dailysignal--2020-09-29--COVID-19 Linked to Rising Suicide Rates Among Teens

The COVID-19 shutdowns have created a category of unlikely victims of collateral damage in teenagers .
Inasmuch as 8 out of 10 COVID-19-related deaths are among people aged 65 or older , few would have expected teens to suffer disproportionately from the coronavirus , but increased rates of anxiety and depression among America ’ s youth signal a palpable threat from suicide .
> > > What ’ s the best way for America to reopen and return to business ?
The National Coronavirus Recovery Commission , a project of The Heritage Foundation , assembled America ’ s top thinkers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it has made more than 260 recommendations .
Learn more here .
Survey data on mental health compiled by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention depict a worrisome new trend among young adults since the onset of the nationwide lockdowns .
Between March and June , suicide risk rose sharply for Americans across the board—perhaps not surprisingly , given the economic impact of the pandemic on American livelihoods .
The rise in suicide cases , though , was most pronounced among the nation ’ s youths .
While 11 % of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seriously considered ” suicide in the past month , that same figure jumps to 25 % for people aged 18 to 24—a deeply worrisome statistic to health officials across the country .
Many experts say that the stringent social distancing measures put in place to combat the spread of COVID-19 have significantly worsened teen mental health .
Because teenagers are social by nature and developmentally reliant on their peers , the pandemic has exacerbated mental health issues among an age cohort already vulnerable to begin with .
According to CDC data , suicide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ young people aged 10 to 24 .
The effects of isolation are heightening this trend .
The closure of schools and other social meeting spots youth normally frequent has forced students to stay confined to their homes , increasing the rates of anxiety , depression , and suicidal thoughts for people of this age group .
Given the increased risk of teen suicide , being able to recognize the classic symptoms of depression and suicidal behavior could mean the difference between life and death .
According to Ellice Park , a licensed professional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , signs of teenage depression and suicidality consist of both external and internal symptoms .
Among external signs , unusual behaviors to watch out for include “ crying spells , conflict with family or friends , insomnia or sleeping too much ( hypersomnia ) , changes in appetite with changes in weight , use of mood-altering chemicals or substances , restlessness , agitation like hand-wringing or an inability to sit still , slowed thinking/speaking or body movements , frequent complaints of unexplained body [ aches ] and headaches , poor school performance , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , angry outbursts , bodily self-harm , and most tellingly , making suicide attempts or plans.
” Internal symptoms might be more subtle and less noticeable to the outside observer , but can include “ irritability , loss of interest or pleasure in usual activities , low self-esteem , feelings of worthlessness , feelings of hopelessness or emptiness , extreme self-blame or self-criticism , extreme sensitivity , trouble thinking and making decisions , frequent forgetfulness , an ongoing sense that life and the future are grim or bleak , and persistent thoughts of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Park stresses the importance of “ checking in ” with loved ones .
With regard to mental health , open dialogue is key , she says .
Most importantly , Park advises parents or family members against taking on any “ unnecessary guilt ” or “ undue burden ” for their child ’ s suffering .
Doing so would only make it harder for them to support their teenager .
To help their teens through the pandemic , Park urges parents to help them find new hobbies to keep them active .
Writing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be a great way for teens to process their emotions .
If a teen already has a favorite hobby , on the other hand , reinforcing those favorite activities can help keep him or her occupied and lessen the likelihood of suicidal thoughts .
Ensuring the teen stays physically active during the lockdown is another way to boost his or her mental health while providing him or her with a healthy outlet for managing emotions .
Other ways parents or family members can get actively involved include consulting with a trusted therapist or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other spiritual adviser .
For more information on teen suicidality and mental health , contact a crisis hotline at 1-800-273-TALK or visit suicidepreventionlifeline.org .
If experiencing severe symptoms of depression , seek help from a mental health professional immediately or from the nearest hospital .

The COVID-19 shutdowns have created a category of unlikely victims of collateral damage in teenagers.
Inasmuch as 8 out of 10 COVID-19-related deaths are among people aged 65 or older, few would have expected teens to suffer disproportionately from the coronavirus, but increased rates of anxiety and depression among America’s youth signal a palpable threat from suicide.
>>> What’s the best way for America to reopen and return to business? The National Coronavirus Recovery Commission, a project of The Heritage Foundation, assembled America’s top thinkers to figure that out. So far, it has made more than 260 recommendations. Learn more here.
Survey data on mental health compiled by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention depict a worrisome new trend among young adults since the onset of the nationwide lockdowns. Between March and June, suicide risk rose sharply for Americans across the board—perhaps not surprisingly, given the economic impact of the pandemic on American livelihoods.
The rise in suicide cases, though, was most pronounced among the nation’s youths. While 11% of respondents to the CDC survey had “seriously considered” suicide in the past month, that same figure jumps to 25% for people aged 18 to 24—a deeply worrisome statistic to health officials across the country.
Many experts say that the stringent social distancing measures put in place to combat the spread of COVID-19 have significantly worsened teen mental health. Because teenagers are social by nature and developmentally reliant on their peers, the pandemic has exacerbated mental health issues among an age cohort already vulnerable to begin with.
According to CDC data, suicide is the second-leading cause of death among young people aged 10 to 24. The effects of isolation are heightening this trend. The closure of schools and other social meeting spots youth normally frequent has forced students to stay confined to their homes, increasing the rates of anxiety, depression, and suicidal thoughts for people of this age group.
Given the increased risk of teen suicide, being able to recognize the classic symptoms of depression and suicidal behavior could mean the difference between life and death. According to Ellice Park, a licensed professional counselor and wellness coach in central Ohio, signs of teenage depression and suicidality consist of both external and internal symptoms.
Among external signs, unusual behaviors to watch out for include “crying spells, conflict with family or friends, insomnia or sleeping too much (hypersomnia), changes in appetite with changes in weight, use of mood-altering chemicals or substances, restlessness, agitation like hand-wringing or an inability to sit still, slowed thinking/speaking or body movements, frequent complaints of unexplained body [aches] and headaches, poor school performance, less attention to personal hygiene or appearance, angry outbursts, bodily self-harm, and most tellingly, making suicide attempts or plans.”
Internal symptoms might be more subtle and less noticeable to the outside observer, but can include “irritability, loss of interest or pleasure in usual activities, low self-esteem, feelings of worthlessness, feelings of hopelessness or emptiness, extreme self-blame or self-criticism, extreme sensitivity, trouble thinking and making decisions, frequent forgetfulness, an ongoing sense that life and the future are grim or bleak, and persistent thoughts of death, dying, or suicide.”
Park stresses the importance of “checking in” with loved ones. With regard to mental health, open dialogue is key, she says.
It can be hard to mark internal symptoms for parents, so talk to your teen. See if they seem capable of managing challenging feelings by themselves, or if they seem overwhelmed. That may be a good indicator it is worth providing them professional support to assess and work through it.
Most importantly, Park advises parents or family members against taking on any “unnecessary guilt” or “undue burden” for their child’s suffering. Doing so would only make it harder for them to support their teenager.
To help their teens through the pandemic, Park urges parents to help them find new hobbies to keep them active. Writing and art, in particular, can be a great way for teens to process their emotions. If a teen already has a favorite hobby, on the other hand, reinforcing those favorite activities can help keep him or her occupied and lessen the likelihood of suicidal thoughts.
Ensuring the teen stays physically active during the lockdown is another way to boost his or her mental health while providing him or her with a healthy outlet for managing emotions.
Other ways parents or family members can get actively involved include consulting with a trusted therapist or contacting a minister, priest, or other spiritual adviser.
For more information on teen suicidality and mental health, contact a crisis hotline at 1-800-273-TALK or visit suicidepreventionlifeline.org. If experiencing severe symptoms of depression, seek help from a mental health professional immediately or from the nearest hospital.


