Posts

How Obama’s Latest Locker Room Fiat Affects Your Family

The North Carolina transgender fight has gone national, thanks to a letter from the Obama Administration.

According to a report published Thursday night at the New York Times:

A letter to school districts will go out Friday, adding to a highly charged debate over transgender rights in the middle of the administration’s legal fight with North Carolina over the issue. The declaration — signed by Justice and Education department officials — will describe what schools should do to ensure that none of their students are discriminated against.

So, as soon as a parent or guardian says that a child’s identified gender changes, or “differs from previous representations or records,” public schools have to comply and treat the child as such.

“No student should ever have to go through the experience of feeling unwelcome at school or on a college campus,” reads a statement from Department of Education Secretary John B. King on the issue. “We must ensure that our young people know that whoever they are or wherever they come from, they have the opportunity to get a great education in an environment free from discrimination, harassment and violence.”

The 25-page letter also provides information on how schools should best use a child’s preferred name and pronouns.

In effect, the letter uses similar reasoning to a recent decision by a panel of judges in the Fourth Judicial Circuit, which interpreted Title XI of the Civil Rights Restoration Act in 1972’s language on discrimination to include gender based on identity, rather than biological sex.

“Although title IX of the United States Education Amendments of 1972 was designed to prohibit discrimination in schools against one gender, the Obama administration took it upon itself to “expand” the law to redefine gender itself,” explained CR Senior Editor Daniel Horowitz regarding the Fourth Circuit Ruling. “In January 2015, the DOE’s Office of Civil Rights promulgated a regulation barring schools from assigning bathroom facilities based on biological gender, demanding they instead assign them based on someone’s chosen gender. In addition to representing a facial absurdity, this opinion was lawless and a complete bastardization of a congressional statute.”

“The gravity of this new low in the ever-steep slippery slope of judicial tyranny and licentiousness cannot be overstated. ‘As Paul Judge Niemeyer, the lone dissenter observed, the court literally redefined the definition of ‘sex’ from the bench and ‘for the first time ever, holds that a public high school may not provide separate restrooms and locker rooms on the basis of biological sex.’”

Horowitz’s warning appears to have merit, because, whereas the ruling still only applies to the case in question, the Administration’s Friday edict takes the reasoning a step further by applying it to public school districts across the country.

As stated above, the letter does not carry the force of law, but it does carry the potential force of funding, the implications of which potentially mirror those of the Department of Justice’s recent lawsuit against the State of North Carolina, which passed a law in April that prohibited local governments from enforcing private sector multiple-use facility policies ordinances on identity, rather than biology. As a result of the DOJ’s actions, the Tar Heel State could lose billions of dollars in federal monies. Likewise, schools that do not comply with the administration’s decree could face similar lawsuits or a loss of federal funds.

“The administration’s new guidelines simply reinforce what has been abundantly clear already — that it has a political goal of forcing women to share restrooms and locker rooms with men across the nation and will spread falsehoods about federal law to achieve its aims,” says Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Jeremy Tedesco in a statement.

In short, this means that, while the decree outlines some “emerging orders” such as installing privacy curtains and allowing kids to change in bathroom stalls, schools now have to allow biological males to use the same restrooms, locker rooms, and showers alongside biological females. All they need is a note from home…or else.

“It is very clear that the federal government is an education bully. It uses its 9 percent of public-school funding to direct the other 91 percent, in a manner largely unaccountable to parents and taxpayers,” Pullman told CR education research fellow at The Heartland Institute, managing editor at The Federalist, and author of the forthcoming “Coretastrophe: What Common Core Means for America’s Future,” explained to CR when asked about a related issue in February. “Federal bureaucrats will never know what is best for individual children, but they will inevitably believe they can know this and attempt to force it on families local and communities. They should have no available leverage to do so.”

Perhaps the most troubling issue about the move is that it isn’t really about bathrooms; it’s about executive power. Much like on the issue of “climate change,” the Administration has declared itself a scientific arbiter of what constitutes the very nature on man and woman. However, just like on the issue of climate change, there is still disagreement among experts on the subject.

