[VIDEO] Bizarre Leftist Claims Parents Need Consent From Babies Before Changing Diapers

Leftists just continue to get stranger in their ideology and quest towards a completely totalitarian/government-controlled society.  But now, one bizarre woman claims that parents need consent from their babies before a diaper can be changed.

A fiction novel could never do justice to the ridiculousness of the modern liberal. This is evidenced in an interview conducted by ABC with a terrifyingly serious woman who claims parents should have to get consent from their babies before removing fecal matter from their behinds.  The woman who made the ridiculous claim is now under fire.

Deanne Carson, who describes herself as a “sexuality educator, speaker, and author” on Twitter says asking the babies permission would set up an atmosphere of “consent” from birth.

Don’t believe us? Have a look at the video:

 Not kidding – look:

She even admits the baby can’t actually respond with consent, but it’s the thought that counts.  “Of course the baby is not going to respond, ‘Yes mum, that’s awesome. I’d love to have my nappy changed.’ But if you leave a space, and wait for body language and wait to make eye contact, then you’re letting that child know that their response matters,” Carson says. 

What kind of body language are we waiting for here? A different response than a baby screaming because the feces stuck to their sensitive skin is irritating?  This woman is a lunatic and we aren’t the only ones who thought so.

LAD Bible reported that many people who saw the segment were completely in amazement at the level of irrationality displayed. People were left feeling pretty confused, shocked and annoyed by her comments, with one writing on Twitter: “If parents are getting advice from this woman about raising a baby then the baby should be removed from parents care.”

Another wrote: “What in the hell is WRONG with these people?”

Someone else said: “Must admit I was watching the whole interview open-mouthed and shaking my head when it was broadcast, and couldn’t believe the interviewer wasn’t remotely questioning some of the nonsense this lady was coming out with.

Sky News commentator Rowan Dean heard about Carson’s comments and was not happy, accurately slamming the segment as “lefty lunacy” on air. “Here we go, Ross,” Dean said to his co-presenter. But he seemed pretty lost for words by the segment, adding: “A consent for changing nappies – I think that might get a bit, uh… Anyway, I won’t go there.”

Suspending ABC News Reporter Brian Ross Over Misreporting?

[image: CNN]

Suspending him had nothing to do with falsifying a report on Trump and Michael Flynn, everything to do with getting caught red-handed, causing a furor at the same time – the network uncomfortable about making news about its fake news reporting.

All Western media operate the same way – disinformation, Big Lies and fake news standard practice on major issues, especially geopolitical ones, notably covering US-dominated NATO imperial wars of aggression, claiming they’re liberating ones, along with anything relating to Trump and Russia.

Ross is ABC’s chief investigative reporter, suspended for four weeks without pay – a meaningless slap on the wrist.

He falsely claimed former Trump national security advisor Michael Flynn would testify that candidate Trump directed him to make contact with Russia – his disinformation report typical of how Western media operate, why I call them scoundrels.

They suppress vital news, information, and analysis everyone has a right to know, operating as press agents for wealth, power and privilege, sanitizing their print, on air and online reporting.

What’s not reported is most important of all – why it’s suppressed.

In testimony given special council Robert Mueller’s witch-hunt inquiry, Flynn explained president-elect (not candidate) Trump instructed him to contact Russia, aiming to initiate a process for improving relations.

It was undermined by false accusations of Kremlin interference in America’s electoral process, along with phony claims of “Russian aggression” in Ukraine and nonexistent threats against other countries.

The fabricated Russiagate case hinges on proving illegal or improper Trump team collusion with Moscow during the presidential campaign. Not a shred of evidence suggests it.

Post-election, presidents and administration officials have direct contacts with numerous countries – part of their jobs, the way most nations operate.

ABC News retracted the story when caught red-handed lying. Otherwise, it would have stood as misreported.

