53percenter's Blog

In a vote that has genuinely stunned many Americans, Senate Democrats shot down a bill Monday brought by Republican Ben Sasse protecting born-alive babies who survive botched abortions.

The bill, the “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act,” would have amended the criminal code to “prohibit a health care practitioner from failing to exercise the proper degree of care in the case of a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion.” While all present Senate Republicans voted for it, all but three Democratic senators voted against the bill, causing it to fail, 53-44.

“If an abortion results in the live birth of an infant, the infant is a legal person for all purposes under the laws of the United States, and entitled to all the protections of such laws,” reads the bill. “Any infant born alive after an abortion or within a hospital, clinic, or other facility has the same claim to the protection of the law that would arise for any newborn, or for any person who comes to a hospital, clinic, or other facility for screening and treatment or otherwise becomes a patient within its care.”

In response, President Trump predicted that the Democrats’ actions will go down as “one of the most shocking votes in the history of Congress.” He also characterized the failure of doctors to save the born-alive babies as “executing” them.

“Senate Democrats just voted against legislation to prevent the killing of newborn infant children. The Democrat position on abortion is now so extreme that they don’t mind executing babies AFTER birth,” he wrote in a pair of tweets after the vote Monday evening. “This will be remembered as one of the most shocking votes in the history of Congress. If there is one thing we should all agree on, it’s protecting the lives of innocent babies.”

In response, the New York Times published its version of a “fact-check” on Trump’s “misleading” tweet on Wednesday and provided the following summary of its central arguments: “Babies are rarely born alive after abortion procedures, and if they are, doctors do not kill them. These are the facts behind President Trump’s misleading tweet in the latest abortion battle.”

That the Times would believe that the fact that babies are “rarely born alive” is a legitimate argument against voting for the bill, and its attempt to parse the concept of a doctor allowing a baby to die on the table as different from actually killing the child, didn’t go over well online; in fact, response to the tweet of the article was overwhelmingly negative.

“First off, what does it matter if babies are ‘rarely’ born alive after abortion procedures?” noted Twitchy. “Mass shootings ‘rarely’ occur and yet we have an entire party trying to ban semi-automatic weapons. Transgender students ‘rarely’ are conflicted about which restroom to use. And for what it’s worth, Sen. Sasse’s bill was about those rare occurrences.”

“So why vote against a bill protecting them?” one Twitter follower asked the Times in reference to the paper’s “rarely” argument.

“Do you even hear yourself? ‘Babies are rarely born alive…’ BABIES! Yes, babies that were not allowed to be born alive. And if they somehow are alive, doctors do not have to provide them care and may let them die. May God have mercy on us!” one followerer wrote.

“How can you work for the NYTimes and not know what Northam said, which kicked all this off? He specifically talked about newborns being born and then a discussion on what to do with them. This is why you’re fake news,” wrote another, citing the infamous defense of infanticide by “moderate” Democratic Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam.

“8th paragraph of article. ‘The bill would force doctors to resuscitate such an infant, even if the parents did not want those measures.’ Sounds like u admit Trump was right and buried it as far down as u could,” another pointed out. “If you stopped acting like #FakeNews , we’d stop calling you it.”

“I could hardly believe this article was referring to a human being,” wrote another.

Related: WATCH: Sen. Tim Scott’s Powerful Speech On Senate Floor After Democrats Refuse To Protect Born-Alive Babies

Connecticut high schooler Selina Soule appeared on Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle” on Tuesday night to discuss transgender athletes in women’s sports. Soule recently competed in a high-stakes competition where two biologically male transgender sprinters beat the field, taking first and second place by significant margins. Soule finished in 8th place, missing an opportunity to compete in front of college coaches by two places.

“I am very happy for these athletes and I fully support them for being true to themselves and having the courage to do what they believe in,” Soule told host Laura Ingraham. “But, in athletics, it’s an entirely different situation. It’s scientifically proven that males are built to be physically stronger than females. It’s unfair to put someone who is biologically a male, who has not undergone anything in terms of hormone therapy, against cis-gender girls.”

Ingraham, a former athlete at the same high school, jumped in to rhetorically ask what happens when transgender athletes start infiltrating other sports, too. What happens to girl’s sports, she wondered aloud.

The Fox host mentioned recent comments made by gay advocate and tennis star Martina Navratilova, who warned that women’s sports are headed down a dangerous path if biological males, who have a clear advantage over women physically, are allowed to compete in women and girl’s sports. Ingraham noted that Navratilova has been “trashed” for making such an obvious, data-proven point.

“What are other members of your team saying about this?” asked Ingraham.

“My teammates and my fellow competitors — we are happy for these athletes, of course — but we do think it’s unfair, and for us it is upsetting when we work hard all season and put in a lot of effort, only to turn up at the state meets and get beat by someone who is biologically a male and lose state championships over this,” said the high schooler.