dailysignal--2020-09-30--6 Highlights From Trump-Biden Debate

6 Highlights From Trump-Biden Debate

President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden squared off for the first of three debates Tuesday night .
Here ’ s six matters the two discussed in the debate , which was moderated by Fox News anchor Chris Wallace .
With COVID-19 prompting significant mail-in or absentee voting , election integrity has become a major topic of discussion .
“ There are going to be millions of people , because of COVID , that are going to be voting by mail-in ballots , ” Biden said .
“ We ’ re going to make sure the people who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do that because enough poll watchers are there to make sure they can socially distance.
” He added , referring to Trump , “ This is all about trying to dissuade people from voting because he ’ s trying to scare people into thinking that it ’ s not going to be legitimate.
” The former vice president stressed that he would accept the results either way .
“ If I win , that will be accepted .
If I lose , that will be accepted , ” Biden said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he ’ s not sure what he ’ s going to accept , let me tell you something , it doesn ’ t matter .
If we get the votes , it ’ s going to be all over , He ’ s going to go.
” Trump warned of fraud , bringing up numerous examples of primaries earlier this year where mail-in balloting was a problem .
Trump made a distinction between absentee ballots–or what he called solicited ballots–and mass mail-in ballots .
“ As far as the ballots are concerned , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solicited ballot is OK. You ’ re asking .
They send it , you send it back .
I did that , ” Trump said .
“ They are sending millions of unsolicited ballots across the country .
There is fraud .
They found them in creeks .
They found some with the name Trump in a wastepaper basket .
They are being sent all over the place .
They sent two in a Democrat area .
This is going to be fraud like you ’ ve never seen.
” Trump later added @ @ @ @ @ @ @ months because these ballots are going to be all over .
Take a look at what happened in Manhattan .
Take a look at what happened in New Jersey .
Take a look at what happened in Virginia and other places .
They ’ re not losing 2 % or 1 % .
They are losing 30 % and 40 % .
It ’ s a fraud and a shame.
” As for the final results , Trump said , “ I am urging my supporters to go into the polls and watch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a fair election , “ I am 100 % on board.
” Trump argued that “ forest management ” was key to preventing the wildfires scouring California .
“ You need forest management … the forest floors are loaded up with trees , dead trees that are years old and they ’ re like tinder , and leaves and everything else— you drop a cigarette in there , and the whole forest burns down .
You ’ ve got to have forest management , ” Trump said .
Later he added @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the call , California ’ s burning , California ’ s burning … if you had forest management , good forest management , you wouldn ’ t be getting those calls.
” Asked by Wallace if human pollution and greenhouse gas emissions were contributing to global warming , Trump said , “ To an extent , yes.
” Biden spoke of weatherizing buildings , and increased use of electric-powered vehicles .
“ We can get to net zero in terms of energy production by 2035 , ” the former vice president said , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ created .
He also attributed the dramatic weather in recent years to climate change , saying : If the United States had stayed in the Paris Agreement , an international treaty , the nation would have had to make significant strides in reducing greenhouse gas emissions , After Trump brought up the Green New Deal , an environmental plan released by Sen. Bernie Sanders , I-Vt. , and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , D-N.Y. , Biden said , “ I don ’ t support the Green New Deal.
” “ Your party wants to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
Biden responded that his Democratic primary opponents attacked him for not supporting a Medicare for All plan .
“ The platform of the Democratic Party is what I , in fact , approved of , ” Biden said .
Wallace suggested Trump had no plan to replace Obamacare .
“ Of course I have , ” Trump responded .
“ We got rid of the individual mandate.
” Biden said that voters should “ have a right ” to determine who fills the Supreme Court seat vacated after the death of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should wait and see what the outcome of this election is , ” the former vice president said , adding , “ It ’ s just not appropriate to do this before the election.
” He did make it clear that it wasn ’ t personal .
“ She seems like a very fine person , but she has written before she went on the bench that she thinks that the Affordable Care Act is not constitutional , ” Biden said , referring to Amy Coney Barrett , who currently serves as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the 7th Circuit .
When asked about the appropriateness of appointing Barrett to serve on the Supreme Court before the election , Trump stated , “ Elections have consequences.
” “ A president is elected for four years , ” Trump said .
“ We are not elected for three years .
I ’ m not elected for three years.
” Trump also said of Barrett , “ She is going to be as good as anybody that has served on that court.
” Some Democrats have called for ending the filibuster @ @ @ @ @ @ @ liberal justices , if Democrats win the presidency and the Senate .
Wallace asked Biden , “ Are you willing to tell the American people tonight whether or not you will support ending the filibuster or packing the court ?
” Biden said he wasn ’ t going to answer the question .
“ Whatever position I take on that , that will become the issue , ” Biden said .
“ The American people should speak .
You should go out and vote .
… Vote and let your senators know how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ m not going to answer the question because the question is … ” Trump kept interrupting before Biden finished his point about why he wouldn ’ t answer .
Wallace asked the two candidates to address race , and asked Trump about his executive order to stop Critical Race Theory training in the federal government .
The theory promotes the belief that a person is automatically advantaged or disadvantaged based on race .
“ I ended it because it ’ s racist .
I ended it because a lot of people were being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ insane , ” Trump said , adding , “ It was a radical revolution taking place in our military , in our schools , all over the place .
You know it and so does everybody else.
” Biden claimed Trump has walked away from the goal of equity .
“ He ’ s the racist , ” Biden said of Trump .
“ The fact is there is racial insensitivity .
People need to be made aware of what other people feel like , what insults them , what is demeaning to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them to know .
Many people don ’ t want to hurt other people ’ s feelings .
It makes a gigantic difference in how a child is able to grow up and have a sense of self esteem.
” Trump talked about the riots in numerous cities across the country .
“ The people of this country want and demand law and order and you ’ re afraid to even say it , ” Trump said .
When Trump pressed him , Biden said he was for law and order .
However @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is an idea , not an organization .
”

President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden squared off for the first of three debates Tuesday night.
Here’s six matters the two discussed in the debate, which was moderated by Fox News anchor Chris Wallace.
1. Election Integrity
With COVID-19 prompting significant mail-in or absentee voting, election integrity has become a major topic of discussion.
Biden suggested it’s not a concern.
“There are going to be millions of people, because of COVID, that are going to be voting by mail-in ballots,” Biden said. “We’re going to make sure the people who want to vote in person are able to do that because enough poll watchers are there to make sure they can socially distance.”
He added, referring to Trump, “This is all about trying to dissuade people from voting because he’s trying to scare people into thinking that it’s not going to be legitimate.”
The former vice president stressed that he would accept the results either way.
“If I win, that will be accepted. If I lose, that will be accepted,” Biden said. “By the way, if he says he’s not sure what he’s going to accept, let me tell you something, it doesn’t matter. If we get the votes, it’s going to be all over, He’s going to go.”
Trump warned of fraud, bringing up numerous examples of primaries earlier this year where mail-in balloting was a problem. Trump made a distinction between absentee ballots—or what he called solicited ballots—and mass mail-in ballots.
“As far as the ballots are concerned, it’s a disaster. A solicited ballot is OK. You’re asking. They send it, you send it back. I did that,” Trump said. “They are sending millions of unsolicited ballots across the country. There is fraud. They found them in creeks. They found some with the name Trump in a wastepaper basket. They are being sent all over the place. They sent two in a Democrat area. This is going to be fraud like you’ve never seen.”
Trump later added, “We might not know for months because these ballots are going to be all over. Take a look at what happened in Manhattan. Take a look at what happened in New Jersey. Take a look at what happened in Virginia and other places. They’re not losing 2% or 1%. They are losing 30% and 40%. It’s a fraud and a shame.”
As for the final results, Trump said, “I am urging my supporters to go into the polls and watch very carefully.” He said if it’s a fair election, “I am 100% on board.”
2. Forest Fires and Green New Deal
Trump argued that “forest management” was key to preventing the wildfires scouring California.
“You need forest management … the forest floors are loaded up with trees, dead trees that are years old and they’re like tinder, and leaves and everything else—you drop a cigarette in there, and the whole forest burns down. You’ve got to have forest management,” Trump said.
Later he added, “Every year, I get the call, California’s burning, California’s burning … if you had forest management, good forest management, you wouldn’t be getting those calls.”
Asked by Wallace if human pollution and greenhouse gas emissions were contributing to global warming, Trump said, “To an extent, yes.”
Biden spoke of weatherizing buildings, and increased use of electric-powered vehicles. “We can get to net zero in terms of energy production by 2035,” the former vice president said, adding that millions of jobs would be created.
He also attributed the dramatic weather in recent years to climate change, saying:
We spend billions of dollars now … on floods, hurricanes, rising seas. We’re in real trouble. Look what’s happened just in the Midwest with these storms that come through and wipe out entire sections and counties in Iowa. They didn’t happen before. They’re because of global warming. We make up 15% of the world’s problem … but the rest of the world, we got to get them to come along. That’s why we have to get back into … the Paris accord.
If the United States had stayed in the Paris Agreement, an international treaty, the nation would have had to make significant strides in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, he said.
After Trump brought up the Green New Deal, an environmental plan released by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Biden said, “I don’t support the Green New Deal.”
3. Health Care
Trump asserted that Biden would back socialized medicine.
“Your party wants to go socialist medicine,” the president said.
Biden responded that his Democratic primary opponents attacked him for not supporting a “Medicare for All” plan.
“The platform of the Democratic Party is what I, in fact, approved of,” Biden said.
Wallace suggested Trump had no plan to replace Obamacare.
“Of course I have,” Trump responded. “We got rid of the individual mandate.”
4. Confirming Barrett and Court Packing
Biden said that voters should “have a right” to determine who fills the Supreme Court seat vacated after the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
“We should wait and see what the outcome of this election is,” the former vice president said, adding, “It’s just not appropriate to do this before the election.”
He did make it clear that it wasn’t personal.
“She seems like a very fine person, but she has written before she went on the bench that she thinks that the Affordable Care Act is not constitutional,” Biden said, referring to Amy Coney Barrett, who currently serves as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit.
When asked about the appropriateness of appointing Barrett to serve on the Supreme Court before the election, Trump stated, “Elections have consequences.”
“A president is elected for four years,” Trump said. “We are not elected for three years. I’m not elected for three years.”
Trump also said of Barrett, “She is going to be as good as anybody that has served on that court.”
Some Democrats have called for ending the filibuster and filling the Supreme Court with additional liberal justices, if Democrats win the presidency and the Senate.
Wallace asked Biden, “Are you willing to tell the American people tonight whether or not you will support ending the filibuster or packing the court?”
Biden said he wasn’t going to answer the question.
“Whatever position I take on that, that will become the issue,” Biden said. “The American people should speak. You should go out and vote. … Vote and let your senators know how you feel about this. I’m not going to answer the question because the question is … ”
Trump kept interrupting before Biden finished his point about why he wouldn’t answer.
5. Racism and Critical Race Theory
Wallace asked the two candidates to address race, and asked Trump about his executive order to stop training in critical race theory in the federal government. The theory promotes the belief that a person is automatically advantaged or disadvantaged based on race.
“I ended it because it’s racist. I ended it because a lot of people were being asked to do things that were absolutely insane,” Trump said, adding, “It was a radical revolution taking place in our military, in our schools, all over the place. You know it and so does everybody else.”
The president continued:
If you were a certain person, you had no status in life. We were paying people hundreds of thousands of dollars to teach really bad ideas and really very sick ideas. Really, they were teaching people that our country is a horrible place, it’s a racist place, and they were teaching people to hate our country and I’m not going to allow that to happen.
Biden claimed Trump has walked away from the goal of equity.
“He’s the racist,” Biden said of Trump. “The fact is there is racial insensitivity. People need to be made aware of what other people feel like, what insults them, what is demeaning to them. It’s important to them to know. Many people don’t want to hurt other people’s feelings. It makes a gigantic difference in how a child is able to grow up and have a sense of self-esteem.”
6. Law and Order
Trump talked about the riots in numerous cities across the country.
“The people of this country want and demand law and order, and you’re afraid to even say it,” Trump said.
When Trump pressed him, Biden said he was for law and order.
However, later Biden said, “Antifa is an idea, not an organization.”


