The Patriot Post Digest 8-25-2016

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 8-25-2016
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

Mid-Day Digest

Aug. 25, 2016

THE FOUNDATION

“The policy or advantage of [immigration] taking place in a body (I mean the settling of them in a body) may be much questioned; for, by so doing, they retain the Language, habits and principles (good or bad) which they bring with them.” —George Washington (1794)

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

30,000 From Terror Hot Spots Crossed Border Last Year1

In March, Hillary Clinton assured us, “I think we’ve done a really good job securing the border. I think that those who say we haven’t are not paying attention to everything that was done the last 15 years under President Bush and President Obama.” That same month, Barack Obama declared the Islamic State is “not an existential threat to us.” Joe Biden echoed that statement this week, telling The Atlantic, “Terrorism is a real threat, but it’s not an existential threat to the existence of the United States of America.” Democrats keep telling us we have nothing to worry about. But the facts tell us otherwise.

Army Col. Lisa A. Garcia, a representative of the U.S. Southern Command, just revealed2, “Networks that specialize in smuggling individuals from regions of terrorist concern, mainly from the Afghanistan-Pakistan region, the Middle East, and East Africa, are indeed a concern for SOUTHCOM and other interagency security partners who support our country’s national security.” Alarmingly, she added, “In 2015, we saw a total of 331,000 migrants enter the southwestern border between the U.S. and Mexico, [and] of that we estimate more than 30,000 of those were from countries of terrorist concern [emphasis added].”

To give this perspective, consider that a remarkable 11% of last year’s border-crossers are reasonably suspected by counterterrorism officials of being affiliated with militant groups. The fact that some 30,000 individuals — those who the Obama administration would deceptively call “lone wolves” — entered the country last year to possibly plot attacks is concrete evidence that we are not doing “a really good job securing the border.”

Those Chemical Weapons Assad Destroyed? He Used Them.3

In August 2012, Barack Obama warned Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, “A red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized.” By September 2013, Obama was denying he set a red line, saying, “The world set a red line.” Translation: The line was gone. After reports that Assad had crossed that line, Obama simply didn’t want to enforce it. Yesterday, we reported why4: Iran was ready to nuke the nuclear deal if Obama messed with mullah-buddy Assad.

Recall also that Secretary of State John Kerry made an offhand remark in September 2013 about how Assad “could turn over every single bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in the next week” in order to avoid a U.S. strike. Assad’s other enforcer, Vladimir Putin, happily took Kerry up on the foolish comment, offering a deal5 to oversee the destruction of all of Syria’s chemical weapons.

Predictably, that didn’t work out as Obama and Kerry might have hoped. Yesterday, a UN investigation concluded that the Syrian military conducted chemical weapons attacks on at least two occasions — after those weapons were supposedly destroyed. There were other attacks as well, but the UN couldn’t conclusively determine the perpetrators. Now Syria faces possible sanctions from the UN Security Council, though Russia has veto power. “It is essential that the members of the Security Council come together to ensure consequences for those who have used chemical weapons in Syria,” U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power said in a statement. “We strongly urge all states to support strong and swift action by the Security Council.” Assad should stay tuned for a strongly worded letter of rebuke.

Who Spiked the EpiPen?6

Teddy Roosevelt the Trust Buster must be rolling in his grave over news of the recent spike in the price of the life-saving EpiPen. Mylan, the drug company that produces the popular treatment for severe allergic reactions, has steadily raised the price of the device by over 400% since 2008. A double pack of the device cost $100 in 2008, but will now set you back more than $600. The EpiPen has been around since the 1970s and has a low production cost, but due to the lack of competition Mylan has effectively cornered the market and taken advantage by increasing the price exponentially. The fault lies not with other companies attempting to compete, but with Food and Drug Administration regulations. As The Wall Street Journal notes7, “The FDA maintains no clear and consistent principles for generic drug-delivery devices.” As a result, competing drug companies have no standard by which to measure drug-delivery system compliance when seeking to produce a similar product. Effectively, the FDA has helped to secure Mylan’s monopoly on the EpiPen.

Hillary Clinton recently waded into the matter, saying she would require all drug makers to “prove that any additional costs are linked to additional patient benefits and better value.” Once again, Hillary’s socialist instincts have missed the mark — more regulations or price controls won’t work. Clinton conveniently blames “Big Pharma,” side stepping the real issue of government over-regulation in order to push for even more government involvement in and control of health care.

There is one other interesting angle to this story. Mylan’s CEO is Heather Bresch, who is the daughter of West Virginia Democrat Senator Joe Manchin. Manchin has been somewhat hesitant to give his full support to Hillary’s run for the White House, as she is no friend of his state’s coal industry. It’s a good bet that Hillary’s calling out of Mylan is more than just politically pandering — it could be a shot across the bow warning Manchin to stay in line.