Soule said student-athletes applying for colleges are already running into “major issues” because there is no specified way in Connecticut to differentiate between transgender girls and biological girls. So when college coaches review stats, they are looking at major discrepancies in times without any explanation, she explained.

The student-athlete has previously made similar comments about the issue. “We all know the outcome of the race before it even starts; it’s demoralizing,” she said, according to Fox News. “I fully support and am happy for these athletes for being true to themselves. They should have the right to express themselves in school, but athletics have always had extra rules to keep the competition fair.”

Andraya Yearwood, one of the transgender athletes who bested Soule, will likely attempt to qualify for this year’s National Scholastic Athletics Foundation (NSAF) national championships held in March, reported The Daily Wire.

“The group recently adopted new rules allowing pre-pubescent girls to participate with their affirmed gender, though no ages are specified. Post-pubescent transgender girls must have completed sex-reassignment surgery and ‘a sufficient amount of time must have passed’ after the operation or hormone therapy ‘to minimize gender-related competitive advantages,'” The Washington Times noted.

According to the NSAF website: “Freshman and Junior High School miles are limited to first 30 entries per gender that both meet the entry standard and pay for the entry … Junior High Mile is limited to the first 30 entries per gender that both meet the entry standard and pay for the entry.”

WATCH:

Earlier this week, an 81-year-old man was assaulted at a grocery store in New Jersey for wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat.

Even though the story was yet another example of President Donald Trump supporters getting attacked for supporting the president, it didn’t get national attention. To be fair, it had to compete with three other stories of people being attacked for supporting Trump just this week alone.

The elderly victim in this case was leaving a ShopRite grocery store in Franklin Township when a 19-year-old, identified as Ryan M. Salvagno, lashed out over the MAGA hat, prosecutors told NJ.com. The two went back and forth over the hat, briefly, before the victim turned to leave.

“As the victim turned to walk away, defendant Salvagno was able to grab the victim’s hat and the two struggled for sole possession of the hat,” Prosecutor Michael H. Robertson said in a statement to NJ.com. “Salvagno then took the victim by the arm and threw him to the ground, tipping over the victim’s cart of groceries and ultimately throwing the hat to the side.”

Salvagno was charged with disorderly persons offenses of assault and harassment, NJ.com reported.

The elderly victim received minor injuries but declined medical treatment.

NJ.com’s reporting of the assault has been factual and accurate, but their headlines have oddly downplayed the assault. They likely were not written by the author, since they differ from the reporting in the article.

The original article reporting the assault did include the phrase “physically assaulted,” but referred to the incident as a “dust-up over his MAGA hat.” Hard to say a physical assault resulted from a “dust-up,” but here we are.

In the follow-up article announcing Salvagno’s arrest, NJ.com went a step further. The words “physical assault” no longer appear in the headline, and the incident is now referred to as a “tug-of-war over MAGA hat that left 81-year-old injured, grocery cart toppled.”

Really? “Tug-of-war,” is what we’re calling it now? There’s no way this language would be used if a right-leaning person attacked a left-leaning person.

This NJ.com article was written the same day the Washington Post wrote about an assault on a right-leaning campus activist from the angle that conservatives were “enraged” about the response, making sure we all know only the Right cares that Leftists are physically assaulting right-leaning people. The Jussie Smollett hate crime hoax was the story of the month until it was shown to be a hoax, but actual crimes against conservatives are completely acceptable to the Left.

After far-left Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez railed hard against “farting cows” and beef, she was caught at dinner with a staffer who was eating a juicy hamburger.

Ocasio-Cortez was widely mocked for her attack on “farting cows” in her Green New Deal, but she doubled down on her stance last week on Showtime’s “Desus & Mero” late-night show.

The self-identified socialist explained that she wanted to “take a look at” factory farming and went on to suggest against eating beef.

“But it’s to say, ‘listen, we gotta address factory farming. Maybe we shouldn’t be eating a hamburger for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Like, let’s keep it real,’” Ocasio-Cortez said.

Ocasio-Cortez defends wanting to regulate cow farts: “Maybe we shouldn’t be eating a hamburger for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.”pic.twitter.com/X3WBz7wWhO

— Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) February 22, 2019

TRENDING: James Woods Shares Incredible Moment from Iranian Hijab Protests: ‘This Is What a Hero Looks Like’

But apparently the socialist’s own staff doesn’t follow her advice.

On Tuesday, conservatives on Twitter began circulating a photo of Ocasio-Cortez at dinner with a hamburger-clutching staffer. Fox News identified Ocasio-Cortez’ companion as her chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti. The restaurant was unidentified.

pic.twitter.com/i9uivY2CZZ

— Caleb Hull (@CalebJHull) February 27, 2019

pic.twitter.com/48MxWOJDNr

— Caleb Hull (@CalebJHull) February 27, 2019

Instead of addressing the blatant hypocrisy here, Twitter liberals, including Ocasio-Cortez herself, had a meltdown and slammed the photo as “creepy.”