dailysignal--2020-09-30--YouTube Adds Disclaimer to Heritage Foundation Video on Mail-In Ballots

YouTube has posted a disclaimer to a video produced by The Heritage Foundation that warns of the potential problems of mass voting by mail .
YouTube didn ’ t say it disputed any of the facts in the video , which was posted Sept. 2 and details recent problems with mail-in primary elections .
The video cites mainstream media reporting and the U.S. Election Assistance Commission on ballots sent back to voters as “ undelivered , misdelivered or reported missing.
” However , YouTube posted a disclaimer below the video citing information from the Bipartisan Policy Center that it labels @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ Mail-in ballots that meet eligibility and validity requirements are counted in every election .
The law requires all valid votes to be counted in every election regardless of how they are cast.
” “ This is unfair and ill-informed censorship by YouTube , ” Hans von Spakovsky , manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation , told The Daily Signal .
The Bipartisan Policy Center cited by YouTube is a “ left-leaning think tank , ” according to the Capital Research Center , a conservative-leaning watchdog group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s board of directors includes Henry Cisneros , secretary of housing and urban development during the Clinton administration , and Maria Contreras-Sweet , head of the Small Business Administration during the Obama administration .
It also includes liberal Republicans such as former Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine and former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele , who has been a vocal critic of his party and President Donald Trump in recent years .
Von Spakovsky , a senior legal fellow at Heritage who is a former member of the Federal Elections Commission , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Policy Center as actually bipartisan .
“ This shows that YouTube is favoring nonprofit groups that reflect their biases and reflect their politics , and it shows YouTube is not being neutral , ” von Spakovsky said .

YouTube has posted a disclaimer to a video produced by The Heritage Foundation that warns of the potential problems of mass voting by mail.
YouTube didn’t say it disputed any of the facts in the video, which was posted Sept. 2 and details recent problems with mail-in primary elections. The video cites mainstream media reporting and the U.S. Election Assistance Commission on ballots sent back to voters as “undelivered, misdelivered or reported missing.”
However, YouTube posted a disclaimer below the video citing information from the Bipartisan Policy Center that it labels as “Context.”
The disclaimer reads: “Mail-in ballots that meet eligibility and validity requirements are counted in every election. The law requires all valid votes to be counted in every election regardless of how they are cast.”
“This is unfair and ill-informed censorship by YouTube,” Hans von Spakovsky, manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal.
Similarly, YouTube added the same “context” disclaimer to at least two other Heritage videos. One features von Spakovsky in a Newsmax interview about an FBI investigation of mai-in ballots in Pennsylvania; the other includes audio in which von Spakovsky talks about potential disenfranchisement as a result of mail-in ballots.
YouTube previously removed another video produced in 2017 by The Daily Signal, in which Dr. Michelle Cretella, a pediatrician and executive director of the American College of Pediatricians, talked about gender reassignment surgery. The Daily Signal is the multimedia news organization of The Heritage Foundation.
The Bipartisan Policy Center cited by YouTube is a “left-leaning think tank,” according to the Capital Research Center, a conservative-leaning watchdog group that monitors nonprofits.
The center’s board of directors includes Henry Cisneros, secretary of housing and urban development during the Clinton administration, and Maria Contreras-Sweet, head of the Small Business Administration during the Obama administration.
It also includes liberal Republicans such as former Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine and former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele, who has been a vocal critic of his party and President Donald Trump in recent years.
Von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at Heritage who is a former member of the Federal Election Commission, said he does not view the Bipartisan Policy Center as actually bipartisan.
“This shows that YouTube is favoring nonprofit groups that reflect their biases and reflect their politics, and it shows YouTube is not being neutral,” von Spakovsky said.
Ivy Choi, policy communications manager for YouTube, declined to answer questions directly, but referred The Daily Signal to a Sept. 24 blog post by YouTube. That post appears to state that the Bipartisan Policy Center will be the sole source of information that YouTube relies on for information about mail-in voting.
“Alongside the consistent enforcement of our policies, we’re continuing to raise up authoritative voices and reduce harmful misinformation,” the YouTube blog says, adding:
One of the ways we do this is through our information panels, which provide relevant context alongside content. For example, in 2018, we started to show information panels linking to third-party sources around a small number of well-established topics that are subject to misinformation, such as the moon landing or COVID-19. We’re expanding this list of topics to include voting by mail. This means that under videos that discuss voting by mail, you’ll see an information panel directing you to authoritative information from the Bipartisan Policy Center, a bipartisan think tank.
This report was updated Oct. 1 to include YouTube’s response to a request for comment and to note that YouTube also added the “context” disclaimer to at least two other Heritage Foundation videos.


dailysignal--2020-10-01--Barrett Will Be ‘Role Model’ for Our Daughters and Granddaughters, Female GOP Senators Say

Female Republican senators praised Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett on Wednesday , saying that Barrett will inspire their daughters and granddaughters through her example as a dignified legal jurist and successful mother .
“ Folks , this is what a mom can do , ” Sen. Joni Ernst , R-Iowa , said at a Wednesday press conference .
“ I tell my daughter that all the time .
A mom can be a farmer or a rancher .
A mom can be a combat veteran .
A mom can be a financial planner .
A mom can serve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most certainly , a mom can be a Supreme Court justice .
Anybody that says different is absolutely wrong.
” President Donald Trump announced Barrett as his Supreme Court nominee Sept. 26 .
If confirmed by the Senate , Barrett will replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg , who died Sept. 18 .
In Barrett , “ we have a role model for our girls , our daughters , and our granddaughters , ” said Sen. Shelley Moore Capito , R-W.Va. , adding that since Barrett has “ traveled a journey that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we should use that as an opportunity to inspire that next generation.
” “ She ’ s been asked to put her name forward .
She ’ s accepted that .
She ’ s putting her family under tremendous scrutiny , along with her professional life , and that ’ s not an easy journey in and of itself , ” Capito said .
Barrett ’ s 2017 confirmation hearings gained national attention when Democrats suggested that her Catholicism made her unfit to serve as a judge—and the media have attempted to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an interview on filling Supreme Court vacancies .
Barrett ’ s Catholic faith has also been called “ extreme , ” and some media outlets have attempted to link a Catholic group associated with Barrett to the fictional dystopian novel “ The Handmaid ’ s Tale.
” Republican female leaders pushed back against those criticisms Wednesday , emphasizing that Barrett is a “ brilliant ” jurist and a woman who conducts herself with “ grace.
” “ Her religion ought not to be a disqualifier for serving on the federal bench , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , adding that there are “ some on the left ” who would rather have an atheist or secularist on the bench .
“ We appreciate freedom of religion .
As she goes through this process , we are going to hear more about that , about her life , her character.
” Barrett has seven children , five biological children and two adopted from Haiti , and her critics have questioned whether she will be able to take care of her children and serve as a Supreme Court justice .
Media figures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ children for nefarious reasons .
Sen. Deb Fischer , R-Neb.
, praised Barrett ’ s ability to balance both an impressive legal career and a large family , saying : “ When we look at Judge Barrett , we see an accomplished woman .
We see a brilliant jurist .
We see a nice person .
We see someone who has been able to balance their family life with a husband , seven children , and keep everyone on track.
” “ I think it is fitting that we have Judge Barrett being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ breaking those barriers , ” Sen. Martha McSally , R-Ariz. , said , describing Barrett as a woman of “ faith , and of grace , and of brilliance , and of compassion.
” McSally also pointed out the hypocrisy of those who ask Barrett how she will balance her family with serving as a Supreme Court justice .
“ Nobody asks the men that , ” she said .
“ She ’ ll be just the fifth woman , if confirmed , on the court , and she ’ ll be the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Supreme Court , ” McSally added .
“ That is something that should be celebrated across the country.
” Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing opportunities of this original content , email [ email protected ]

