Although the legacy media regularly hail Critical Race Theory proponents, left-wing feminists, and themselves, media coverage ignores that all these extremists have one thing in common: They’re losers. Faced with discouraging news of left-wing overreach, the legacy media ignored or misreported multiple stories this week that reveal the ways traditional citizens are winning the war against left-wing extremism everywhere from the universities to the halls of Congress and the offices of the Biden administration.
Here are three such stories:
1. Anti-Christian administrators at the University of Iowa must pay Christians $2 million for unconstitutional, anti-Christian viewpoint discrimination
The University of Iowa had to pay nearly $2 million in settlements to two Christian groups it attempted to kick off campus, because they held to traditional, Judeo-Christian moral teachings.
The university, as well as some administrators in their personal capacity, have been ordered to settle up with the university’s chapter of two Christian ministries: Business Leaders in Christ and InterVarsity Christian Fellowship. The ruling awards BLinC $1.37 million in attorneys’ costs, while IVF won $20,000 in real damages, in addition to more than half-a-million dollars in lawyers’ fees.
The controversy began when a homosexual student applied for a leadership position with Business Leaders in Christ, which turned him down because he could not endorse its statement of faith and beliefs, including its provision that marriage is exclusively the union of one man and one woman. He complained to the University of Iowa, which accused the Christian organization of violating the university’s Human Rights Policy and the Iowa Civil Rights Act.
A judge pointed out that the university targeted the evangelical business group while dozens of groups held similar views. Rather than reverse its discrimination, the university responded by deregistering 38 other student groups, including InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, Hillel, and the Muslim Students Association.
While university officials banned students who believed their religions’ traditional moral teachings, administrators took no action against a campus group started by the student who was denied a leadership position with BLinC (a group he named “Love Works”), which requires its leaders to sign a “gay-affirming statement of Christian faith.” InterVarsity sued the university in 2018.
An Obama-appointed federal judge, Stephanie Rose, ruled that university officials violated students’ constitutional rights and denied them qualified immunity. That view was upheld by a Trump-appointed judge this summer.
“We are hard-pressed to find a clearer example of viewpoint discrimination,” wrote Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Jonathan Allen Kobes, a Trump appointee, on behalf of a three-judge panel in July. “The University and individual defendants turned a blind eye to decades of First Amendment jurisprudence or they proceeded full speed ahead knowing they were violating the law.”
In July, a federal judge ruled the university unconstitutionally “targeted religious groups for differential treatment under the human rights policy — while carving out exemptions and ignoring other violative groups with missions they presumably supported.”
Administrators at a public university, whose salaries are paid by taxpayers in conservative Iowa, felt they could silence Christians, Jews, and Muslims who believe in biblical morality. The effort backfired — and cost its perpetrators. It also changed the law.
In March 2019, Governor Kim Reynolds (R) signed a law stating that “a public institution of higher education shall not deny any benefit or privilege to a student organization based on the student organization’s requirement that the leaders of the student organization agree to and support the student organization’s beliefs.”
Despite the significance of the ruling, a Google search turned up nothing from The New York Times, Reuters, NBC News, or CBS News.
The Washington Post and ABC News reprinted the Associated Press story, which buried the fact that “the university had violated their constitutional rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion” in the sixth paragraph. The absurd lead sentence — “A state panel agreed Monday to spend nearly $2 million to settle two federal lawsuits brought against the University of Iowa in 2017 after a religious group denied a gay student a leadership role” — makes it sound as though the university paid the damages because of the Christian groups’ actions against a homosexual student, not its unconstitutional act of moral imperialism.
This story shows that, even in a secular society, Christians can stand up for their faith’s unbroken 2,000-year-long moral teachings, fight for their constitutional rights against well-funded opponents, and win. No wonder the legacy media did everything they could to suppress it.
2. Leftists lose battle to force women into the military draft
An effort to force America’s young women to register for the military draft has been turned back, at least for now. Senate Democrats — and a few Republicans — included a provision that would potentially require women to join men in the ranks of the unwillingly enlisted in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a must-pass military funding bill.
Republican President Richard Nixon abolished the draft on January 27, 1973, but men aged 18 through 25 must still register with the Selective Service System, in case politicians again authorize a war so unpopular that people must be forced to fight in it. Equity-obsessed feminist activists insist that denying women the right to be forced into a kill-or-be-killed position violates women’s rights. As Military.com reported:
In July, the Senate Armed Services Committee voted 21-5 to add women to the draft registration system, with seven Republicans among the “yes” votes. The House Armed Services Committee approved the change in September in a 35-24 vote, with four Republicans supporting it.
The committee approval came after a congressionally mandated commission last year recommended draft registration be expanded to include women, calling it a “necessary and fair step.”
Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) led the fight against the measure, along with Senator Mike Lee (R-UT). Chuck Schumer removed the provision from the NDAA this week. “We should not draft women, and I am glad that my efforts with Sen. Hawley have made that clear,” said Senator Lee upon hearing the news. Curiously, the New York Times, The Washington Post, NBC and ABC appear not to have run a stand-alone story about the repeal. CNN, MSNBC, and CBS News appear not to have reported the story at all.
