Some Massachusetts elementary schools are observing “Transgender Awareness Week” in a district that bars parents from opting their children out of lessons about gender identity and sexuality. “November 13th through November 19th is Transgender Awareness Week,” Angiers Elementary Principal Orla Higgins Averill said in an email obtained by The Daily Signal. “This week helps raise the visibility about transgender people and address issues members of the community face.” The link provided takes parents to the website of GLAAD, a radical LGBTQ activist group that claims so-called gender-affirming care is lifesaving for young people who believe they are transgender. Angiers Elementary teaches kindergarten through fifth grade as part of Newton Public Schools in Newton, Massachusetts, a predominantly liberal area north of Boston. Parents whose children are enrolled in Newton Public Schools can’t opt them out of lessons on sexual orientation or gender identity, according to guidance approved in October by the district’s school board, called the Newton School Committee. “While parents/guardians/caregivers may opt out of the health curriculum specifically related to sexualreproduction, our commitment to gender and sexuality education remains firm,” the document says. “Our curriculum aligns with state guidelines to promote understanding and inclusion of diverse identities andorientations.” A footnote clarifies that parents and guardians legally may exempt their kids from sex education lessons, but this doesn’t include lessons where themes of “sexuality, gender identity, or sexual orientation” are “embedded in the course material or instructional lesson but not the course’s primary subject.” Newton Public Schools told The Daily Signal the guidance on gender identity is not a policy. The district did not immediately respond to a follow-up question about why that distinction matters. “Regarding district policy related to sexual education,” the communications office said, “parents have the option to exempt their student from any portion of the curriculum that primarily involves human sexual education or human sexuality issue.” The district did not address the “gender identity” portion of the policy. Guidance on the Basis of Gender Identity – DRAFT (1)Download Massachusetts’ 2023 standards for health include lessons on “Gender, Sexual Orientation, and Sexual Health” beginning in kindergarten, from which Newton parents are not allowed to pull their children. In third grade, students learn to “describe the differences between biological sex and gender identity, and explain how one’s outward behavior or appearance does not define one’s gender identity or sexual orientation.” The standards say 8-year-olds in Massachusetts should be able to describe “a range of ways people may express their gender and that some people’s gender identity (how they think about themselves) matches others’ expectations about what their bodies look like on the outside and others do not.” Also, children should be able to explain “how gender identity and sexual orientation can vary in each individual,” according to the standards. healthdraft.coDownload Under the state standards, Newton Public Schools “integrate LGBTQ+ inclusive content across all grade levels (PK-12) and subjects in age-appropriate practices, and provide ongoing professional development for educators,” according to the gender identity guidelines. An individual claiming to be a Newton parent posted anonymously in a “Newton Community” Facebook group claiming that she asked her child’s principal for permission to opt her child out of lessons about Transgender Awareness Week, but the principal declined her request. The parent didn’t specify which school her child attends. However, the moderator of the Facebook group confirmed that she is a parent. Anna Nolin, Newton’s school superintendent, responded to the anonymous parent by saying that Transgender Awareness Week doesn’t include lessons at school. Rather, she wrote, parents are encouraged to use recommended resources to discuss transgenderism with their elementary schoolers at home. The anonymous parent said her child’s principal didn’t inform her that there were no specific lesson plans, but that her child’s teacher told her the class wouldn’t learn about transgenderism. Newton Public Schools’ communications office told The Daily Signal that the information posted on the Facebook group “was not accurate, as the district does not have curriculum on the topic of Transgender Awareness Week.” “Transgender Awareness Week is recognized by the Human Rights Campaign as a time to acknowledge transgender people in our society,” the school district said in an emailed statement. “Newton Public Schools did not create this awareness week, and any mention of it was meant for informational purposes only.” Critics say that the Human Rights Campaign, a major LGBTQ rights group, supports irreversible transgender medical interventions for children and peddles the lie that children are less likely to commit suicide if they “transition” to the opposite sex. Another parent shared a screenshot of an email from the principal of Bowen Elementary School informing parents of Transgender Awareness Week. The week aims to “raise the visibility about transgender people” to children in kindergarten through fifth grade, according to a screenshot of the email. Recommended library books include “I am Jazz,” “Julian is a Mermaid,” “When