Female Republican senators praised Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett on Wednesday, saying that Barrett will inspire their daughters and granddaughters through her example as a dignified legal jurist and successful mother.
“Folks, this is what a mom can do,” Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, said at a Wednesday press conference. “I tell my daughter that all the time. A mom can be a farmer or a rancher. A mom can be a combat veteran. A mom can be a financial planner. A mom can serve in the United States Senate. And most certainly, a mom can be a Supreme Court justice. Anybody that says different is absolutely wrong.”
President Donald Trump announced Barrett as his Supreme Court nominee Sept. 26. If confirmed by the Senate, Barrett will replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died Sept. 18.
In Barrett, “we have a role model for our girls, our daughters, and our granddaughters,” said Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., adding that since Barrett has “traveled a journey that not many of us get to do, we should use that as an opportunity to inspire that next generation.”
“She’s been asked to put her name forward. She’s accepted that. She’s putting her family under tremendous scrutiny, along with her professional life, and that’s not an easy journey in and of itself,” Capito said.
Barrett’s 2017 confirmation hearings gained national attention when Democrats suggested that her Catholicism made her unfit to serve as a judge—and the media have attempted to spin comments Barrett made soon after during an interview on filling Supreme Court vacancies.
Barrett’s Catholic faith has also been called “extreme,” and some media outlets have attempted to link a Catholic group associated with Barrett to the fictional dystopian novel “The Handmaid’s Tale.”
Republican female leaders pushed back against those criticisms Wednesday, emphasizing that Barrett is a “brilliant” jurist and a woman who conducts herself with “grace.”
“Her religion ought not to be a disqualifier for serving on the federal bench,” Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said, adding that there are “some on the left” who would rather have an atheist or secularist on the bench. “We appreciate freedom of religion. As she goes through this process, we are going to hear more about that, about her life, her character.”
Barrett has seven children, five biological children and two adopted from Haiti, and her critics have questioned whether she will be able to take care of her children and serve as a Supreme Court justice. Media figures have also suggested that Barrett adopted her children for nefarious reasons.
Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb., praised Barrett’s ability to balance both an impressive legal career and a large family, saying: “When we look at Judge Barrett, we see an accomplished woman. We see a brilliant jurist. We see a nice person. We see someone who has been able to balance their family life with a husband, seven children, and keep everyone on track.”
“I think it is fitting that we have Judge Barrett being nominated to continue to push forward in breaking those barriers,” Sen. Martha McSally, R-Ariz., said, describing Barrett as a woman of “faith, and of grace, and of brilliance, and of compassion.”
McSally also pointed out the hypocrisy of those who ask Barrett how she will balance her family with serving as a Supreme Court justice. “Nobody asks the men that,” she said.
“She’ll be just the fifth woman, if confirmed, on the court, and she’ll be the first with school-age children serving on the Supreme Court,” McSally added. “That is something that should be celebrated across the country.”
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.


dailysignal--2020-10-01--How Low Can Far Left Go? Attacks on Barrett for Adopting Haitian Orphans Hit Rock Bottom

Just when you thought you ’ d seen the bottom of the political sewer as it relates to opposing Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett , along come some despicable , racist tweets by two college professors .
Their repulsive comments are , sadly , par for the course for some on the far left who oppose transracial adoption .
On the day Barrett was nominated to the Supreme Court , professor Ibram X. Kendi tweeted that Barrett and her husband are “ white colonizers ” for adopting two black orphans from Haiti , and that they were trying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who they supposedly think are “ savages , ” in the “ superior ways of White people , while using them as props.
” Barrett and husband Jesse , according to Kendi , did that “ while cutting the biological parents of these children out of the picture of humanity.
” Don ’ t believe me ?
Here is the tweet : When some on Twitter pushed back , Kendi said that he is “ challenging the idea that White parents of kids of color are inherently ‘ not racist.
’ ” In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just because the Barretts adopted two orphans from Haiti , that doesn ’ t prove they aren ’ t racists .
Kendi is , ironically , the founder and director of the Center for Antiracist Research at Boston University .
He is the Andrew W. Mellon professor in the humanities at the university , an author , and a fellow at Harvard , where he ’ s working on a book to be called “ Bones of Inequity : A Narrative History of Racist Policies in America.
” He also contributes to The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ News .
Kendi has received some criticism for his racist tweet , most notably on Twitter and in a Newsweek piece .
But the silence from Boston University , Harvard , CBS , and The Atlantic is deafening—and telling .
Imagine if a white conservative professor had tweeted similar bile about a black Supreme Court nominee who had adopted a white child .
Then there ’ s the similarly vile tweet by Ruth Ben-Ghiat , a New York University professor of Italian and history .
According to her NYU webpage , she is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , war , propaganda , and Donald Trump.
” Oh .
She praises Kendi ’ s tweet , and adds : “ Many authoritarians seized children of color for adoption by White Christians , ” she tweeted .
“ Pinochet ’ s regime did this with indigenous kids and Nazis took Aryan looking Poles for German families .
Trump takes migrant kids for adoption by Evangelicals.
” These two professors ignore the fact that millions of children across the globe are orphans , and that parents around the world have opened up their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brown , and white—do so because they care deeply about the needs of others , to build or add to their families , and out of love .
They don ’ t care about the color of the child ’ s skin .
They care about the child , who needs a loving family , a stable home life , and a chance at fulfilling his or her God-given talents .
Set aside the fact that millions of Americans have adopted children internationally , and that hundreds of thousands have adopted children who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Moreover , they never criticize notable white Hollywood stars who have adopted black children .
That list includes Sandra Bullock : two kids ( a son and a daughter ) , both adopted out of the Louisiana foster care system ; Tom Cruise : a son , adopted from Florida ; Jane Fonda : a daughter ; Angelina Jolie : a daughter , adopted from Ethiopia ; Madonna : four kids ( a son and three daughters ) , adopted from Malawi ; Michelle Pfeiffer : a daughter ; Steven Spielberg : a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Ethiopia ; Joey Mazzarino : a daughter from Ethiopia ; Jillian Michaels : a daughter from Haiti ; and Mary-Louise Parker : a daughter from Ethiopia .
Sadly , Kendi and Ben-Ghiat are not alone in their warped views about transracial adoption .
As Jason Riley noted Sept. 29 in The Wall Street Journal , the National Association of Black Social Workers has been opposed to transracial adoption since 1972 .
It established a written position statement on the subject , linked here , and takes “ a vehement stand against the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for any reason.
” According to the association , “ black children in white homes are cut off from the healthy development of themselves as Black people , which development is the normal expectation and only true humanistic goal.
” Its position statement includes highly disturbing assertions , including : white parents of black children “ seek out special help with their parenting ” ; a white mother will “ panic ” as she ponders who her black son will date ; white parents need “ special programming in learning how to handle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and white parents have to “ prepare their neighbors for their forthcoming Black child.
” Perhaps the group ’ s position , taken 38 years ago , was understandable then , but this is 2020 .
Yet , it hasn ’ t changed its position on transracial adoption to account for the changing nature of the American family , or recent social science research on the subject , which shows how out of the mainstream it is .
Furthermore , the National Association of Black Social Workers ’ position discourages white parents from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a stable home when those babies are black .
Riley , who is himself black , also points out that social science research on interracial adoption supports the practice , and reveals no evidence of harm to black children .
He cites the 2018 book “ Saving International Adoption , ” by economists Mark Montgomery and Irene Powell , in which they analyzed the literature on interracial adoption and found that , when comparing black adoptees in white families with those in black families , “ there is no statistical difference between the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and family integration.
” Montgomery and Powell wrote that the “ overwhelming conclusion of studies of transracial adoption is that it is not bad for children .
This greatly weakens the case of the opponents of transracial and transnational adoption on the grounds that it harms children.
” The Barretts adopted their son John Peter from a Haitian orphanage after the devastating earthquakes on the Caribbean island nation in 2010 .
He was 3 years old when he was adopted .
That natural disaster killed almost 250,000 people and displaced more than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barretts adopted their daughter Vivian from a Haitian orphanage where she was 14 months old .
At the time , she was so malnourished that she wore size 0 clothes and couldn ’ t pull herself up or even make vocal sounds .
Haiti is one of the poorest countries on the earth .
Forty-six percent of its population is malnourished , and citizens there have a life expectancy of just 63 years , so it ’ s not surprising that many children are available for adoption .
Does anyone really think John @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off growing up ( if they survived ) in Haiti , rather than in the Barretts ’ home in South Bend , Indiana ?
Today , John Peter and Vivian are thriving in a loving , large family .
So , before anyone else decides to stir the “ white colonizer ” pot in the run-up to Barrett ’ s Supreme Court confirmation hearing , they might want to learn a bit about international adoptions , and adoptions from Haiti in particular .
Armed with that knowledge , they will see how cumbersome @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s lengthy , and the protections built into the system to protect the rights of the child .
The United States is a party to the Hague Adoption Convention , an international treaty that provides important safeguards to “ protect the best interests of children , birth parents , and adoptive parents who are involved in intercountry adoptions.
” That convention entered into force in the United States in 2008 , but even before that , there were international rules in force and in each country where the orphan lives , which protect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ preamble to the Hague Adoption Convention reads : Since Haiti is also a party to the Hague Adoption Convention , adoption requirements of both countries have to be followed .
Americans who want to adopt internationally have a mountain of paperwork and process to endure , even before the adoption agency they contract with works with the host country to get them on a waiting list , which often takes years .
To adopt internationally , Americans must be at least 25 years old .
If you ’ re married , you must @ @ @ @ @ @ @ undergo a criminal background check ; go through an exhaustive home study conducted by a licensed provider ; provide your financial data and credit history ; and undergo other scrutiny .
Furthermore , prospective parents must meet eligibility and suitability requirements as determined by U.S .
Citizenship and Immigration Services .
Once the prospective parents are in country , and the eligible child is identified for adoption , they are all required to be interviewed by the U.S. consulate in the host country .
Haitian law requires prospective adoptive parents to obtain a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law before the child can emigrate to the United States .
Haitian regulations require prospective parents to work through a U.S. adoption service provider authorized to operate in Haiti by its adoption authority .
Private adoptions , where the prospective parents work directly with the biological parents or custodians , are prohibited , nor can prospective parents “ select ” a child on their own .
Haitian law requires that prospective parents prove that they are employed and financially stable .
It also requires them to travel to Haiti before the adoption is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( which can include same-sex couples ) , at least one member be at least 30 years old .
For a Haitian child to be eligible for adoption , the biological parents must have relinquished the child , be deceased , or be unknown .
Then , and only then , can the state make the child available for international adoption .
As an adopted person , who married an adopted person , who together adopted four children internationally , my wife and I can attest to the fact that the process is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ draining , and extremely difficult .
Our children , like those of the Barretts , had unique medical and psychological needs .
But we , like so many other people , persevered because we believe that orphans—of any color—need a loving , stable home .
Sadly , as Riley pointed out , there are “ more black children in need of adoption , here and abroad , than there are black families who have expressed a willingness to take them.
” Liberals who oppose adoption in general , and interracial adoption in particular @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and their views , especially in 2020 , are backwards and repulsive .
The Barretts should be applauded for adopting a sickly , malnourished orphan girl and an orphaned boy from Haiti .
They , like so many other adoptive parents , did so out of pure love and gave those children a better life than the ones they would have suffered in their birth country .