As explained in a previous article at Conservative Review:

The American Psychiatric Association defines “gender dysphoria” as having a “marked difference between [someone’s] expressed/experienced gender and the gender others would assign him or her.” Furthermore, the condition must “continue for at least six months” to reach the threshold of diagnosis.

Psychologists disagree about how to best treat this condition, which most LGBT advocates argue is a natural condition. Some say the only way to address it is to allow and encourage people to dress and act in accordance with their “expressed/experienced gender.” This includes using the restroom of the perceived gender, undergoing treatments that alter the human body, gender reassignment surgery, hormone therapy, and/or having government documents changed to indicate the expressed gender as fact.

There is a great deal of disagreement with this approach, however.

For example, Dr. Paul McHugh, former psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins Hospital, has long argued against this approach, saying in one article that the basic premise that one’s sexual nature is “misaligned with one’s biological sex” is a “problematic assumption” and that “gender dysphoria — the official psychiatric term for feeling oneself to be of the opposite sex—belongs in the family of similarly disordered assumptions about the body, such as anorexia nervosa and body dysmorphic disorder.”

Furthermore, research cited by Dr. Mark Yarhouse, head of Regent University’s Institute for the Study of Sexual Identity recently cited research that a vast majority of gender dysphoria resolve on their own. In his book on the subject, he also concedes that childhood cases of the condition usually resolve before adolescence.

Likewise a 2011 study found that, “Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behavior, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population,” and suggests that things like sex reassignment and hormone therapy are not the best means of treating the disorder.

Finally, a recent report from the American College of Pediatricians has urged 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,” and goes on to refer to the conditioning as “child abuse.” These findings run contradictory to the actions of the Obama Administration, when one takes into account the teaching power of the law — the phenomenon that governments implicitly encourage things by making them legal, a chief example of which can be seen in the widespread acceptance of divorce as a cultural norm following the introduction of no-fault divorce laws.

If your children are currently enrolled in public school, this is what the Department of Education has in store for them.

Nonetheless, the Administration has now taken a side and elected to impose both carrots and sticks for compliance and noncompliance. This will not be put up for vote by your school board and your Parent and Teacher Association has no say in the matter. Your taxes will go to support it. The Administration has told you that the science is settled; gender is based on identity, not biology and they have the power to yank your school’s federal funding if the district doesn’t play along. (For more from the author of “How Obama’s Latest Locker Room Fiat Affects Your Family” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Itches for Trump Fight

President Obama can’t wait to take on Donald Trump.

Obama has been largely sidelined in the presidential contest, a last-year officeholder with high approval ratings who has repeatedly shown he likes to spar with political foes.

With Bernie Sanders continuing to slug it out with likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, Obama largely has to choose his openings to talk 2016.

So on Friday, when the White House announced Obama would make a statement about the economy, the president knew he’d get asked about Trump, the presumptive GOP presidential nominee . . .

“We are in serious times, and this is a really serious job,” Obama said. “This is not entertainment; this is not a reality show. This is a contest for the presidency of the United States.” (Read more from “Obama Itches for Trump Fight” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

An Army Captain Is Suing Obama for This Major Reason

Bush-era war authorizations do not give President Obama authority to fight the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), an Army officer argued in a lawsuit filed Wednesday against Obama.

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. district court by an intelligence officer stationed in Kuwait who says he supports the fight against ISIS but believes it is being carried out illegally because Congress hasn’t specifically authorized it.

“How could I honor my oath when I am fighting a war, even a good war, that the Constitution does not allow, or Congress has not approved?” Capt. Nathan Michael Smith wrote. “To honor my oath, I am asking the court to tell the president that he must get proper authority from Congress, under the War Powers Resolution, to wage the war against ISIS in Iraq and Syria.”

Obama has sought an authorization for use of military force (AUMF) from Congress. But Congress has been hesitant to take it up, with Republicans worried it would be too restrictive and some Democrats worried it wouldn’t be restrictive enough.

In the absence of a new AUMF, Obama has said he has the authority to fight ISIS from the 2001 authorization to fight al Qaeda, from which ISIS originated. (Read more from “An Army Captain Is Suing Obama for This Major Reason” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Scolds Press on Trump Coverage: This Is Not a Reality Show [+video]

President Barack Obama gave his review of the presidential election on Friday during a press conference in the White House and warned that it is not for a reality show . . .