Don’t Miss Alexander’s Column

Read The Clinton Crime Syndicate8. The essential facts about Hillary Clinton’s “ethical lapses” — corrupt activities that should render her ineligible for office, if not eligible for prison.

If you’d like to receive Alexander’s Column by email, update your subscription here9.

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

Larry Elder: Trump Speaks, Media Translates10
Victor Davis Hanson: Diversity: History’s Pathway to Chaos11
Michelle Malkin: Leo DiCaprio’s Dirty Dollars12

For more, visit Right Opinion13.

TOP HEADLINES

Kabul’s American University Attacked, Killing at Least 1214
U.S. Destroyer Harassed by Iranian Patrol Boats15
Clinton Foundation Rethinks Changes16

For more, visit Patriot Headline Report17.

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
‘Born This Way’? New Study Debunks LGBT Claims18

By Louis DeBroux

Among leftists, it is at convenient times an accepted fact (“settled science,” you might say) that homosexuals and transgendered people are “born that way” — that their sexual attractions or gender identities are not the product of choice, but a matter of genetics. (When that’s not convenient, of course, it’s a perfectly acceptable “life choice.”) A new report, instantly controversial, torpedoes that understanding of homosexuality and gender dysphoria, the medical term for transgenderism.

The report, entitled “Sexuality and Gender: Findings from the Biological, Psychological, and Social Sciences,” is co-authored by two of the most well respected experts on mental health and human sexuality. Dr. Paul McHugh, described as “arguably the most important American psychiatrist of the last half century,” is a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the prestigious Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, and served for 25 years as psychiatrist in chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital. And Dr. Lawrence Mayer, Psychiatry Department scholar-in-residence at Johns Hopkins University, is a professor of statistics and biostatistics at Arizona State University.

While, not surprisingly, many on the Left and in the LGBT “community” immediately raged against the report as anti-LGBT, it should be noted that Johns Hopkins was the first medical facility in the U.S. to perform sex-reassignment surgery, and did so for decades until a growing body of peer-reviewed studies, including an analysis of how Hopkins' own transgendered patients fared over time, led the hospital to end those types of surgeries. Furthermore, McHugh is no far right-wing ideologue or Bible-thumper; he’s a self-described “politically liberal” Democrat.

Yet it was his long-term experience with patients who suffer from gender dysphoria that led him to his conclusions, summarized in a report that analyzed more than 200 peer reviewed studies. McHugh and Mayer are also very up front about what the science does and does not show. They freely admit the gaps in the available research, which they argue underscores the need for more research before establishing medical standards, public policy guidelines, and laws, based on “settled science” that is not at all settled.

So what did the study find? A few excerpts19:

“The belief that sexual orientation is an innate, biologically fixed human property — that people are ‘born that way’ — is not supported by scientific evidence.

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 8-25-2016
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

Likewise, the belief that gender identity is an innate, fixed human property independent of biological sex — so that a person might be a ‘man trapped in a woman’s body’ or ‘a woman trapped in a man’s body’ — is not supported by scientific evidence.

Only a minority of children who express gender-atypical thoughts or behavior will continue to do so into adolescence or adulthood. There is no evidence that all such children should be encouraged to become transgender, much less subjected to hormone treatments or surgery.

Non-heterosexual and transgender people have higher rates of mental health problems (anxiety, depression, suicide), as well as behavioral and social problems (substance abuse, intimate partner violence), than the general population. Discrimination alone does not account for the entire disparity.”

One of the most shocking findings in the report is that not only do people who suffer from gender dysphoria experience far higher rates of social pathologies (depression, substance abuse, suicide) than the general population, but sex-reassignment surgery does not offer the relief those on the Left claim. One study20 finds that “compared to [the general population], sex-reassigned individuals were about five times more likely to attempt suicide and about 19 times more likely to die by suicide.” The study finds a staggering 41% of transgendered individuals will attempt suicide in their lifetime.

The duo investigated the underlying causes of these tragic statistics, and found that while “stressors like stigma and prejudice account for much of the additional suffering observed in these subpopulations … [this theory] does not seem to offer a complete explanation for the disparities in the outcomes.” Even in social environments where transgendered people are accepted, they still suffer from above-normal rates of these social pathologies. McHugh and Mayer encourage additional research be done to study the correlation between childhood sexual abuse and sexual orientation (studies have shown non-heterosexuals to be two to three times more likely to have experienced childhood sexual abuse as compared to heterosexuals).

Far from offering condemnation or judgment, they stress the need for greater understanding of the science behind gender dysphoria, and a more thoughtful, science-based approached to treating it. “More research is needed to uncover the causes of the increased rates of mental health problems in the LGBT subpopulations,” McHugh and Mayer say, calling on society to work to “alleviate suffering and promote human health and flourishing.”