Just when you thought you’d seen the bottom of the political sewer as it relates to opposing Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett, along come some despicable, racist tweets by two college professors.
Their repulsive comments are, sadly, par for the course for some on the far left who oppose transracial adoption.
On the day Barrett was nominated to the Supreme Court, professor Ibram X. Kendi tweeted that Barrett and her husband are “white colonizers” for adopting two black orphans from Haiti, and that they were trying to “civilize” the children, who they supposedly think are “savages,” in the “superior ways of White people, while using them as props.”
Barrett and husband Jesse, according to Kendi, did that “while cutting the biological parents of these children out of the picture of humanity.”
Don’t believe me? Here is the tweet:
Some White colonizers "adopted" Black children. They "civilized" these "savage" children in the "superior" ways of White people, while using them as props in their lifelong pictures of denial, while cutting the biological parents of these children out of the picture of humanity. https://t.co/XBE9rRnoqq — Ibram X. Kendi (@DrIbram) September 26, 2020
When some on Twitter pushed back, Kendi said that he is “challenging the idea that White parents of kids of color are inherently ‘not racist.’” In other words, Kendi is saying that just because the Barretts adopted two orphans from Haiti, that doesn’t prove they aren’t racists.
Kendi is, ironically, the founder and director of the Center for Antiracist Research at Boston University. He is the Andrew W. Mellon professor in the humanities at the university, an author, and a fellow at Harvard, where he’s working on a book to be called “Bones of Inequity: A Narrative History of Racist Policies in America.” He also contributes to The Atlantic and is a contributor to CBS News.
Kendi has received some criticism for his racist tweet, most notably on Twitter and in a Newsweek piece. But the silence from Boston University, Harvard, CBS, and The Atlantic is deafening—and telling.
Imagine if a white conservative professor had tweeted similar bile about a black Supreme Court nominee who had adopted a white child.
Then there’s the similarly vile tweet by Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a New York University professor of Italian and history. According to her NYU webpage, she is an expert on “fascism, authoritarianism, war, propaganda, and Donald Trump.” Oh.
She praises Kendi’s tweet, and adds: “Many authoritarians seized children of color for adoption by White Christians,” she tweeted. “Pinochet’s regime did this with indigenous kids and Nazis took Aryan looking Poles for German families. Trump takes migrant kids for adoption by Evangelicals.”
These two professors ignore the fact that millions of children across the globe are orphans, and that parents around the world have opened up their homes to them. Those parents—black, brown, and white—do so because they care deeply about the needs of others, to build or add to their families, and out of love.
They don’t care about the color of the child’s skin. They care about the child, who needs a loving family, a stable home life, and a chance at fulfilling his or her God-given talents.
Set aside the fact that millions of Americans have adopted children internationally, and that hundreds of thousands have adopted children who happened to be a different race.
Moreover, they never criticize notable white Hollywood stars who have adopted black children. That list includes Sandra Bullock: two kids (a son and a daughter), both adopted out of the Louisiana foster care system; Tom Cruise: a son, adopted from Florida; Jane Fonda: a daughter; Angelina Jolie: a daughter, adopted from Ethiopia; Madonna: four kids (a son and three daughters), adopted from Malawi; Michelle Pfeiffer: a daughter; Steven Spielberg: a son; Connie Britton: a son from Ethiopia; Joey Mazzarino: a daughter from Ethiopia; Jillian Michaels: a daughter from Haiti; and Mary-Louise Parker: a daughter from Ethiopia.
Sadly, Kendi and Ben-Ghiat are not alone in their warped views about transracial adoption.
As Jason Riley noted Sept. 29 in The Wall Street Journal, the National Association of Black Social Workers has been opposed to transracial adoption since 1972. It established a written position statement on the subject, linked here, and takes “a vehement stand against the placements of black children in white homes for any reason.”
According to the association, “black children in white homes are cut off from the healthy development of themselves as Black people, which development is the normal expectation and only true humanistic goal.”
Its position statement includes highly disturbing assertions, including: white parents of black children “seek out special help with their parenting”; a white mother will “panic” as she ponders who her black son will date; white parents need “special programming in learning how to handle black children’s hair”; and white parents have to “prepare their neighbors for their forthcoming Black child.”
Perhaps the group’s position, taken 38 years ago, was understandable then, but this is 2020. Yet, it hasn’t changed its position on transracial adoption to account for the changing nature of the American family, or recent social science research on the subject, which shows how out of the mainstream it is.
Furthermore, the National Association of Black Social Workers’ position discourages white parents from adopting orphans and children in need of a stable home when those babies are black.
Riley, who is himself black, also points out that social science research on interracial adoption supports the practice, and reveals no evidence of harm to black children.
He cites the 2018 book “Saving International Adoption,” by economists Mark Montgomery and Irene Powell, in which they analyzed the literature on interracial adoption and found that, when comparing black adoptees in white families with those in black families, “there is no statistical difference between the groups in terms of self-esteem, self-concept, and family integration.”
Montgomery and Powell wrote that the “overwhelming conclusion of studies of transracial adoption is that it is not bad for children. This greatly weakens the case of the opponents of transracial and transnational adoption on the grounds that it harms children.”
The Barretts adopted their son John Peter from a Haitian orphanage after the devastating earthquakes on the Caribbean island nation in 2010. He was 3 years old when he was adopted. That natural disaster killed almost 250,000 people and displaced more than 1.5 million Haitians.
Earlier, the Barretts adopted their daughter Vivian from a Haitian orphanage where she was 14 months old. At the time, she was so malnourished that she wore size 0 clothes and couldn’t pull herself up or even make vocal sounds.
Haiti is one of the poorest countries on the earth. Forty-six percent of its population is malnourished, and citizens there have a life expectancy of just 63 years, so it’s not surprising that many children are available for adoption.
Does anyone really think John Peter and Vivian would have been better off growing up (if they survived) in Haiti, rather than in the Barretts’ home in South Bend, Indiana?
Today, John Peter and Vivian are thriving in a loving, large family.
So, before anyone else decides to stir the “white colonizer” pot in the run-up to Barrett’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing, they might want to learn a bit about international adoptions, and adoptions from Haiti in particular.
Armed with that knowledge, they will see how cumbersome the process is, why it’s lengthy, and the protections built into the system to protect the rights of the child.
The United States is a party to the Hague Adoption Convention, an international treaty that provides important safeguards to “protect the best interests of children, birth parents, and adoptive parents who are involved in intercountry adoptions.”
That convention entered into force in the United States in 2008, but even before that, there were international rules in force and in each country where the orphan lives, which protect the rights of the child.
The preamble to the Hague Adoption Convention reads:
Every child benefits from a loving home in deeply profound ways. Intercountry adoption has made this permanently possible for hundreds of thousands of children worldwide. When children cannot remain with a relative, and new parents within their communities cannot be found, intercountry adoption opens another pathway to children to receive the care, security, and love that a permanent family can provide.
Since Haiti is also a party to the Hague Adoption Convention, adoption requirements of both countries have to be followed. Americans who want to adopt internationally have a mountain of paperwork and process to endure, even before the adoption agency they contract with works with the host country to get them on a waiting list, which often takes years.
To adopt internationally, Americans must be at least 25 years old. If you’re married, you must jointly adopt the child. You must undergo a criminal background check; go through an exhaustive home study conducted by a licensed provider; provide your financial data and credit history; and undergo other scrutiny.
Furthermore, prospective parents must meet eligibility and suitability requirements as determined by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Once the prospective parents are in country, and the eligible child is identified for adoption, they are all required to be interviewed by the U.S. consulate in the host country.
Haitian law requires prospective adoptive parents to obtain a full and final adoption decree under Haitian law before the child can emigrate to the United States.
Haitian regulations require prospective parents to work through a U.S. adoption service provider authorized to operate in Haiti by its adoption authority. Private adoptions, where the prospective parents work directly with the biological parents or custodians, are prohibited, nor can prospective parents “select” a child on their own.
Haitian law requires that prospective parents prove that they are employed and financially stable. It also requires them to travel to Haiti before the adoption is finalized, and that for married couples (which can include same-sex couples), at least one member be at least 30 years old.
For a Haitian child to be eligible for adoption, the biological parents must have relinquished the child, be deceased, or be unknown. Then, and only then, can the state make the child available for international adoption.
As an adopted person, who married an adopted person, who together adopted four children internationally, my wife and I can attest to the fact that the process is frustrating, maddening, lengthy, emotionally draining, and extremely difficult.
Our children, like those of the Barretts, had unique medical and psychological needs. But we, like so many other people, persevered because we believe that orphans—of any color—need a loving, stable home.
Sadly, as Riley pointed out, there are “more black children in need of adoption, here and abroad, than there are black families who have expressed a willingness to take them.”
Liberals who oppose adoption in general, and interracial adoption in particular, are in the extreme minority, and their views, especially in 2020, are backwards and repulsive.
The Barretts should be applauded for adopting a sickly, malnourished orphan girl and an orphaned boy from Haiti.
They, like so many other adoptive parents, did so out of pure love and gave those children a better life than the ones they would have suffered in their birth country.


