plus launched. LightWorkers Media, their subsidiary at MGM, even produced several shows including The Baxters (currently unreleased). With MGM recently acquired by Amazon, the status of that planned streamer is unclear and inquiries were not immediately answered.

With this complex market in major flux, Plugged Ins Holz gives the bottom line: Most families dont have the ability to subscribe to a bunch of niche streaming outlets.

Many people end up reaching for the brand they associate with family entertainment: Disney. Their streaming service has another Star Wars entry, the $100-million limited series Obi-Wan Kenobi, out in a couple weeks alongside several titles celebrating LGBT Pride Month.

For Holz, a critical-mass alternative cannot come soon enough. It might be that consolidation among these niche services needs to happen for families to take full advantage of them.

Josh Shepherd covers culture, faith, and public policy for several media outlets including The Stream. His articles have appeared in Christianity Today, Religion & Politics, Faithfully Magazine, Religion News Service, and Providence Magazine. A graduate of the University of Colorado, he previously worked on staff at The Heritage Foundation and Focus on the Family. Josh and his wife live in the Washington, D.C. area with their two children.

See more here:

Disney Plus Alternatives Have Options for Families. But Are They Enough? - The Federalist

The pro-abortion machine has been working overtime to churn out lies about preborn babies and laws designed to protect them. Just Wednesday, after a bipartisan majority in the U.S. Senate defeated the legislatures most radical abortion bill in history, pro-aborts on Capitol Hill and in the corporate media were declaring that Republicans (in fact a bipartisan majority that included Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin) had used the filibuster (rather than a simple 51-49 vote) to defeat the bill.

The lying started more than 50 years ago with Norma McCorvey of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. McCorvey later admitted she had fabricated her account of being raped by three men and a woman in 1969 because she had hoped to circumvent a 100-year-old Texas law that banned abortions except when the womans life was in danger, as The New York Times reported.

Here are five of many more Roe lies to be aware of, along with ways to counter them.

Democrat Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut claimed last Sunday that the leaked Supreme Court decision means women and doctors are going to be sent to jail immediately when this opinion becomes a reality.

But Murphy, an attorney, failed to explain that prior to Roe, when abortion was illegal in nearly every state, women werent being rounded up in jails for having abortions.Who would even lobby for such laws? Abortionists might get jail time, as legal abortionist Kermit Gosnell did in Pennsylvania, but women were not prosecuted or sent to jail even for self-abortion.

As Villanova University law professor Joseph Dellapenna noted, in the 19th and 20th centuries, Courts rationalized their view of women as victims of abortion by declaring that a woman was not deemed able to assent to an unlawful act against herself. This attitude was reinforced by the reality that generally no conviction of the abortionist could be obtained without the testimony of the woman who underwent the abortion.

Dellapenna also pointed out that states like New York enacted immunity statutes to protect women from prosecution if they would testify against their abortionists.

Attorney Paul Linton performed exhaustive case review background work on the actual practice of prosecuting abortionists in the United States. He could not find even one reported case from any State, prior to Roe, in which a woman was prosecuted, convicted and sentenced for inducing her own abortion, or for consenting to an abortion performed upon her by a third party.

There were only two reported abortion cases, he found, in which a woman was even charged for having had an abortion. In Pennsylvania, a woman took a drug to produce abortion, but the trial judge refused to enter the jurys guilty finding because the statute was not intended to apply to the woman.

The order was affirmed on appeal. A Texas case from 1922 notes that a woman was indicted, but there was no record that the woman was ever tried or convicted and sentenced.

Abortion advocates also claim that women who miscarry could be criminally prosecuted. Pregnancy loss before 20 weeks gestation can result from non-controlled diabetes, infections, hormone conditions, uterine or cervix problems, or thyroid disease.These have nothing to do with intentional, induced abortion.Miscarriage occurs in 26 percent of all pregnancies and up to 10% of clinically recognized pregnancies.

Paul Wohlers noted in The Washington Post in 1981 that the term miscarriage in some older state statutes referred to induced abortion.But after a thorough search of state abortion prosecutions from the mid-1800s, he concluded that In no case was a spontaneous miscarriage made the object of criminal investigation or prosecution.

Further, a prosecutor would have great difficulty convincing a judge or jury that a particular early miscarriage (before 20 weeks) resulted from an intentional action of the woman.It would be nearly impossible for a criminal prosecutor to procure the body (corpus delicti) of a miscarried child to initiate a criminal trial, to prove a defendant intentionally caused a miscarriage.

One pro-abortion group claimed Theres no medical way to tell the difference between a miscarriage and a medication abortion, in an attempt to argue that victims of miscarriage could be prosecuted. But that very fact means no prosecutor could thus prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the childs death was due to abortion.

Forbes Magazinelast week suggested that reversing Roe will lead to birth control pills being outlawed because defining the life of an unborn child as starting at fertilization or conception would affect common birth control methods. But users of IUDs or the Pill were never prosecuted under the criminal abortion laws that were in place prior to Roe, so why would they be prosecuted if Roe is reversed? Most of the abortion laws prior to Roe defined the unborn childs life as beginning at fertilization or conception.

Harriet Pilpel, Planned Parenthoods lawyer, filed an amicus brief in 1971 noting that state criminal abortion laws had not made any effort to outlaw the use of the intrauterine device which may in fact function to prevent implantation after fertilization has occurred.

Pilpels testimony before Congress in 1976 explained one practical reason why women had not been prosecuted for using drugs or devices that prevented pregnancy after fertilization: Since it is not possible scientifically to determine either when fertilization or implantation occurs it would be impossible in cases of early pregnancies to know when and whether it was being violated.