“But most importantly, and I speak to all of you in this room as reporters, as well as the American public, I think, I just want to emphasize the degree to which we are in serious times and this is a really serious job. This is not entertainment. This is not a reality show. This is a contest for the presidency of the United States and what that means is that every candidate, every nominee, needs to be subject to exacting standards and genuine scrutiny.”

The comments about the campaign being a reality show can be interpreted as being referenced to Trump’s former reality show, The Apprentice.

“It means that you got to make sure that their budgets add up. It means that if they say they’ve got an answer to a problem, that it is actually plausible and that they have details for how it would work. And if it’s completely implausible and would not work, that needs to be reported on and the American people need to know that,” Obama said. “If they take a position on international issues that could threaten war or has the potential of upending our critical relationships with other countries or would potentially break the financial system, that needs to be reported on. (Read more from “Obama Scolds Press on Trump Coverage: This Is Not a Reality Show” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Blames Antipathy Toward Government for Flint Water Crisis

Widespread water contamination in Flint, Michigan, was a “man-made disaster” brought about in part by a political preference for small government, President Barack Obama in a visit on Wednesday to the city.

In a speech to about 1,000 residents, Obama urged them to resist assumptions that their children have been permanently harmed by consuming water with lead, and blamed “a mindset that believes that less government is the highest good, no matter what.” He didn’t mention Michigan’s Republican governor, Rick Snyder, who addressed the audience earlier and professes the virtues of smaller government. Snyder has borne much of the blame for the contamination.

“I do not believe that anybody consciously wanted to hurt the people in Flint, and this is not the place to sort every screw-up that resulted in contaminated water,” Obama said. “This myth that government is always the enemy — that forgets that our government is us, that it’s an extension of us, ourselves. That attitude is as corrosive to democracy as the stuff that resulted in lead in your water.”

Prior to Obama’s remarks, Snyder was booed as he publicly apologized to the same audience for the mishaps that led to the contamination. Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette on April 20 charged two state officials and one city official with felonies related to the contamination. (Read more from “Obama Blames Antipathy Toward Government for Flint Water Crisis” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Queen to Obama: Don’t Burn My Lawn This Time

hqdefaultEngland’s Queen Elizabeth II turned 90 this week and dignitaries from all over the world came to celebrate, including President Obama. However, this time, the birthday girl put her foot down and refused to allow the Obama entourage to have their way with how they arrived and comported.

In 2011, when the U.S. commander in chief came to town, he left a trail of destruction in his wake at Windsor Castle, the queen’s home and favorite of all residences. His helicopters, all six of them, scorched the earth at the castle and left landing-gear divots in the manicured lawn.

The Express reported the queen was not amused and required the president to use three helicopters during this year’s visit, to minimize the damage to the castle’s grounds. The Express’ Alix Culbertson wrote, “She said only three helicopters, including the president’s personal aircraft Marine One, could land on the lawn when Mr. Obama, 54, and his wife, Michelle, 52, came for dinner with the Queen and Prince Philip to celebrate her 90th birthday.” Also reported as a requirement was for the president’s security detail to remain outside the Windsor dining hall during the dining hour.

Apparently, it took some time for the Secret Service to come around to the matriarch’s way of thinking but eventually the queen’s demands were met. An inside source reportedly told the Express, “She rarely imposes her will but when she does people listen – it just took the US Secret Service agents a little time to realise that.” The president’s men complied and the event went over without any incidents reported save the complete shutdown of air traffic over London when the president’s choppers arrived. The choppers were also reportedly escorted by F-22 Raptors poised to shoot down any airborne threats against the president and first lady. (Read more from “Queen to Obama: Don’t Burn My Lawn This Time” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Plans 250 More U.S. Troops for Syria, Boosting Force to 300

 President Barack Obama will announce on Monday he plans to send as many as 250 additional U.S. troops to Syria, a sharp increase in the American presence working with local Syrian forces fighting Islamic State militants, U.S. officials said.

The deployment, which will increase U.S. forces in Syria to about 300, aims to accelerate recent gains against Islamic State and appears to reflect growing confidence in the ability of U.S.-backed forces inside Syria and Iraq to claw back territory from the hardline Sunni Islamist group.