Aidan Became a Mermaid,” and “They She He Me: Free to Be!,” all controversial titles that teach children they could have been born in the wrong body. In June, someone dressed as Bowen Elementary’s mascot waved a “pride” flag before an assembly of students to celebrate Pride Month, according to footage obtained by the Massachusetts Family Institute. A school mascot waves a pride flag at Bowen Elementary in Newton, Massachusetts, in June.This is the same school district where parents can't opt their kids out of gender and sexuality lessons. More coming soon. @MAInformParents pic.twitter.com/eq51ZMMZBu— Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell (@TheElizMitchell) November 15, 2024 Sam Whiting, general counsel at the Massachusetts Family Institute, said he believes sexuality and gender identity lessons should be included under the umbrella of human sexuality lessons, which parents are allowed to exempt their kids from. The district’s legal counsel did not immediately respond to The Daily Signal’s question about Whiting’s statements. This article will be updated if a response is received. “When you’re talking about what we’ve seen many times, which is something framed as an anti-bullying presentation, but it’s really just indoctrinating kids into however many genders there are, and how great it is to celebrate LGBT and all that, we think that definitely falls under the sex-ed opt-out law because it’s a human sexuality issue,” Whiting told The Daily Signal.  The Massachusetts Family Institute’s legal wing is looking for a plaintiff to bring a lawsuit against school districts with guidelines like Newton’s.  The mom of an elementary schooler in Newton Public Schools who asked to remain anonymous told The Daily Signal that schools shouldn’t teach young children about transgenderism. “They suggest that if a child feels they are not a boy but a girl, then they can become a girl solely based on those feelings,” the mother said. “This approach is concerning.” “We are responsible for our children, and I and many parents don’t want our children to be taught in a way like ‘If you want to be a girl, I will support you,'” she said. “Kids are kids, they live in another world, they believe in Santa Claus, they can believe anything an adult says, if this adult is someone very close to that child.” It is “emotional manipulation” and “legalized abuse” for parents to transition a son because he likes to play with dolls, the mother told The Daily Signal. “Children often live in a world of imagination—they may pretend to be animals, or boys might play with dolls while girls play with cars,” she said. “There’s nothing unusual about this; they’re simply exploring and having fun.” The post Parents in Massachusetts School District Can’t Opt Out of ‘Sexuality,’ ‘Gender Identity’ Lessons appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) member Brendan Carr is asking Alphabet, Apple, Meta, and Microsoft to provide answers regarding their censorship-related activities over the past four years. Reclaim The Net has access to a letter addressed to the tech giants’ CEOs, where Carr mentions controversy-riddled NewsGuard – which is promoted by those running it as “a rating system for news websites.” We obtained a copy of the letter for you here. But the commissioner, citing information revealed in the Twitter Files, placed it within “the broader censorship cartel” and as one of the so-called fact-checkers and media monitors whose main business, in reality, is to suppress free speech in general, and certain voices in particular. And, according to him, NewsGuard and its ilk have been targeting conservative media with defunding, demonetizing, and other methods of harming their business, notably by working with ad agencies. Chinese state-controlled media fare better in NewsGuard’s “credibility” ranking than conservative outlets in the US, the commissioner remarked. Carr, a Republican, point-blank accuses the four major tech companies of improper conduct as they played “a significant role” in what he said was “an unprecedented surge of censorship” Americans have been exposed to during recent years. Carr’s message for the CEOs is that he is confident once the new US administration is in place, both the White House and Congress will take “broad-ranging actions” aimed at restoring free speech protections guaranteed by the First Amendment, but also that one of those actions could be “a review of your companies” along with their third-party partners involved in censorship running afoul of those protections. The four tech giants have until December 10 to respond to the letter and explain how they use fact-checkers, raters, etc., but also which ad agencies they partner with. The commissioner accused Big Tech of subjecting Americans to censorship and media bias in a separate statement to Newsmax, essentially arguing that this has gone too far, and has been going on for too long. Reacting to Carr’s letter, a NewsGuard spokesperson told NewsMax it was being “littered with falsehoods,” while at the same time claiming that the organization is not only “apolitical” – but also plays no part in online censorship, or in “blocking” conservative news sources. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post FCC’s Carr Demands Answers From Big Tech and Media Hall Monitor on Speech Suppression Claims appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

Chicago Trib Editorial Board: $1M? WTF, Oprah?

