Several Democrats running in tight races for the U.S. House and Senate joined a larger group of Democrats in signing a letter urging Congress not to defund a measure providing experimental transgender medical interventions that’s included in a bill to fund the U.S. military. The vast majority of the Democrats in the House (162 of 212) signed the letter, led by Reps. Sara Jacobs, D-Calif.; Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash.; and Mark Pocan, D-Wis. The letter urges the House of Representatives not to include “provisions that actively target LGBTQ+ service members and LGBTQ+ dependents and threaten the recruitment, retention, and readiness of our Armed Forces” in the National Defense Authorization Act, the bill to fund the military. The NDAA allocates money to the Department of Defense and it is considered one of the must-pass bills in Congress each year. Two of the letter’s signatories, Reps. Colin Allred, D-Texas, and Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., are running for U.S. Senate in their respective states. The letter flags provisions House Republicans added to the NDAA that would restrict what the Democrats call “medically necessary care for transgender service members or their family members.” In addition to defunding transgender medical interventions, the provisions would prevent military leaders from approving ideological flags like the LGBTQ “Pride” flag. They would also remove pornographic books and books pushing gender ideology from Department of Defense K-12 school libraries, which the Democrats call a “transgender book ban.” They would also ban any of the NDAA funds from going to “a drag show, drag queen story hour, or similar event.” The 162 Democrats who signed the letter claim that these provisions would exacerbate the U.S. military’s recruitment and retention crisis and that people who identify as transgender are more likely to serve in the military than those who do not so identify. “As our nation faces recruitment and retention challenges, attacking transgender people—who are more likely to serve in the U.S. military than cisgender people—is a grave mistake,” the Democrats wrote. “If service members are concerned for their health care, their right to exist, or the well-being of their children and loved ones, they cannot focus on their jobs, thereby weakening military readiness and retention rates.” “The U.S. government should not prohibit our service members from accessing medically necessary care, especially care that is safe, effective, and supported by every major medical association in the U.S., representing more than 1.3 million doctors,” the letter adds. “The care transgender service members receive is essential for them to be their authentic selves and focus on their mission. Denying this access to health care would deter transgender people from joining the Armed Forces, damage retention efforts, and hurt our military readiness.” Are these claims true? ‘Gender-Affirming Care’ Many states have passed laws banning experimental “transgender” medical interventions for minors, such as so-called puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries that remove healthy breasts or sex organs. There is no conclusive evidence that these interventions, euphemistically referred to as “gender-affirming care,” make life better for people struggling with gender dysphoria (the persistent and emotionally painful condition of identifying with the gender opposite one’s sex). Internal documents from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, or WPATH, a pro-transgender activist group, revealed that the organization’s leaders knew about various side effects of “gender-affirming care,” including cancer in teens and reduced sexual function, as well as the lack of informed consent for procedures with lifelong impacts. These medical professionals endorse the experimental treatments anyway. Some doctors have gone on record opposing such treatments. Back in 2023 in Florida, many doctors testified in favor of a rule that would prevent Medicaid dollars from funding “gender-affirming care.” The doctors—including psychiatrists, endocrinologists, neurologists, and a former WPATH leader—testified that these interventions are experimental and may do more harm than good. “The claim that ‘gender affirming’ drugs and surgery are safe, effective, and medically necessary is a triple lie,” Jay Richards, director of the Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Life, Religion, and Family at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal. “The complications—some that persist for a lifetime—from these experimental procedures are notorious,” he said. “And while some individuals may report relief from symptoms of gender dysphoria in the short term, there’s no evidence that, on balance, medicalizing a therapy for a mental disorder is beneficial. And by definition, these procedures are not medically necessary—since they attempt to treat a psychological disorder with drugs and surgery that does not directly address the psychological disorder.” “At best, sex trait motivation drugs and surgery are experimental interventions of doubtful benefit and obvious harms,” Richards added. “Subjecting service members to these experiments makes no sense either for the individuals involved or for military readiness.” Polls have consistently found that more Americans oppose “gender-affirming care” for minors, even when framed in terms most likely to get a favorable response. An RMG Research poll in March found that only 22% of respondents supported giving minors access to “gender-affirming care,” while 64% said they opposed it. A 2022 Pew Research Center survey asked respondents whether they would “make it illegal for health care professionals to help someone <18 [under 18] with medical care for gender transition.” Even with this arguably deceptive framing, nearly half of respondents (46%) said they would support such a ban. Similarly, more Americans (44%) told Pew they would oppose requiring “health insurance companies to cover medical care for gender transitions” than would support it (27%). From these responses, it seems likely that taxpayer funding for experimental transgender interventions would prove rather controversial. As for the idea that transgender people are “more likely to serve in the U.S. military than cisgender people,” the claim appears to trace back to an analysis of the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey. That survey, conducted by the National Center for Transgender Equality, found that “respondents served in the military at nearly twice the rate as the people in the U.S. population overall.” Since the proportion of the general population who identify as transgender is minuscule, this does not mean that a large proportion of veterans or service members is transgender or that the military would be handicapped without transgender recruits. Two Senate Candidates Two of the 162 House Democrats who signed the letter are running for U.S. Senate. Allred is challenging Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, in the Lone Star State, which former President Donald Trump carried in 2016 and 2020. Cruz leads Allred by 5 points in the RealClearPolitics polling average. “Day after day, Colin Allred shows Texas who he really is,” a spokesman for the Cruz campaign told The Daily Signal in a statement on the letter. “He is a radical who will destroy Texas and America. His record on transgender issues puts our children and families at risk.” Gallego is running against Republican Kari Lake in Arizona, which is considered a key swing state. Gallego leads Lake by 7 points in the RealClearPolitics average. “The fact that Ruben Gallego would try to hold up the National Defense Authorization Act to DEMAND that taxpayer money goes to sexual reassignment surgeries is a testament to how radical he truly is,” a spokesperson for Lake’s campaign told The Daily Signal in a statement Tuesday. “Gallego’s radicalism does tremendous harm to our military preparedness and puts our national security at risk.” 18 Swing-District Democrats Eighteen House Democrats in races the Cook Political Report rates as “competitive” also signed the letter. Reps. Yadira Caraveo, D-Colo., and Emilia Sykes, D-Ohio, are running in races Cook rates as “toss-ups.” Eight Democrats in races Cook rates as “lean Democrat” also signed the letter: Reps. Jahana Hayes, D-Ct.; Eric Sorensen, D-Ill.; Frank Mrvan, D-Ind.; Angie Craig, D-Minn.; Susie Lee, D-Nev.; Pat Ryan, D-N.Y.; Andrea Salinas, D-Ore.; and Chris Deluzio, D-Pa. Eight more Democrats in “likely Democrat” races also signed the letter: Reps. Mike Levin, D-Calif.; Darren Soto, D-Fla.; Sharice Davids, D-Kan.; Hillary Scholten, D-Mich.; Chris Pappas, D-N.H.; Dina Titus, D-Nev.; Steven Horsford, D-Nev.; and Greg Landsman, D-Ohio. None of these Democrats responded to The Daily Signal’s request for comment by press time. ndaa_conference_letterDownload The post Transgender ‘Medicine’ Essential to Military Recruitment, Say Democrats in Tight Races appeared first on The Daily Signal.