Despite the fact that, by definition, no one wants to be drafted, Democrats have spent decades trying to send young women to basic training. Most recently, congressional Democrats simply proclaimed that the Equal Rights Amendment, which went down to ignominious defeat in 1982, had actually been ratified by the states. Opponents of the ERA, especially the late Phyllis Schlafly, long warned that the amendment would require women to be drafted alongside men.
Congressional Democrats legislatively flirted with a female draft during the George W. Bush administration. Then-Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) introduced a bill in 2002 to reinstate the draft. (It was later voted down 402-2, with Rangel not voting for his own amendment.)
The Supreme Court upheld the all-male draft in 1981’s Rockster v. Goldberg, ruling that “since women are excluded from combat service by statute or military policy, men and women are simply not similarly situated for purposes of a draft.” But President Bill Clinton removed the “risk rule” barring women from training for combat positions, and President Barack Obama formally allowed the military to place women in the deadliest positions in December 2015.
Thus, Presidents Clinton and Obama vitiated the Supreme Court’s rationale for allowing the government to exclude women from the draft.
Attempts to promote or expand the draft fly in the face of the military’s statements that conscription produces poor recruits. As this author has reported:
Military brass almost universally oppose the draft, stating the quality and reliability of recruits suffer under a conscripted army. Conscription also drives up military costs, with higher turnover and its attendant mandatory training investments. A Reagan administration report published [39] years ago noted reinstating the draft would raise military costs by $1 billion a year in 1982 dollars. Commanders also viewed the precipitous decline in military discipline as a by-product of the draft.
A bipartisan coalition of congressmen — Senators Rand Paul (R-KY) and Ron Wyden (D-OR), joined by Reps. Rodney David (R-IL) and Pete DeFazio (D-OR) — introduced a bill to abolish Selective Service. “It has been nearly 50 years since the draft was last used. I’ve long stated that if a war is worth fighting, Congress will vote to declare it and people will volunteer,” said Senator Paul. “This outdated government program no longer serves a purpose and should be eliminated permanently.”
3. President Biden withdraws former Communist appointee who wanted to bankrupt energy companies, nationalize banking
President Joe Biden’s handpicked nominee for U.S. Comptroller of the Currency, Saule Omarova, had to withdraw after her extremist positions in favor of bankrupting U.S. industries and partially nationalizing the banking system became known.
True, the legacy media reported on her withdrawal (although a Google search seems to indicate that CBS News did not cover the story). But their coverage entirely elided the real reason Republicans, and some Democrats, opposed her nomination: Her intention to bankrupt disfavored U.S. industries, to nationalize banking, and her sympathy for the former USSR. “Here what I’m thinking about is primarily coal industry and oil and gas industry,” she said. “We want them to go bankrupt if we want to tackle climate change.” That was one of many controversies engulfing the far-Left nominee, as The Daily Wire reported:
Omarova’s nomination originally made waves after the discovery of posts displaying apparent sympathy toward the fallen Soviet Union and its alleged gender equality. Omarova has also called for the bankruptcy of oil and gas companies to fight climate change, argued for the Federal Reserve to manage consumer bank deposits, and drafted a thesis entitled “Karl Marx’s Economic Analysis and the Theory of Revolution in Das Kapital” during her college years.
“I don’t know whether to call you professor or comrade,” quipped the quick-witted Senator John Kennedy (R-LA) during their confirmation hearing.
Instead, the legacy media claimed Republicans opposed the native of Kazakhstan because of her birthplace in the former Soviet Union. MSNBC portrayed her as the victim of a “Red Scare campaign.” The New York Times blamed her withdrawal on “lobbyists” who “began to oppose her almost as soon as her nomination was announced,” and claims that “Omarova’s Soviet childhood meant that she could not be trusted.”
“Republicans in Congress mimicked the lobbyists’ criticisms,” the Times stated.
The Washington Post, which mentioned opposition from Democratic senators, blamed “an uncharacteristically fierce campaign against her nomination from the banking industry.”
The Associated Press helpfully pointed out in the third sentence of its story, “If confirmed, she would be the first woman and person of color to run the 158-year-old agency.” It buried the substance of her writings, which it called “ambitious,” in the ninth paragraph.
That’s still better than NBC News, which only mentioned her writings while quoting allegations from Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) that “powerful interests” had “distorted” her views. Even that beats the execrable coverage of CNN, which did not mention her controversial writings or positions at all.
None mentioned her stated desire to bankrupt U.S. energy companies during a time of skyrocketing gas and home heating costs.
Those three stories show radicals attempting to impose a form of cultural imperialism on the American people — and losing handily. Americans should circulate these hopeful stories to one another, until all of the harassed silent majority catch the vision of victory.
The views expressed in this piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.