Fear and Loathing in the Leviathan - Trump Assembling a General Officer 'Review Board'

CNN senior political commentator and possible future White House Press Secretary Scott Jennings entered into Thursday’s CNN NewsNight — which could easily be referred to as the Thunderdome — to do battle with liberal host Abby Phillip and a team of fellow progressives over the lack of trust in public health and President-Elect Trump’s choice of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to lead the Department of Health and Human Services. The opening segment largely centered around Kennedy’s controversial claims about vaccinations and autism (which the study often cited to support this having been debunked), including Georgia Republican-turned-Democrat Geoff Duncan huffing that “there’s really no good reason why” Kennedy “should be HHS secretary” given that he has “no managerial experience.” Jennings triggered the first uproar with a simple question: “Why?”     Duncan began stammering and insisting he only wanted to discuss the position “looking forward,” so Jennings explained the reality that Biden-Harris HHS Secretary “Xavier Becerra was just a lawyer and a politician with no management experience.” Jennings went back to the two women who served in the position under Barack Obama: “Sylvia Burwell was a Walmart lobbyist. Donna Shalala was a university person.” Duncan didn’t have any response, so he blurted out none of that matters because “RFK Jr. is nut,” leaving the humorously opportunistic Jennings to school him that his opposition is first and foremost political before making a broader point about trust in health agencies: You just said he doesn’t possess the requisite managerial experience, but then we get to the real issue here, which is you want to insult the man, which is your right to do because you opposed them in the election...[Y]ou are raising the issues that he has been raising and I think they’re appropriate questions to raise. I don’t know whether he can be confirmed or not. The vaccine stuff at the table is obviously going to be the flashpoint of this hearing. But I’ll tell you one thing, this whole issue of the CDC and these public health agencies, look, public trust in the health regime in this country is as low as it’s ever been. Former CNNer-turned-failed Democratic congressional candidate John Avlon tried to interject and blame Kennedy and Trump for why so many people died from COVID-19, leaving Jennings to school him and an interrupting Phillip on how America “was drug through a bunch of condescending and heavy-handed mandates” during the pandemic “that all turned out to be garbage” (click “expand”): AVLON: But why, Scott? JENNINGS: It’s because of COVID — AVLON: Right. JENNINGS: — because of school closures, because of mask mandates — PHILLIP: Wait, wait, wait. Hold on, let me — JENNINGS: — because this country was — PHILLIP: — I’m going to let doctor — let the doctors get in on this. JENNINGS: — because this — but let me just finish — because this country was drug through a bunch of condescending and heavy-handed mandates that all turned out to be garbage, and that’s why it’s low — AVLON: Scott! JENNINGS: — and the questions are valid. AVLON: Scott! Scott! DUNCAN: And RFK is the answer to all of that? AVLON: Yeah, but, dude — JENNINGS: Yeah, but, I don’t know if he’s going to confirmed. AVLON: — RFK helped promote the — the assault on the CDC that lowered — the disinformation that led to — JENNINGS: No. The CDC led to its own demise. AVLON: — more than a million deaths, Scott, more than a million deaths in the United States, higher than any other industrialized nation per capita. That’s the result of failed policies and the demonization of the conspiracy theory that killed people. JENNINGS: Whose policies? PHILLIP: All right. AVLON: Under the Trump administration. Phillips played a Trust the Science card by tossing to Columbia University Dr. W. Ian Lipkin, who argued that yes, we should still have complete trust in public health agencies. Notice how he even admitted the coronavirus vaccines weren’t as sturdy as they were billed, but refused to acknowledge that was a hit to their credibility (click “expand”): PHILLIP: John, let me let Dr. Lipki in, because, again, we got experts at the table. Go ahead, Doctor. LIPKIN: So, first of all, the vaccines we’re talking about have been tested. We know they have to go through safety testing. They have to go through efficacy testing, and it’s only when they get through that final step — that final hurdle that they’re produced and distributed. So, it’s not something that we need to revisit. I disagree. The other thing I wanted to refer to is the discussion about the NIH and the CDC. These agencies are jewels. They’re considered as such by the rest of the world. The National Institutes of Health has given drugs that I would venture to say everybody in this room has taken, and the FDA has approved those. So, if we lose those agencies, we’re going to have unproven drugs, we’re going to have a whole series of problems. You were talking about COVID. I was in China in January of 2020. I saw what it did to that country. I was in China in 2003 for SARS. I’ve seen outbreaks. I’ve seen thousands of people die. When we had a vaccine for COVID, the major advantage we hoped initially was that it was going to prevent transmission as long as well as reduce disease and morbidity — mortality. We found out that it wasn’t as effective in reducing transmission as we had hoped, but it definitely reduced morbidity and mortality — PHILLIP: And one — when you hear — LIPKIN: — and let me just finish one last thing. It saved people who otherwise couldn’t have gotten care for a heart attack or a stroke or anything else because the hospitals would have been completely overwhelmed. Jennings made clear he hasn’t been “suggesting that agencies should be done away with,” but rather “reformed for the purpose of increasing public trust.” The condescending Phillip lectured Jennings with what seemed as though was a demand to never question public health experts because it’s dangerous.  