Obama will explain his decision in a speech at 11:25 a.m. (0925 GMT) in Hanover, where he discussed the Syria crisis with German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Sunday. They will meet with other major European leaders after his remarks.

Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, controls the cities of Mosul in Iraq and Raqqa in Syria and is proving a potent threat abroad, claiming credit for major attacks in Paris in November and Brussels in March.

While Obama has resisted putting U.S. troops into Syria, where a five-year civil war has killed at least 250,000 people, he sent 50 U.S. special operations forces to Syria last year in what U.S. officials described as a “counterterrorism” mission rather than an effort to tip the scales in the war. (Read more from “Obama Plans 250 More U.S. Troops for Syria, Boosting Force to 300” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

London Mayor Describes Obama as ‘Part-Kenyan’

obama-356133_960_720London Mayor Boris Johnson offered a cold welcome to President Obama on Friday as the president opened his visit to the city with a call for the United Kingdom to stay in the European Union.

Johnson, a member of the Conservative Party and an advocate for Britain’s exit from the EU, published an article noting Obama’s “part-Kenyan” roots while highlighting the often repeated claim of the Obama administration returning a bust of Winston Churchill to the British embassy in D.C.

“Some said it was a snub to Britain. Some said it was a symbol of the part-Kenyan President’s ancestral dislike of the British empire — of which Churchill had been such a fervent defender,” Johnson wrote in an op-ed published in The Sun, referencing Obama’s father, who was born in Kenya.

“For the United States to tell us in the UK that we must surrender control of so much of our democracy — it is a breathtaking example of the principle of do-as-I-say-but-not-as-I-do,” Johnson wrote . . .

The Guardian reports that Johnson has come under fire for the comment on Kenya, with Labour Party politician Yvette Cooper saying, “As ever, it’s more bad judgment from Boris Johnson. Is this really how a man who wants to be prime minister should be talking about the president of the United States?” (Read more from “London Mayor Describes Obama as ‘Part-Kenyan'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Did Not Press Putin on Recent Military Provocations

Vladimir PutinPresident Obama did not raise Russian military provocations against a Navy warship and Air Force intelligence jet last week during a Monday phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, the White House disclosed Monday.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said the president had “an intense discussion” by telephone with Putin, but not about two dangerous aerial actions by Russian warplanes.

The conversation instead was limited to Russian activities in Ukraine, where Moscow has militarily annexed Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula, and the conflict in Syria.

“We have ample opportunities to express our concerns about these kinds of provocative actions to the Russians and it did not necessitate a presidential level conversation,” Earnest told reporters at the White House.

Two Russian Su-24 jets buzzed the guided missile destroyer USS Donald Cook in the Baltic Sea on April 14, flying dangerously close to the ship as it was conducting operations. (Read more from “Obama Did Not Press Putin on Recent Military Provocations” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Amnesty Supreme Court Case to Test Limits of Presidential Power

hqdefaultThe Constitution was ratified more than two centuries ago, and in all that time no president had ever tested the limits of executive power enough to force the Supreme Court to rule whether he has lived up to the founders’ command that the laws be “faithfully executed” . . .

When the justices convene Monday morning, they will hear what is shaping up to be the biggest case of the term, and perhaps one of the most consequential in a generation, as they consider whether President Obama has overstepped his constitutional powers by trying to grant a tentative deportation amnesty to up to 5 million illegal immigrants.

“In 225 years, the Supreme Court has never had occasion to ask the president whether he has reneged on his oath to take care that the laws are faithfully executed. However, with pens and phones replacing checks and balances, the Supreme Court is now poised to break new constitutional ground in order to preserve our embattled separation of powers,” said Josh Blackman, associate professor at the South Texas College of Law, who has followed the case from the start and filed amicus briefs opposing Mr. Obama’s claim of powers.

At issue is the Take Care Clause, which is what scholars call the Constitution’s charge to presidents to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

That clause has been read to be both empowering to presidents, emboldening them with independent authority to see through the execution of laws, but also as a check — that, in the end, he carry out laws rather than write them. (Read more from “Obama Amnesty Supreme Court Case to Test Limits of Presidential Power” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.