For more than two months, Republicans have mocked Vice President Kamala Harris for hiding in the basement and not granting interviews and press conferences, which could give voters an idea of how she might handle the presidency. So, after she and her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, have engaged in debates, Team Harris decided to book her on a series of softball interviews. Start with the “Call Her Daddy” sex podcast, which sounds like something that would be easy for conservatives to mock. Sure, it is a massively popular podcast among young women, but it sounds like more of a forum for aspiring Bill Clinton interns than a public policy platform. Naturally, Barbie look-alike podcaster Alex Cooper is “sex-positive,” which also means “abortion-positive.” Cooper wasn’t going to ask about Harris being “mentored” in her career by powerful then-San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown when she was his young paramour. She wasn’t going to ask about her husband, Doug Emhoff, ruining his first marriage by cheating with the nanny and getting her pregnant. These are also the kind of saucy subjects that the old Howard Stern would want to talk about on the radio. But the new Howard Stern is firmly entrenched on the Left, and he was suggesting to Harris that she was in danger if former President Donald Trump were reelected: “If he wins, God forbid, would you feel safe in this country? Would you stay in this country?” Remember that old song “Paranoia Will Destroy Ya”? Stern jumped the shark and landed in a crib. Then there were the liberal ladies of “The View” on ABC. Fox News people joked that would turn out to be more of a “hot stone massage” than an interview. Whoopi Goldberg set the tone by introducing Harris as “the next president of the United States.” There were moments the news people could underline. Sunny Hostin asked, “Would you have done something differently than President Biden during the past four years?” Harris replied, “There is not a thing that comes to mind.” So much for all her talk of “turning the page.” The toughest appearance on the list was “60 Minutes” on CBS, but based on the record, that’s not saying much. Bill Clinton tiptoed around Gennifer Flowers on that show. Barack Obama drew a series of worshipful interviews with Steve Kroft, first as a candidate and then as president. More recently, Scott Pelley has contributed several softball sessions with Joe Biden. So, it was surprising and refreshing when CBS correspondent Bill Whitaker challenged Harris with some obvious facts. He asked if it was a mistake to “loosen the immigration policies as much as you did?” When she tried to claim the border was “a long-standing problem,” he followed up: “The numbers did quadruple under your watch.” Whitaker also noted she flipped positions on a host of issues, from a fracking ban to a socialist “Medicare for All” program. These are simple facts, so why are we amazed when a journalist simply points them out and asks her to explain? It’s a reflection on how Democrats don’t have a Tim Russert figure in their “mainstream” TV scene that they consider a serious test of their mettle. Today’s TV hosts act like defense lawyers for the Democrats. They don’t seem to have any prosecutorial muscles at all for the candidates they favor. So, raise a glass to Whitaker for reminding us what the news used to sound like in the polyester days. COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post Kamala Harris’ Parade of (Mostly) Softball Interviews appeared first on The Daily Signal.