dailysignal--2020-10-01--Problematic Women: How Rep. Debbie Lesko Is Fighting for the Rights of All Women

Rep. Debbie Lesko , R-Ariz. , is a powerful voice for conservative women across America .
Lesko , the only female member of the House Freedom Caucus , joins “ Problematic Women ” to explain how she is working to defend women ’ s sports from the agenda of radical LGBTQ groups .
Lesko also shares her own journey into the pro-life movement and why she fights to protect the lives of the unborn .
Plus , Kelsey Bolar , a senior policy analyst at the Independent Women ’ s Forum , joins the show to discuss the attacks on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , why progressives are threatened by her nomination to the Supreme Court , and what we can expect during the Senate confirmation hearings .
And as always , we ’ ll be crowning our “ Problematic Woman of the Week.
” Listen to the podcast below or read the lightly edited transcript .
Lauren Evans : Welcome back to the show .
We are joined by Rep. Debbie Lesko of Arizona .
Representative Lesko , thank you so much for being on the show .
Rep. Debbie Lesko : Thanks for having me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : … If you look up “ problematic woman ” in the dictionary—when , eventually , it ’ ll be in there—your face , I think , would be right underneath it .
Lesko : I don ’ t know if that ’ s good or bad .
Evans : So how did you first gain an interest in policy and what led you to want to run for Congress ?
Lesko : Wow .
This was a long journey and I ’ ve come a long way .
So , I used @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who threatened my life multiple times and so , thankfully , I left that relationship and married a great new husband who I ’ ve been married to for a long time and had more children .
But it was rough .
It was rough along the way .
The last thing on my mind was being a congresswoman , I ’ ll tell you that .
I was just trying to make a living and support my young daughter because I was a single mom .
So , one thing led to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in my kids ’ schools .
Then I started getting involved in my city as a volunteer community worker .
Then I started getting involved in the Republican Party as a volunteer , and before you know it , I was elected an officer of the district , then the county , then the state , and then an opening came up in the state House of Representatives in Arizona and people suggested I run .
So I ran and I won , served there six years , got into a leadership position @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , then went over to the state Senate , got into leadership , and I was going to run for Senate president .
And then all of a sudden , my congressman resigned .
People encouraged me to run for Congress and here I am .
Now I ’ m flying on Air Force One and was one of eight members in the U.S. House of Representatives to serve on President [ Donald ] Trump ’ s impeachment defense team .
So life is good and God has blessed me .
Allen : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
… I think it ’ s just so special to hear someone ’ s personal story and how you come from these wild circumstances and then where you are now .
It ’ s just really awesome to see all the different seasons of life that as women we can experience and go through .
Within Congress , you serve on a number of different committees and caucuses , including the House Freedom Caucus .
Can you just tell us a little bit about the work of the House Freedom Caucus ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the only woman in it .
So , hey , good thing at least one woman is a representative in it .
It ’ s a good caucus .
It goes more in-depth into legislation , which I find very valuable .
To me , I want to learn everything about different pieces of legislation .
So I go to the conference meetings and learn about it there and of course , my staff teaches me or guides me on what the legislation does , but I like hearing all different perspectives .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for conservative fiscal values , conservative social values , and free markets , and so it ’ s a good group to belong to .
Evans : Well , Rep. Lesko , I ’ m such a fan of the House Freedom Caucus and I get to cover them with The Daily Signal a lot .
When Virginia told me about this interview , my first gut was , I want to break down why are you the only woman on the House Freedom Caucus ?
Why don ’ t women value these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much as the soft issues , such as abortion and things like that ?
Lesko : I don ’ t know why I ’ m the only woman , but I imagine it ’ s a factor—there ’ s only 13 voting Republican women in the entire U.S. Congress , right ?
So it ’ s all about numbers , I think .
And also , it ’ s hard .
It ’ s hard to raise money when you ’ re in the Freedom Caucus .
So when I first got here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ member of the Freedom Caucus before , back to the primary , Republican special election primary , because all of the Republicans of Arizona are members of the Freedom Caucus , right ?
And my predecessor was a member of the Freedom Caucus and I believed in it .
But it was tough .
I got some from other Republican members that weren ’ t really excited about the Freedom Caucus .
They gave me a glaring eye and wondered , “ What is this lady all about ?
” And also , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , quite frankly .
So I guess the reason that there aren ’ t more women in it is because there are only 13 of us , right ?
But I hear that we ’ re going to have more women members very soon after the election .
So it ’ s good to have some more women in the group .
Allen : You also co-chair the Congressional Caucus for Women ’ s Issues .
Women ’ s issues tend to be some of the most contentious , I think , at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ representing the female conservative perspective on that committee ?
Lesko : Well , I ’ m totally outnumbered , I ’ m the Republican co-chair of the Women ’ s Caucus .
And usually , when we go to meetings there ’ s maybe 30 Democrat women in the room and sometimes I ’ m the only Republican woman because of the scheduling and there ’ s only 13 Republican women in Congress , right ?
So sometimes they have really liberal issues that I totally don ’ t agree with , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tongue sometimes and listen .
I try to have an open mind .
But other times , I can agree with them .
I would say that I am pretty good friends with the co-chair , Brenda Lawrence , and she introduced me to Karen Bass .
We went out to dinner one time and Karen Bass serves on the Judiciary Committee .
So those relationships have gotten me to do bipartisan legislation with Karen Bass .
We just introduced one that passed out of Judiciary Committee that protects pregnant women that are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pro-life woman , so to me that was a win-win .
Evans : One of the biggest issues right now for women is women ’ s sports , the transgender issue where men who are biologically men now identify as women and want to play sports with people who are biologically women .
You have a bill called the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act .
Can you let us know what that will do if passed and what the trajectory of that looks like ?
Lesko : Yes .
Thank @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
My bill , which I co-sponsored , will basically protect women and girls .
Women and girls have fought so long for rights and the Democrats are really pushing to prioritize transgenders .
So their Equality Act , which they passed through the U.S. House of Representatives , which I voted no on and was quite vocally against , it ’ s called the Equality Act—sounds good , right ?
But it ’ s not equal .
It ’ s giving priority to transgenders and saying , OK , let ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
You ’ re a minor , right ?
And you think all of a sudden , you wake up one day and say , “ You know what ?
I really feel like a guy and I want to get a mastectomy or I want to get hormone therapy.
” Their bill actually prevents the parents from stepping in for their minor child and saying no .
The parents could actually be reported to child protective custody just for stepping up and trying to protect their daughter from this radical agenda , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And so this is another thing that was in the Equality Act .
The Equality Act that the Democrats pushed through the U.S. House of Representatives basically said , “ Under mandate of federal law , schools , organizations , churches , any public organization has to take in biological males that still have male body parts and if they say they ’ re a woman that particular moment and they relate to a girl or they say they ’ re a girl , they have to be allowed into girls and women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrong .
That ’ s discriminatory against women and girls .
It prioritizes transgenders over women and girls .
I think it ’ s wrong and that ’ s why I stood up to fight against it .
Allen : Why is this issue so critical beyond , let ’ s say , just high school girls that obviously want to compete fairly ?
How does this issue truly affect all Americans ?