Ross is no outlier. All establishment on air and print reporters operate the same way – suppressing hard truths on vital issues, lying to viewers and readers, what they’re instructed to do.

Suspending Ross for four weeks was laughable. He’ll be back in short order to misreport again. If he and others like him diverged from the official narrative, they’d be fired and replaced straightaway.

Western media lack credibility, alternative sources the only reliable ones, especially online, reporting real news, information and analysis – the antidote to media scoundrels’ misreporting.

The post Suspending ABC News Reporter Brian Ross Over Misreporting? appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.

Guess Who’s Behind Facebook’s New ‘Fake News’ Detector?

December 18, 2016   |   admintam

(RPI) Are you terrified of “fake news”? Don’t worry, the elites are doing something to combat it!

As anyone active on the Internet is aware, there have been increasing calls for social media companies (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) to address the mostly manufactured crisis of “fake news” making its way onto people’s computer screens. The mainstream media, which finds itself increasingly viewed as untrustworthy by the American public, has latched on to the idea that the relatively free flow of ideas and opinions on the Internet actually poses a threat to our well-being.

As could be expected, political leaders jumped in early on this attack on independent media. In October, President Obama urged Americans to avoid independent news sources and stick with the mainstream, urging a kind of filter for information. He told an audience in Pittsburgh:

There has to be, I think, some sort of way in which we can sort through information that passes some basic truthiness tests and those that we have to discard. … The answer is obviously not censorship, but it’s creating places where people can say ‘this is reliable’ and I’m still able to argue safely about facts and what we should do about it.

Hillary Clinton, after losing the election, sounded even more bitter about non-mainstream media sources, warning the Senate about the, “epidemic of malicious fake news and false propaganda that flooded social media over the past year.”

To Hillary, it was personal: independent media could be deadly. Said the defeated candidate earlier this month:

This isn’t about politics or partisanship. Lives are at risk — lives of ordinary people just trying to go about their days to do their jobs, contribute to their communities. It’s a danger that must be addressed, and addressed quickly.

Lives are at risk! It was only a matter of time before some of these social media behemoths embraced the requests of the elites they most identify with. Yesterday, Facebook announced that it was going to employ a variety of “fact-checking” organizations to make sure no “fake news” made it onto people’s Facebook news feeds. So Facebook will be using Snopes, PolitiFact, Factcheck.org, ABC News, and the Associated Press, among others, to check its members’ postings and label them as “fake news” if these organizations determine them to be so.

One problem: these organizations themselves are among the biggest purveyors of real fake news! PolitiFact has a whole website dedicated to exposing the organization’s biases. The popular site Snopes is in fact run by a husband and wife out of their home in California. Neither have any background in research or investigative techniques — they just use Google to make their determinations. As for AP and ABC News — they are mainstream media outlets with no clean hands when it comes to propagating fake stories. In fact the Associated Press has a long history of coordinating with governments to produce fake news.

Political fact checking is not a science. On the contrary, more often than not it carries with it all the biases of any hyper-partisan organization.

Never fear. A group of selfless and unbiased philanthropists have stepped forward to offer millions of dollars to assist these “fact-checkers” in their efforts to ferret out and disappear anything they determine to be “fake news.” It seems rather curious, however, that these donors are all in fact in one way or other completely beholden to Hillary Clinton and the left-interventionists of the Democratic Party.

Who are they? George Soros, otherwise known as Hillary’s sugar daddy. EBay founder Pierre Omidyar who’s given more than $30 million to the Clintons and their charities. Google — “in like Flynn” for Hillary. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. And the commie/neocon National Endowment for Democracy (which, as a government-funded entity, will be using our own money to censor news it deems harmful to us).

These are the people who will decide what you will see on Facebook. Are you happy to be thusly protected?

---

This article (Guess Who’s Behind Facebook’s New ‘Fake News’ Detector?) by Daniel McAdams originally appeared on RonPaulInstitute.org and was used with permission. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.