Thankfully, Jennings clapped back that “the doubts in the public health regime in this country were not made up out of whole cloth” and the economic impacts of lockdowns were scarring for so many.     Despite Jennings saying he strongly supports vaccines, Phillip again demanded we Trust the Science and deemed questions about public health bad faith (click “expand”): JENNINGS: We have to restore trust in them. PHILLIP: — the issue about the public trust thing is that this is almost like election denialism. You screamed that the election was stolen and then when people believe you, then suddenly you’re saying, well, if only there weren’t these questions that I made up. You cannot just create doubts and then blame the doubts — JENNINGS: Well, wait, the doubts — PHILLIP: — that you created for the skepticism. JENNINGS: — the doubts in the public health regime in this country were not made up out of whole cloth.  PHILLIP: I guess, but — but — JENNINGS: They are fully derivative of what happened to this country during COVID and the people and the families and the businesses who were devastated by these mandates. PHILLIP: — right — there — there are economic impacts and then there are the health impacts that we are talking about here. RFK Jr. is trying to blame vaccines for health impacts based on no science, no science. We can talk about the economic impacts, but let’s talk about the health impacts and whether there is truth to that. I don’t think there’s that evidence. JENNINGS: I’m also a supporter of vaccines. I believe vaccines work and I think his skepticism of vaccines and some of the statements that he has made are going to be the most problematic things in his nomination, but you cannot separate these — he has raised real concerns that real people have and, by the way, Trump’s not hiding the ball here. He campaigned with this guy virtually every day and the American people said, you know what, some of this sounds pretty good. After New York University Dr. Debbie Nampiaparampil defended patients asking questions is usually a good thing and said other questions Kennedy raised are legitimate, Duncan injected more silliness: “And — and he has no experience...This is like sending a car salesman to go engineer a bridge, right?”     Jennings ended whether he began with Duncan: “Is the current HHS secretary a doctor?” Duncan whined he recycled a previous argument and won’t acknowledge that “the clown car has arrived” to takeover the country. Phillip would move on, but not before Jennings calmly told Duncan that “you’re still campaigning” even though his side lost. Duncan’s hilarious retort? Despite having been a Harris-Walz surrogate, he argued he “actually call[s] balls and strikes.” To see the relevant CNN transcript from November 14, click here.

A woman who reportedly began a monthlong stint as a substitute teacher at Beverly Hills High School on Nov. 4 — the day before the presidential election — said Wednesday she was fired for her "private FB posts criticizing [Make America Great Again] & the behavior of students at their MAGA rally on campus." “I was shocked; I thought I’d get a warning,” Joanie Garratt told the Los Angeles Times. “I didn’t say anything [about Trump] in class. I know not to say anything in class. But I am disgusted with MAGA, and Beverly Hills High School has become MAGA.” 'They have no idea what they have unleashed. SCOTUS gave him free rein, Congress kisses his ass so there are no checks & balances. I have zero respect for America. I’m ashamed to be American.' Garratt retired last year after teaching at the Beverly Hills Unified School District for almost 30 years, the Times said, adding that she was outraged by the Wednesday call from an assistant superintendent firing her. Garratt told the Times her online political posts were cited as the reason for her dismissal.“I WEAR THIS AS BADGE OF HONOR and stand with all the teachers, past & present, who will be persecuted for expressing their views in public forum," she wrote Wednesday on Facebook. "SHAME ON BHUSD.” The Times said a district spokesperson didn't immediately respond to the paper's request for comment regarding Garratt’s firing. During her stint as a substitute teacher — just over a week — Garratt made numerous statements in posts and in comments on her Facebook page. On Sunday, for example, she posted that "sixty-six percent of Jews voted for [Kamala] Harris. Thank goodness my own people did not abandon our liberal democratic tradition." In a comment under the same post, Garratt wrote that "it bothers me that some of my tribe aligned with the devil." In comments under her Saturday post highlighting a message from the high school's student newspaper