Lesko : In the Democrats ’ version of the Equality Act , which they pushed through the U.S. House of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was vocally against it , it enshrines into law , enforces under government federal law for organizations to put biological men in the same shower as girls and women if they say that they happen to feel like a girl that day or they identify as a woman or a girl .
Under mandate of federal law , it says that domestic violence shelters have to take in biological males .
And some of these domestic violence shelters don ’ t have separate facilities for guys and women .
So this is just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Quite frankly , this is a subject that is uncomfortable for a lot of people .
It ’ s uncomfortable for Republicans to talk about , but I ’ m going to talk about it and I talk about it in business groups , too .
So let ’ s say I have different trade organizations .
First , I talk about their subject and then I bring this up and it ’ s uncomfortable to them , but I bring it up and I say , “ This is going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be put as an employer in these uncomfortable positions where you ’ re going to have a woman that says this isn ’ t right , but the federal law says you can ’ t do anything about it because you have to accept a biological male who identifies as a woman and put them right in next to a woman , ” or whatever .
This is just wrong , especially the part where it says that parents can ’ t even have a say over their minor child if the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know what ?
I feel like the opposite sex and I want a surgery to change my sex , ” and they ’ re a minor .
This is craziness .
Evans : Wow .
That is .
… What has this world come to ?
What ’ s going to be next ?
Lesko : That ’ s why I stand up and fight .
There ’ s too many people uncomfortable about talking about it , quite frankly .
And so , I ’ m on the Judiciary Committee , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ m the woman here that ’ s willing to speak up about it , so I ’ m the one that speaks out about it because somebody has to .
Evans : You know , Rep. Lesko , I think we have a lot of problematic listeners who definitely appreciate and value you standing up .
Another issue that we know you ’ re very passionate about is being a pro-life voice in Washington .
Where does that passion come from ?
Lesko : Oh man , because I was lied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pro-life .
I was , if you call it , the left calls it “ pro-choice.
” I call it “ for abortion , ” I guess , or “ anti-life , ” but I used to be like that , so I can relate to it .
I was lied to by Planned Parenthood .
Planned Parenthood said , “ Oh , it ’ s just a clump of cells.
” I think they said it looked like a tadpole .
It was actually when I got involved in the Republican Party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Arizona Republican Party who was very pro-life and then I volunteered to register voters at the Arizona State Fair and there was a booth very close to our Arizona Republican Party booth that was Arizona Right to Life .
And it had little miniatures of fetuses inside the womb .
And I was like , “ That ’ s not a clump of cells .
Those are little babies.
” And so I was converted .
I was converted .
I was like , “ They lied to me.
” And so now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because it ’ s wrong and Planned Parenthood continues to lie .
Do you know that the chairman of the Arizona Planned Parenthood political action committee just recently put out a tweet ?
It was outrageous .
In Arizona , we put out a Blue Alert .
The Department of Public Safety , which is law enforcement , state law enforcement , put out a Blue Alert because a law enforcement officer was attacked in Phoenix .
And this Planned Parenthood chairman put out a tweet , “ F the whole word , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” What is wrong with these people ?
Not only do they want to kill innocent babies—we have gone on the floor , Republicans have gone on the floor , including me , asking for a motion to say , “ OK , if a baby is born alive because the abortion didn ’ t work , it was a botched abortion , the baby was born alive , you need to give medical care to the baby.
” It ’ s called the Born-Alive Act .
The Democrats will not hear the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not only for killing innocent babies in the womb , they want to let babies that are born alive from a botched abortion die .
Now this chairman in Arizona is going after law enforcement and thinks it ’ s totally fine to kill law enforcement officers .
This is insane .
These people have to be stopped .
Allen : It is insane .
It makes zero sense .
The logic doesn ’ t follow .
But I am thankful for the fact that , representative , like yourself , it seems @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that revelation of waking up to the fact that an unborn child is a life and is deserving of life , but it still seems like overall , we need a cultural shift to where we as a society can get to a point where we say an unborn child has rights , mainly the right to life .
What do you think needs to happen in America for us as a society to be able to say that , that an unborn baby deserves the right to life ?
Lesko : President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ life and enacting rules and regulations that protect life .
People have said over and over again that he is the most pro-life president in modern history .
Also , because he is about to nominate the next Supreme Court justice [ President Donald Trump nominated U.S .
Circuit Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court Sept. 26 ] , well , this is a huge issue for pro-life issues .
We need another conservative justice on the court and this is a great opportunity for pro-life supporters .
Allen : Representative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us about any of the legislation that you ’ re working on right now that you ’ re particularly passionate about and really excited to put forth ?
Lesko : Boy , there ’ s a few pieces of legislation I ’ d really love to put forth .
Unfortunately , in the U.S. House of Representatives , Republicans are in the minority , so the Democrats set the entire agenda .
I did a bunch of immigration bills .
I ’ ve introduced a bunch of immigration bills , which are very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In fact , under coronavirus , it ’ s probably the No .
1 issue in Arizona is that we invite people to come here illegally , but we ’ re not a big fan , the majority of Arizonans do not believe in illegal immigration .
And … since I ’ m on Homeland Security Committee and they have authorization over the Border Patrol and over the wall and those type of things , I talked to Customs and Border Protection officials and [ Department of Homeland Security ] officials and said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ order to fix the broken immigration system ?
They gave me a list of things , so I introduced bills .
Well , they were sent to Judiciary Committee .
Unfortunately , [ Rep. ] Jerry Nadler , who is the Democrat chairman , he ’ s not going to hear them because he doesn ’ t believe in that .
Democrats believe in open borders .
So that ’ s one of the things .
The other thing is to continue to create legislation that grows jobs and the economy .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ myself and Democrats who want to raise our taxes and stifle the economy , raise more regulations .
Lesko : Republicans want lower taxes and less regulations and it works .
You saw it .
President Trump signed into law the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and we had the greatest economy going until coronavirus hit .
Unemployment was at record low levels for everyone , whites , blacks , Hispanics , Asians , everyone , it doesn ’ t matter what race .
And so President Trump and the Republicans are the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that .
I also want to improve education .
I really , really think that our students are falling behind in the United States .
We need to up the game .
We need to increase the standards .
We need to give more flexibility to the states and local governments and we definitely need more school choice .
That ’ s why I co-sponsored a bill that says the money follows the child .
That ’ s what I believe in .
Parents should be able to choose what ’ s the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know their child best .
Evans : Wow .
Well , we could talk all day , Rep. Lesko , but before we let you go , we ask every one of our guests here this question on the show because everybody has such an interesting answer and the question is , do you consider yourself a feminist , why or why not ?
Lesko : No .
I don ’ t think I would consider myself a feminist , but I do consider myself someone that believes in women ’ s rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights , and that ’ s why I stand up so strongly against giving transgenders priority over women .
Everyone should be equal .
I believe in equal treatment of everyone , not prioritizing one group of people over another group of people .
I stand up for women and equal rights , but I don ’ t want to do it the Democrat way , that ’ s for sure .
Allen : Rep. Lesko , thank you so much for your time today .
We just have loved having you on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we so appreciate all the work that you ’ re doing on the Hill and for America .
Lesko : Thank you .
I really appreciate it .