Further, as eminently principled pro-life advocate and late Notre Dame law professor Charles Rice wrote, Early abortifacients are beyond the effective reach of the law.It will usually be impossible to prove that life was terminated in an early abortion; prosecution for abortion therefore would be practically impossible.

Since contraceptive drugs are licensed for legitimate uses, it is practically impossible to prevent their use for abortion, he continued. The legal obliteration of the distinction between contraception and abortion has put chemical abortion beyond the practical reach of the law.

This lie comes from Justice Henry Blackmun in the Roe decision itself. But in footnote 34 ofRoe,Justice Harry Blackmun cited Eugene Quays article, Justifiable Abortion Medical and Legal Foundations, which excerpted laws from 19 states and Washington, D.C., all of which classified abortion as manslaughter or second-degree murder, or had similar penalties for such.Quay also included excerpts from 24 state laws prohibiting abortion, all of which used the words child or children, which can only mean a living human being, a person.

Justice Alito cited Eugene Quays same article on page 23 of his working brief.

At the time Roe was decided in 1973, all states had either restricted or prohibited abortion. Forty-three states and the District of Columbia banned abortion because the child was fully human. Even radically pro-abortion President Joe Biden couldnt help admitting that the subject of an abortion is indeed a child.

More than 63 million children have had their lives legally taken by abortion since 1973 under Roe. Isnt it past time that the Supreme Court, which has reversed itself at least 232 times since 1808, according to the Library of Congress, at least let citizens have a say in whether this dreadful practice deserves to stand?

Robert Marshall was a member of the Virginia General Assembly from 1992 to 2018, and is the author ofReclaiming the Republic: How Christians and other Conservatives Can Win Back America." Email him atrobertgbobmarshall@gmail.com.

Read the original post:

5 Lies The Left Spreads About Overturning Roe And How To Counter Them - The Federalist

Nashville country star Luke Combs $100 gas station scratch-off wont get as far today as it did in Donald Trumps America five years ago, when he bragged about buying two 12-packs and a tank of gas with it.

Last week, the latest data from the Department of Labor revealed year-over-year inflation remains at a four-decade high with an 8.3 percent increase in April. But for most Americans, the rise in costs feels far steeper, with staple items seeing price increases nearly double the overall consumer index. Meats, poultry, eggs, and fish are up more than 14 percent, milk nearly 15, energy more than 30, and airfare up more than 33 percent from April last year.

On Twitter, Combs 2017 song celebrating his $100-dollar lottery win was mocked by a user who highlighted the rising cost of beer and gas, the latter of which reached a new record high Tuesday.

Im pretty sure [Luke Combs] cant buy two 12-packs and a tank of gas with that $100 he won off a lottery ticket anymore, wrote Jacob Davis, an Arkansas sports journalist.

Combs agreed.

Hell I filled my truck up yesterday and it was 150 bucks, Combs wrote. In Tennessee, the average price for a gallon of regular unleaded is $4.23, and thats below the national average of $4.52, according to AAAs gas tracker.

Here are 19 other items Combs would struggle to afford in Joe Bidens America with his $100 win.

Someone looking for a quality bike, used or new, wouldnt shop at Walmart. Even if he did, adult bikes start north of $100.

Baby food is up 14 percent from last year, according to the Department of Labor, but good luck finding it. Combs, who is expecting his firstborn this year, can thank the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Government data shows tires up 15 percent from last year. While dependent on the size, brand, and merchant, new tires can usually cost around $200, and $120 for a tire rotation, according to Kelly Blue Book in March.

To counter the narrative of rising prices last summer, the Biden administration touted data from the Farm Bureau showing the average cost of a Fourth of July barbeque was down 16 cents from the summer of 2020.

Planning a cookout this year? Ketchup on the news, the White House wrote in a Twitter post. According to the Farm Bureau, the cost of July BBQ is down from last year. Its a fact you must-hear(d). Hot dog, the Biden economic plan is working. And thats something we can all relish.

Lets hope Combs banked the 16 cents for this summer.

Cleveland Federal Reserve President Loretta Mester forecast inflation to remain high through next year.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration estimates the average electricity bill is $132.33 in Tennessee. That number will only rise as energy prices continue to skyrocket, with air conditioning claiming a greater share of the bill. And Nashville summers are hot, ranging between 72- and 90-degrees Fahrenheit in July.

Combs cant buy more than 50 feet of copper pipe with half an inch diameter at the local Home Depot.

Combs also cant buy more than 14 2x4s either.

Health care costs are far from immune to inflationary pressures. Government data shows medical care services up 3.5 percent.

According to Style Blueprint Magazines 2022 Nashville summer camp guide, posted prices start at $75, not including the gas to get there. And thats just the cheapest, with most hovering around $200.

You get what you pay for.

Teenagers pay more at the pump too.

Just west of the Appalachians, Nashville is just six hours from the Blue Ridge Mountains. Gas prices alone will spike what used to be a low-budget option well beyond $100.

One night in a downtown hotel will cost $200, minimum. Go outside the city, and one can still expect to shell out more than $100, including tax.

Ammoforsale.com is selling 1,000 rounds of 9mm ammunition for $289.95, and thats the special price. But experts say the apocalypse is coming, so its best to stock up now.

The YMCA of middle Tennessee charges $65 for a month of membership to individuals between 31 and 64. Combs is 32.

An Amazon Prime membership costs $14.99 per month, or $139 for the entire year. Its better to buy local anyway.

Memberships begin at $9.99 per month.

Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.

See original here:

19 Things Luke Combs Can't Buy With His $100 Scratch-Off In Biden's America - The Federalist