All the more reason to base medical treatment and public policy on sound science, which is not currently the case. The authors declare they are “disturbed and alarmed by the severity and irreversibility of some interventions being publicly discussed and employed for children. … We are concerned by the increasing tendency toward encouraging children with gender identity issues to transition to their preferred gender through medical and then surgical procedures.” The pair notes, “There is little scientific evidence for the therapeutic value of interventions that delay puberty or modify the secondary sex characteristics of adolescents.”

The Obama administration has used (and abused) its vast power to dismiss the concerns of parents, policymakers and medical professionals in implementing policy in the furtherance of its ideological goal — forced social acceptance of gender dysphoria as normal, all under the guise of medical science.

Part of that effort was Obama’s announcement21 earlier this year that schools receiving federal funding were prohibited from requiring students to use the restroom and shower facilities of their birth sex, while threatening a loss of funding for any school that didn’t comply with his imperial decree. Essentially, this meant boys who think they are girls would get to shower with female classmates.

Luckily, U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor has injected some sanity into the debate, issuing an injunction against implementation of this policy, stating that Obama exceeded his authority22 in his attempt to reinterpret Title IX. As O'Connor said, “It cannot be disputed that the meaning of the term ‘sex’ [in Title IX] meant the biological and anatomical differences between male and female students as determined by their birth.”

Gender dysphoria is a real and debilitating problem for a tiny minority of the population, and we should treat those who suffer from it compassionately23. At the same time, we do not show true compassion by pretending it is not an illness, or by encouraging those who suffer from it to embrace and celebrate it.

MORE ANALYSIS FROM THE PATRIOT POST

Elitist Contempt for Cause and Effect24 — The progressive globalist agenda portends a grim future that must be forcefully challenged.
ObamaCare Near Collapse in TN25 — Huge rate increases coming in 2017, and the exchange isn’t doing so well.
Louisianans Show Charity in Face of Storm26 — Instead of pointing fingers, they offered a hand up.

OPINION IN BRIEF

Larry Elder: “It isn’t that Donald Trump does not say things that are cringe-worthy. It’s that his opponent, Hillary Rodham Clinton, says and does things even more cringe-worthy. … Democrats routinely say vulgar, bigoted, divisive, outrageous things while getting a toll-free pass. It wasn’t Donald Trump, but Donna Brazile, then Al Gore’s campaign manager, who said Republicans have a ‘white-boy attitude.’ It wasn’t Donald Trump, but Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, who said, after Hurricane Katrina, ‘George (W.) Bush let people die on rooftops in New Orleans because they were poor and because they were black.’ It wasn’t Donald Trump, but Vice President Joe Biden, who, before a mostly black audience, criticized then-Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney and Republican resistance to Wall Street regulation, saying: ‘He’s going to let the big banks once again write their own rules — unchain Wall Street! They’re going to put y'all back in chains!’ It wasn’t Trump, but then-Sen. Hillary Clinton, who told a black church audience, ‘When you look at the way the (Republican-majority) House of Representatives has been run, it has been run like a plantation — and you know what I’m talking about!’ It wasn’t Donald Trump, but Debbie Wasserman Schultz, then the chair of the Democratic National Committee, who said that Republicans ‘want to literally drag us all the way back to Jim Crow laws.’ … It wasn’t Donald Trump, but Howard Dean, then-chair of the DNC, who referred to the Republican Party as ‘the white’ party.‘”

SHORT CUTS

The BIG lie: “I know there is a lot of smoke and there is no fire.” —Hillary Clinton on the latest revelations27 of pay-to-play at the Clinton Foundation/State Department

Friendly fire, part I: “If Hillary Clinton is inaugurated in January, there will be no more vital work for her than being president. The continued existence of the Clinton Foundation will be a distraction that America cannot afford.” —USA Today editorial board

Friendly fire, part II: “After promising to avoid any conflict or appearance of conflict, Ms. Clinton left ample room for perceptions that access to the Clinton Foundation could enable access to the government. … Should Ms. Clinton win, all of that work and all of the foundation’s assets should be spun off to an organization with no ties to the first family.” —Washington Post editorial board

Friendly fire, part III: “The Clintons should move now to end donations to the foundation, and make plans to shut it down in November. Even if they’ve done nothing illegal, the foundation will always look too much like a conflict of interest for comfort.” —Boston Globe editorial board

For the record: “Hillary Clinton is a bigot who sees people of color only as votes, not as human beings worthy of a better future. She’s going to do nothing for African-Americans, she’s going to do nothing for the Hispanics. She’s only going to take care of herself, her husband, her consultants, her donors. These are the people she cares about.” —Donald Trump

Non Compos Mentis: “No, I’m not responsible for any partisanship. I’ve tried my best to get things done, but it’s hard when you spend all your time trying to overcome filibusters.” —Harry Reid

And last… “Four years ago, Obama and Clinton were making Romney look like a warmonger when he warned about Putin’s ambitions. Today they are trying to make Trump look naive for thinking he can work with Russia.” —Gary Bauer

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.