FIRST ON DAILY SIGNAL—Pro-life diaper company EveryLife is partnering with America’s Christian Credit Union to celebrate new life and support women in crisis pregnancies. EveryLife, America’s fastest-growing diaper company, announced Wednesday that it will partner with the credit union “to champion the sanctity of life and provide meaningful support to families across the nation.” The organizations will work together to provide gift boxes to bank employees who become parents to a new baby, new baby gift boxes for bank members with an adoption loan, and diaper donations for pregnancy resource centers in need when a new ACCU member opens an account using the EveryLife promo code. “All of those donations that ACCU will be giving out when a customer comes on and opens up a checking account, those will actually go to the pregnancy centers that are in our network, that we are partnered with, that we know are an urgent need of those supplies,” Sarah Gabel Seifert, president and cofounder of EveryLife, told The Daily Signal. “So, we’re super-grateful for their effort and helping us be able to fuel these pregnancy centers with more of the essentials so they can help our families.” New ACCU members who open accounts using the promo code “EveryLife” through Jan. 31 also get $100 bonuses. The credit union provides members with low-rate adoption loans to cover the costs of legal fees and travel. Due to the partnership with EveryLife, the moment child placement happens, families with adoption loans will get new baby gift boxes. “Supplying these resources to the families that are growing is only going to give them hope and feel like they’re supported every step of the way, as they welcome in a new little one or even a grandbaby,” Seifert said. “It’s going to help people feel like they have the support that they need, and to be encouraged to hopefully have more children, because they have a company that’s backing that growth, and that is only going to result in positive things.” On Wednesday, EveryLife also launched a new corporate partnership page on its website for other businesses to join its mission of supporting families. “We will have the opportunity for others that are interested to follow suit, and we will work with them to create a partnership program that makes sense for their organization,” Seifert said. Existing corporate partnerships besides the ACCU collaboration include programs with Hobby Lobby, Seven Weeks Coffee, and We the Free Signs. Launched by Public Square, an app that provides an online marketplace for people to buy products from “values-aligned businesses” instead of woke companies, EveryLife offers parents the option to buy diapers from a company that aligns with their values and that directly funds pro-life initiatives. EveryLife says on its website that a portion of its proceeds go directly to Live Action, a pro-life nonprofit group that advocates for the unborn. EveryLife says its products are “without phthalates, parabens, dyes, fragrances, lotions, latex and hundreds of other ingredients that can be harmful to baby’s developing brain and body.” Seifert hopes EveryLife’s partnership with ACCU will help foster a culture of life. “When we start to see companies like ACCU stand for every precious life, the way that they are doing through this partnership, I think this is really how we start to see a cultural shift to one that does embrace life and celebrate parenthood,” Seifert said. “The more that we start to see companies like this make this kind of outward stance, I believe it really does impact culture, and it makes it easy—or easier—for these families to feel like they really have the support and the essentials that they need.” In an age when having children is costly and often even discouraged, Seifert hopes the partnership with ACCU and other like-minded companies will make it easier for people to have more children. “When we start to see companies championing that mindset, it really can encourage people to have more children, and we know that strong families really secure a strong nation,” she said. “So, I think this sends a message out loud and proud, hopefully to all of our communities and really other businesses, to consider doing something similar, because it really can make a difference,” Seifert continued, “not only for the employees and the people they work with, but also to this cultural darkness that we see in this topic of life, and shifted to one that’s full of positivity and one that really celebrates every precious life, absolutely.” The post Pro-Life Diaper Brand Partners With Christian Credit Union to Support New Moms appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The European Fuel Follies Continue

Biden Admin: Gee, Why Won't the Israelis Tell Us Their War Plans?

Ameca and Azi are on talking terms, although their personal chemistry needs some work.

"A vital function in modern plant, animal, and microbial life, can occur abiotically in a geological environment."

New footage with some hilarious commentary by the scientists of EV Nautilus.

Why would an entire dynasty just... disappear?

Toil and trouble indeed.