against pro-MAGA activity on campus, Garratt wrote the following: "They have no idea what they have unleashed. SCOTUS gave him free rein, Congress kisses his ass so there are no checks & balances. I have zero respect for America. I’m ashamed to be American." "Don’t want to see that ugly rapist, criminal, traitor gloat." "They worship a fascist.""I wouldn’t send my kids there today. Oh how [Beverly Hills Unified School District] has fallen from what it was… morally & academically.""I would advise private school now. ... It’s not the stellar district that hired me in 1993. I was so proud to be a teacher here in this District. Now we’re a MAGA satellite."The paper added that Garratt had a history of anti-Trump posts on Facebook prior to the district asking her to take the substitute teaching gig.The Times said Garratt on Nov. 7 wrote on Facebook that pro-Trump students “harassed & intimidated many other non-MAGA students and specifically targeted the class where the Black Student Union was meeting, yelling all kinds of racial slurs.”Elsewhere on Southern California high school campuses in the wake of Trump winning back the White House with 312 electoral votes last week:A teacher allegedly departed from class at Cerritos High School last week because a student was wearing "Make America Great Again" attire.An English teacher from Chino High School was placed on administrative leave after freaking out in class over a student wearing a Trump hat.An Advanced Placement world history teacher from Valley View High School was placed on administrative leave after going on a profane rant in class against Trump.Outside the Golden State, a Connecticut special-ed teacher threatened Trump voters in a viral video and then tried to explain herself in a tearful on-camera interview after resigning from her position. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

There is a pattern developing with regard to President-elect Donald Trump's recent nominations: He announces someone apparently well suited to executing the agenda he successfully campaigned on; those with vested interests in the status quo panic; and establishmentarians viciously attack the nominees, pleading with nominal Republicans in the U.S. Senate to prevent their confirmation. This pattern has been repeated for multiple picks, including former Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, Pete Hegseth, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Although virtually all of Trump's nominations have ruffled feathers, his choice of Lt. Col. Tulsi Gabbard to serve as the director of national intelligence appears to have inspired a special kind of unease among Democratic lawmakers, the liberal media, and elements of the intelligence community. The media The Atlantic's Tom Nichols rushed to characterize Gabbard's nomination as a "national security risk," complaining that she previously suggested NATO might have had something to do with Russia's invasion of Ukraine and that Syria did not pose a direct threat to the United States. "Gabbard is a classic case of 'horseshoe' politics," Nichols warned. "Her views can seem both extremely left and extremely right, which is probably why people such as Tucker Carlson — a conservative who has turned into … whatever pro-Russia right-wingers are called now — have taken a liking to the former Democrat (who was previously a Republican and is now again a member of the GOP)." The Washington Examiner's Tom Rogan suggested that by nominating Gabbard, Trump — who was kneecapped in his first term by a malignant counterintelligence investigation and whose 2020 political adversary was given narrative cover prior to the election by CIA contractors and intelligence community alumni — "is putting his distrust of the intelligence community before the critical interests of national security." After trotting out the Syria and Russia-themed attacks against Gabbard, then insinuating that she is a sympathizer with the communist Chinese regime, Rogan warned that if confirmed, she would supervise "all U.S. intelligence agencies' collection, analysis, and mission efforts and the production and dissemination of the U.S. government's most sensitive intelligence reporting and analysis. This includes knowledge of spies buried deep inside foreign governments and terrorist organizations." 'This appointment is sending shock waves here in the United States.' Bill Kristol quoted Jonathan Last, editor of the neocon blog the Bulwark, as writing, "Making Gabbard DNI simply makes no sense. ... Or rather, it makes no sense for America. For Russia, DNI Gabbard makes all the sense in the world." Last appeared particularly upset over Gabbard's opposition to fruitless foreign entanglements and ineffectual U.S. sanctions. Dems and spooks spooked "This appointment is sending shock waves here in the United States but also around the globe," John Brennan, former director of the CIA and chief counterterrorism adviser to former President Barack Obama, said in conversation with MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace. Brennan, one of the signatories of the infamous Hunter Biden "intel" letter, likened the 18 intelligence agencies that Gabbard would oversee to an orchestra, suggesting that she likely doesn't even know what instruments are being played. Former Bush adviser John Bolton, a key proponent of America's disastrous 2003 invasion of Iraq, suggested