The conservative obsession with AOC manifests itself in the strangest ways. This creep-shot thread is really something. https://t.co/ExHHgoALQv

— Will Sommer (@willsommer) February 27, 2019

RELATED: Lying AOC’s ‘Affordable’ Green New Deal Would Cost 12 Years’ Income for Every American Household

Tonight a dude was creepily (and obviously) taking a picture of me while pretending he wasn’t and I had to break his imaginary fourth wall and say “Hi! I’m a person! This is weird!” https://t.co/JnybvVubVh

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) February 27, 2019

But the representative’s complaints would have more weight if liberals applied them to their own supporters.

In fact, the whole outcry just  proves the left’s hypocrisy even further because they’re known to ambush politicians in restaurants while their representatives cheer it on.

In comparison, a simple photograph is harmless.

As conservative journalist Caleb Hull pointed out, the left has “endorsed confronting people in the Trump administration anywhere in public and has run them out of restaurants repeatedly.”

My dude your party literally endorsed confronting people in the Trump administration anywhere in public and has run them out of restaurants repeatedly. I think you can handle someone sending me a pic of her COS eating a hamburger after she told the country to eat less of them.

— Caleb Hull (@CalebJHull) February 27, 2019

Sometimes the conservative outrage toward Ocasio-Cortez gets a bit out of hand, such as the “controversy” over an old video of her dancing.

But this instance isn’t misplaced outrage. Ocasio-Cortez wants to control what Americans eat and disrupt an important industry in rural America, but her own staffer is unwilling to comply with her advice.

So you think a powerful politician who is trying to impose her will on Americans and force them to make the food choices she wants shouldn’t have her hypocrisy pointed out? Interesting.

— EducatëdHillbilly™ (@RobProvince) February 27, 2019

With many ridiculous far-left policy proposals, Ocasio-Cortez and her staff are following the old hypocritical liberal practice of “it’s good for thee, but not for me.”

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

Every elementary school in Ontario, Canada, will be forced to fly the gay pride flag for at least one week in June, which is Pride Month in the province. Greater Essex County District School Board nearly unanimously voted on the motion last week; the only dissenting voice on the board was swiftly shut down.

“The rainbow flag, symbol of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender communities, will fly in front of all public elementary schools for at least one week during Pride Month in June,” reported Windsor Star.

Greater Essex County District School Board vice chairman Julia Burgess, who introduced the motion, said the flag will let students know that “we have their back.”

“When you’re in elementary school, and you’re just coming into adolescence, it’s a very vulnerable time. You may not have a lot of peers like you. The Pride flag tells them we have their back,” said Burgess at the board meeting, adding: “It’s a statement that we are going to recognize we’re a diverse, safe, welcoming board.”

According to Windsor Star, the main office and all high schools within the district have been flying the gay pride flags — which includes the color purple, representing gender identity, or transgenderism — during Pride month since 2016. The new measure expands the compulsory flag-flying to also include elementary schools.

Linda Qin, the sole trustee to question the mandate explained that the flag might confuse such young children, particularly with concern to gender identity. Qin, however, was swiftly shut down.

“The kids are so young,” she argued. “The flag may make them confused. I wonder if we’re misleading them about the idea of gender. We want to be careful.”

The trustee noted that she has knowledge of a student being bullied by “aggressive” pro-LGBT folks.

Qin was told her time was up, according to Windsor Star, and was cut off by chairwoman Jessica Sartori.

“Who wouldn’t be proud to fly that flag?” an emotional Sartori asked, who said she flies the gay pride flag at her home.

Another trustee, Gale Simko-Hatfield, suggested the mandate be optional for schools, and mandated down the road, instead.

“It’s what the community is comfortable with,” argued Simko-Hatfield. “I don’t think we’ve reached out to elementary schools to see what they think.”

It’s unclear how or if schools will be punished for refusing to fly gay pride flags, but Simko-Hatfield’s idea to make the measure optional was outright dismissed by Burgess.

Others at the meeting said flying the flag at elementary schools was not enough.

“We also need to have a lot of (LGBT) education,” said trustee Cathy Cooke.

A woman named Melissa Piva, whose child began identifying as “gender creative” at age five, was seemingly onboard with Cooke, too.

Piva’s son allegedly told her while they were shopping that he was a girl and needed to buy dresses so that others knew, too. “When she was in Grade 1, Piva said in a moving presentation, school staff liked to debate which bathroom her daughter should use. The next year, her teacher kept referring to her as ‘he’ and ‘him.’ Other kids said, ‘She’s just a boy who likes to pretend she’s a girl,'” Windsor Star reported.

As noted by LifeSiteNews, Peel District School Board similarly voted in May to fly the gay pride flag. “The board was lobbied by Pride Employee Resource Group (PERG) and heard emotional appeals in favor of raising the flag from parents of ‘gender-creative’ children and homosexual parents in a May meeting packed with LGBT activists wearing pink,” reported the outlet.