Rep. Debbie Lesko, R-Ariz., is a powerful voice for conservative women across America.
Lesko, the only female member of the House Freedom Caucus, joins “Problematic Women” to explain how she is working to defend women’s sports from the agenda of radical LGBTQ groups.
Lesko also shares her own journey into the pro-life movement and why she fights to protect the lives of the unborn.
Plus, Kelsey Bolar, a senior policy analyst at the Independent Women’s Forum, joins the show to discuss the attacks on federal appeals court Judge Amy Coney Barrett, why progressives are threatened by her nomination to the Supreme Court, and what we can expect during the Senate confirmation hearings.
And as always, we’ll be crowning our “Problematic Woman of the Week.”
Listen to the podcast below or read the lightly edited transcript.
Lauren Evans: Welcome back to the show. We are joined by Rep. Debbie Lesko of Arizona. Representative Lesko, thank you so much for being on the show.
Rep. Debbie Lesko: Thanks for having me. It’s exciting.
Evans: … If you look up “problematic woman” in the dictionary—when, eventually, it’ll be in there—your face, I think, would be right underneath it.
Lesko: I don’t know if that’s good or bad.
Virginia Allen: It’s good. It’s definitely good.
Evans: So how did you first gain an interest in policy and what led you to want to run for Congress?
Lesko: Wow. This was a long journey and I’ve come a long way.
So, I used to be married to an abusive ex-husband who threatened my life multiple times and so, thankfully, I left that relationship and married a great new husband who I’ve been married to for a long time and had more children.
But it was rough. It was rough along the way. The last thing on my mind was being a congresswoman, I’ll tell you that. I was just trying to make a living and support my young daughter because I was a single mom.
So, one thing led to the other. I started getting involved in my kids’ schools. Then I started getting involved in my city as a volunteer community worker. Then I started getting involved in the Republican Party as a volunteer, and before you know it, I was elected an officer of the district, then the county, then the state, and then an opening came up in the state House of Representatives in Arizona and people suggested I run.
So I ran and I won, served there six years, got into a leadership position and chair of Ways and Means Committee, then went over to the state Senate, got into leadership, and I was going to run for Senate president.
And then all of a sudden, my congressman resigned. People encouraged me to run for Congress and here I am. Now I’m flying on Air Force One and was one of eight members in the U.S. House of Representatives to serve on President [Donald] Trump’s impeachment defense team. So life is good and God has blessed me.
Allen: Wow. Amen. I love that. … I think it’s just so special to hear someone’s personal story and how you come from these wild circumstances and then where you are now. It’s just really awesome to see all the different seasons of life that as women we can experience and go through.
Within Congress, you serve on a number of different committees and caucuses, including the House Freedom Caucus. Can you just tell us a little bit about the work of the House Freedom Caucus?
Lesko: Sure. I’m the only woman in it. So, hey, good thing at least one woman is a representative in it. It’s a good caucus. It goes more in-depth into legislation, which I find very valuable.
To me, I want to learn everything about different pieces of legislation. So I go to the conference meetings and learn about it there and of course, my staff teaches me or guides me on what the legislation does, but I like hearing all different perspectives. And the Freedom Caucus is very much for conservative fiscal values, conservative social values, and free markets, and so it’s a good group to belong to.
Evans: Well, Rep. Lesko, I’m such a fan of the House Freedom Caucus and I get to cover them with The Daily Signal a lot. When Virginia told me about this interview, my first gut was, I want to break down why are you the only woman on the House Freedom Caucus? Why don’t women value these principles and think about economics just as much as the soft issues, such as abortion and things like that?
Lesko: I don’t know why I’m the only woman, but I imagine it’s a factor—there’s only 13 voting Republican women in the entire U.S. Congress, right? So it’s all about numbers, I think. And also, it’s hard. It’s hard to raise money when you’re in the Freedom Caucus.
So when I first got here, I had committed to being a member of the Freedom Caucus before, back to the primary, Republican special election primary, because all of the Republicans of Arizona are members of the Freedom Caucus, right? And my predecessor was a member of the Freedom Caucus and I believed in it.
But it was tough. I got some from other Republican members that weren’t really excited about the Freedom Caucus. They gave me a glaring eye and wondered, “What is this lady all about?” And also, it was hard to get donor money, quite frankly.
So I guess the reason that there aren’t more women in it is because there are only 13 of us, right? But I hear that we’re going to have more women members very soon after the election. So it’s good to have some more women in the group.
Allen: You also co-chair the Congressional Caucus for Women’s Issues. Women’s issues tend to be some of the most contentious, I think, at times. So what is it like representing the female conservative perspective on that committee?
Lesko: Well, I’m totally outnumbered, I’m the Republican co-chair of the Women’s Caucus. And usually, when we go to meetings there’s maybe 30 Democrat women in the room and sometimes I’m the only Republican woman because of the scheduling and there’s only 13 Republican women in Congress, right?
So sometimes they have really liberal issues that I totally don’t agree with, but I sit through them and bite my tongue sometimes and listen. I try to have an open mind. But other times, I can agree with them.
I would say that I am pretty good friends with the co-chair, Brenda Lawrence, and she introduced me to Karen Bass. We went out to dinner one time and Karen Bass serves on the Judiciary Committee.
So those relationships have gotten me to do bipartisan legislation with Karen Bass. We just introduced one that passed out of Judiciary Committee that protects pregnant women that are incarcerated. And I’m a pro-life woman, so to me that was a win-win.
Evans: One of the biggest issues right now for women is women’s sports, the transgender issue where men who are biologically men now identify as women and want to play sports with people who are biologically women.
You have a bill called the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act. Can you let us know what that will do if passed and what the trajectory of that looks like?
Lesko: Yes. Thank you so much for bringing that up. My bill, which I co-sponsored, will basically protect women and girls.
Women and girls have fought so long for rights and the Democrats are really pushing to prioritize transgenders. So their Equality Act, which they passed through the U.S. House of Representatives, which I voted no on and was quite vocally against, it’s called the Equality Act—sounds good, right? But it’s not equal.
It’s giving priority to transgenders and saying, OK, let’s say you’re a teenage girl. You’re a minor, right? And you think all of a sudden, you wake up one day and say, “You know what? I really feel like a guy and I want to get a mastectomy or I want to get hormone therapy.” Their bill actually prevents the parents from stepping in for their minor child and saying no.
The parents could actually be reported to child protective custody just for stepping up and trying to protect their daughter from this radical agenda, that she may change her mind.
And so this is another thing that was in the Equality Act. The Equality Act that the Democrats pushed through the U.S. House of Representatives basically said, “Under mandate of federal law, schools, organizations, churches, any public organization has to take in biological males that still have male body parts and if they say they’re a woman that particular moment and they relate to a girl or they say they’re a girl, they have to be allowed into girls and women’s sports.
That’s wrong. That’s discriminatory against women and girls. It prioritizes transgenders over women and girls. I think it’s wrong and that’s why I stood up to fight against it.
Allen: Why is this issue so critical beyond, let’s say, just high school girls that obviously want to compete fairly? How does this issue truly affect all Americans?
Lesko: In the Democrats’ version of the Equality Act, which they pushed through the U.S. House of Representatives and I voted against and I was vocally against it, it enshrines into law, enforces under government federal law for organizations to put biological men in the same shower as girls and women if they say that they happen to feel like a girl that day or they identify as a woman or a girl.
Under mandate of federal law, it says that domestic violence shelters have to take in biological males. And some of these domestic violence shelters don’t have separate facilities for guys and women. So this is just wrong. This is discriminatory against women.
Quite frankly, this is a subject that is uncomfortable for a lot of people. It’s uncomfortable for Republicans to talk about, but I’m going to talk about it and I talk about it in business groups, too.
So let’s say I have different trade organizations. First, I talk about their subject and then I bring this up and it’s uncomfortable to them, but I bring it up and I say, “This is going to affect you because you’re going to be put as an employer in these uncomfortable positions where you’re going to have a woman that says this isn’t right, but the federal law says you can’t do anything about it because you have to accept a biological male who identifies as a woman and put them right in next to a woman,” or whatever.
This is just wrong, especially the part where it says that parents can’t even have a say over their minor child if the minor child just decides, “You know what? I feel like the opposite sex and I want a surgery to change my sex,” and they’re a minor. This is craziness.
Evans: Wow. That is. … What has this world come to? What’s going to be next?
Lesko: That’s why I stand up and fight. There’s too many people uncomfortable about talking about it, quite frankly. And so, I’m on the Judiciary Committee, I’m on the Rules Committee. I’m the woman here that’s willing to speak up about it, so I’m the one that speaks out about it because somebody has to.
Evans: You know, Rep. Lesko, I think we have a lot of problematic listeners who definitely appreciate and value you standing up. Another issue that we know you’re very passionate about is being a pro-life voice in Washington. Where does that passion come from?
Lesko: Oh man, because I was lied to. I wasn’t always pro-life. I was, if you call it, the left calls it “pro-choice.” I call it “for abortion,” I guess, or “anti-life,” but I used to be like that, so I can relate to it.
I was lied to by Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood said, “Oh, it’s just a clump of cells.” I think they said it looked like a tadpole.
It was actually when I got involved in the Republican Party and there was a woman in the Arizona Republican Party who was very pro-life and then I volunteered to register voters at the Arizona State Fair and there was a booth very close to our Arizona Republican Party booth that was Arizona Right to Life. And it had little miniatures of fetuses inside the womb. And I was like, “That’s not a clump of cells. Those are little babies.” And so I was converted.
I was converted. I was like, “They lied to me.” And so now I’m very vocal about this because it’s wrong and Planned Parenthood continues to lie.
Do you know that the chairman of the Arizona Planned Parenthood political action committee just recently put out a tweet? It was outrageous.
In Arizona, we put out a Blue Alert. The Department of Public Safety, which is law enforcement, state law enforcement, put out a Blue Alert because a law enforcement officer was attacked in Phoenix. And this Planned Parenthood chairman put out a tweet, “F the whole word, F Blue Alert, your Blue Alert.”
What is wrong with these people? Not only do they want to kill innocent babies—we have gone on the floor, Republicans have gone on the floor, including me, asking for a motion to say, “OK, if a baby is born alive because the abortion didn’t work, it was a botched abortion, the baby was born alive, you need to give medical care to the baby.” It’s called the Born-Alive Act. The Democrats will not hear the bill.
So now they’re not only for killing innocent babies in the womb, they want to let babies that are born alive from a botched abortion die. Now this chairman in Arizona is going after law enforcement and thinks it’s totally fine to kill law enforcement officers. This is insane. These people have to be stopped.
Allen: It is insane. It makes zero sense. The logic doesn’t follow. But I am thankful for the fact that, representative, like yourself, it seems like more and more Americans are having that revelation of waking up to the fact that an unborn child is a life and is deserving of life, but it still seems like overall, we need a cultural shift to where we as a society can get to a point where we say an unborn child has rights, mainly the right to life.
What do you think needs to happen in America for us as a society to be able to say that, that an unborn baby deserves the right to life?
Lesko: President Trump has been so vocal about protecting life and enacting rules and regulations that protect life. People have said over and over again that he is the most pro-life president in modern history.
Also, because he is about to nominate the next Supreme Court justice [President Donald Trump nominated U.S. Circuit Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court Sept. 26], well, this is a huge issue for pro-life issues. We need another conservative justice on the court and this is a great opportunity for pro-life supporters.
Allen: Representative, looking forward, can you tell us about any of the legislation that you’re working on right now that you’re particularly passionate about and really excited to put forth?
Lesko: Boy, there’s a few pieces of legislation I’d really love to put forth. Unfortunately, in the U.S. House of Representatives, Republicans are in the minority, so the Democrats set the entire agenda.
I did a bunch of immigration bills. I’ve introduced a bunch of immigration bills, which are very important for the state of Arizona. In fact, under coronavirus, it’s probably the No. 1 issue in Arizona is that we invite people to come here illegally, but we’re not a big fan, the majority of Arizonans do not believe in illegal immigration.
And … since I’m on Homeland Security Committee and they have authorization over the Border Patrol and over the wall and those type of things, I talked to Customs and Border Protection officials and [Department of Homeland Security] officials and said, “What do you need in order to fix the broken immigration system?
They gave me a list of things, so I introduced bills. Well, they were sent to Judiciary Committee. Unfortunately, [Rep.] Jerry Nadler, who is the Democrat chairman, he’s not going to hear them because he doesn’t believe in that. Democrats believe in open borders. So that’s one of the things.
The other thing is to continue to create legislation that grows jobs and the economy. This is a huge difference between Republicans like myself and Democrats who want to raise our taxes and stifle the economy, raise more regulations.
Lesko: Republicans want lower taxes and less regulations and it works. You saw it. President Trump signed into law the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and we had the greatest economy going until coronavirus hit. Unemployment was at record low levels for everyone, whites, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, everyone, it doesn’t matter what race. And so President Trump and the Republicans are the ones that can get it back to that.
I also want to improve education. I really, really think that our students are falling behind in the United States. We need to up the game. We need to increase the standards. We need to give more flexibility to the states and local governments and we definitely need more school choice.
That’s why I co-sponsored a bill that says the money follows the child. That’s what I believe in. Parents should be able to choose what’s the best education for their child because they know their child best.
Evans: Wow. Well, we could talk all day, Rep. Lesko, but before we let you go, we ask every one of our guests here this question on the show because everybody has such an interesting answer and the question is, do you consider yourself a feminist, why or why not?
Lesko: No. I don’t think I would consider myself a feminist, but I do consider myself someone that believes in women’s rights, women’s and girls’ rights, and that’s why I stand up so strongly against giving transgenders priority over women.
Everyone should be equal. I believe in equal treatment of everyone, not prioritizing one group of people over another group of people. I stand up for women and equal rights, but I don’t want to do it the Democrat way, that’s for sure.
Allen: Rep. Lesko, thank you so much for your time today. We just have loved having you on the show and talking with you and we so appreciate all the work that you’re doing on the Hill and for America.
Lesko: Thank you. I really appreciate it.