to NewsNation's "The Hill" that with Trump's "announcement of Tulsi Gabbard to be the director of national intelligence, he's sending a signal that we have lost our mind when it comes to collecting intelligence." One former senior intelligence official who spoke under the condition of anonymity told Politico that the choice was a "left turn and off the bridge." Another intelligence official warned that America's allies, including Israel, might withhold information from Washington if Gabbard were the DNI, adding, "What some allies share may now be shaped by political goals rather than professional intelligence sharing." An unnamed "Western security source" similarly suggested to Reuters that Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand may be less forthcoming about the intelligence they collect, stressing that foreign nations believe Trump's appointments all lean in the "wrong direction." Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger (Va.), a former CIA officer who now warms a chair on the House Intelligence Committee, suggested on X that Gabbard, who served in Iraq and Kuwait, would be an oath-breaker. "The men and women of the U.S. Intelligence community honor their oaths by collecting the vital intelligence that keeps our fellow Americans safe. The global threats we face require a Director of National Intelligence who would do the same. Tulsi Gabbard is not that person," wrote Spanberger. The former spook, echoing Nichols, appears to have unwittingly highlighted what has the establishment panicking, telling The Hill, "The DNI has access to every single secret that the United States has, every single bit of information that we know. … It's the keys to the intelligence community kingdom." Larry Pfeiffer, former chief of staff at the CIA under the Bush administration, told The Hill, "Some of the statements she has made through the years that sound like they came right out of the Kremlin's talking points paper are a little bit alarming. Her cozying up to Bashar al-Assad and being an apologist for him as well just raise questions in my mind. Is that really the best person to put in charge of this very complicated, very sensitive operation that is the U.S. intel community?" Jamil Jaffer, a former House Intelligence Committee staffer and national security prosecutor, told The Hill, "What is unusual here is you've got somebody who's had such a long and vociferous track record of saying things that are factually incorrect, that seem to give aid and comfort to U.S. adversaries and that undermine the very people they should be representing at the principals committee." As with Hegseth and Gaetz's critics, those denouncing Gabbard appear to be exponents of the very worldview and policy conventions that Trump was effectively elected to obliterate. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Sydney Sweeney has one word for the notion that women are any less vicious than men when it comes to rising to the top of Hollywood's eat-or-be-eaten food chain. Fake!The "Anyone But You" actress recently called BS on the industry's cloying "women empowering other women" narrative. Sweeney should know. Back in April, veteran producer Carol Baum launched an out-of-nowhere attack on the up-and-comer. 'All of it is fake and a front for all the other s**t that they say behind everyone’s back.'"There’s an actress who everybody loves now: Sydney Sweeney. I don’t get Sydney Sweeney," Baum griped. "I was watching on the plane Sydney Sweeney’s movie [‘Anyone but You’] because I wanted to watch it. I wanted to know who she is and why everybody’s talking about her. I watched this unwatchable movie — sorry to people who love this ... romantic comedy where they hate each other."Baum threatBaum — whose credits include “Dead Ringers,” “Father of the Bride,” and “Buffy the Vampire Slayer,” and who also works as an adjunct professor at the University of Southern California's School of Cinematic Arts — added, "I said to my class, ‘Explain this girl to me. She’s not pretty, she can’t act. Why is she so hot?’ Nobody had an answer.""How sad that a woman in the position to share her expertise and experience chooses instead to attack another woman," Sweeney's rep responded."If that’s what she’s learned in her decades in the industry and feels is appropriate to teach to her students, that’s shameful. To unjustly disparage a fellow female producer speaks volumes about Ms. Baum’s character."Claws outSweeney opened up about Baum's catty conniption in a recent interview with Vanity Fair: "It’s very disheartening to see women tear other women down, especially when women who are successful in other avenues of their industry see younger talent working really hard — hoping to achieve whatever dreams that they may have — and then trying to bash and discredit any work that they’ve done," the 27-year-old Sweeney responded. "This entire industry, all people say is 'women empowering other women.' None of it’s happening," Sweeney continued. "All of it is fake and a front for all the other s**t that they say behind everyone’s back."High school with moneySweeney is not the only star to feel Tinseltown's mean girl vibes. Anne Hathaway and Jennifer Lawrence have also commented on the tendency for female performers to become a target when they're at their professional peak.Sweeney thinks she knows why. "I’ve read that our entire lives, we were raised — and it’s a generational problem — to believe only one woman can be at the top. There’s one woman who can get the man. There’s one woman who can be, I don’t know, anything.""So then all the others feel like they have to fight each other or take that one woman down instead of being like, Let’s all lift each other up," Sweeney concluded. "I’m still trying to figure it out. I’m just trying my best over here. Why am I getting attacked?"As Blaze News reported in August 2022, liberals attempted to cancel Sweeney because guests at her mother's 60th birthday party were wearing "Make America Great Again" inspired hats and a "blue lives matter" shirt.The celebrity actress brushed off the outrage, "You guys, this is wild. An innocent celebration for my mom's milestone 60th birthday has turned into an absurd political statement, which was not the intention. Please stop making assumptions. Much love to everyone and Happy Birthday Mom!"Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Every single one of Donald Trump’s Cabinet picks has been followed by immediate wailing and gnashing of teeth on the left, but the award for the most controversial pick goes to Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), who is nominated to the role of attorney general. Steve Deace, however, is “here for it” — not just for the appointment of Gaetz but for the full panel Trump has chosen to be in his administration and their collective mentality to “[bring] this whole thing down.” “This is Hulk smash,” says Deace in reference to Trump’s appointees. However, “this Cabinet appointment of Gaetz is the biggest middle-finger appointment in the history of the U.S. presidency,” he says. While Steve isn’t sure if Gaetz is “a righteous person,” as “there are serious [sex trafficking] allegations against [him],” he also knows that this DOJ has no qualms about “indicting Republicans or conservatives,” especially the anti-establishment type. If the allegations against Gaetz, who is undeniably a firebrand, are true, why hasn’t he been indicted already? Steve says that there are two possibilities here: One, “this Department of Justice knowingly allowed a creeper to sit in a congressional seat for the last few years.” Or two, “they don’t have the goods, and they’re smearing [Gaetz].” However, Steve says there’s “a way we get clarity.” “Let’s have a confirmation hearing. … Why don’t we just call witnesses, [Gaetz] calls his, people testify, and let’s find out?” he proposes. Some may think that a hearing is impossible now that Gaetz has resigned his congressional seat and Congress no longer has jurisdiction over him, but Steve says the investigators can “still release their report.” “Are you guys just sick of being told stuff but never being shown stuff?” Steve asks in frustration. “I sure as hell am.” To hear more, watch the episode above. Want more from Steve Deace? To enjoy more of Steve's take on national politics, Christian worldview, and principled conservatism with a snarky twist, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Whoopi Goldberg said on "The View" earlier this week during a discussion about the economy in relation to the presidential election that "I appreciate that people are having a hard time. Me too. I work for a living."Uh-oh. But she wasn't done. The outspoken co-host of the far-left talk show added stridently that "if I had all the money in the world, I would not be here, OK? So I'm a working person, you know? ... I know it's hard out there."'She made it seem like she's struggling and that she has no choice but to ... really pick herself up every day and just head over to work a lot of manual labor.'In regard to Goldberg's 2016 contract extension with "The View," Variety reported that "she will continue to earn her current annual salary, which is in the $5 to $6 million range."Not incidentally, when her heavy-duty Manhattan shift is over, Goldberg reportedly retreats across the bridge to a tony Northern New Jersey community, where her nearly 10,000-square-foot "Georgian Colonial-style residence" with eight bedrooms awaits her. Goldberg reportedly bought the place in 2009 for a cool $2.8 million.So as you might expect, head-shaking outrage erupted once everyday people picked up on Goldberg's pronouncement about her "working person" plight.But perhaps the most eye-opening responses came from Ana Kasparian and Cenk Uygur, hosts of the far-left show "The Young Turks." Neither of them were pleased with Goldberg's words, either."Whoopi, you can't say ... you work for a living and then 'I know your pain' et cetera as if you're a person who isn't spectacularly wealthy," Uygur reacted. "You have to at least acknowledge, 'Look, guys, I get it. I'm wealthy, and I used to be poor, but I haven't been poor in a long, long time. But, you know, here's the ways that I can relate.' Just be honest about it, no problem, right? But when you make it seem like you're barely getting by and you're worried about your grandkids ..."Kasparian added, "She made it seem like she's struggling and that she has no choice but to ... really pick herself up every day and just head over to work a lot of manual labor. ... The way she carried herself in that segment was ridiculous. ... She's not a working-class American."You can watch the Young Turks' reaction to Goldberg's "I work for a living" commentary here.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!