Gates-Backed School Promotes Plan to Turn Teen Boys Against Meat

A school supported by the Gates Foundation is initiating a campaign aimed at changing how teenage boys view meat, associating it with masculinity. The goal is to shift dietary choices among American males aged 16 to 24 through targeted marketing.

Target Audience: The campaign is specifically focused on young males, influencing them through fitness influencers and podcasters who associate meat with masculinity.

Marketing Strategy: The organization aims to reshape cultural perceptions around meat and promote plant-based diets by partnering with trusted figures within the target demographic.

Long-term Impact: The school’s co-founder believes that changing young men's views on meat will influence their future diets and those of their children.

Existing Campaigns: Current programs like "Plants for the Win" already promote plant-based eating by appealing to gym culture and using fitness-related messaging.

Public Sector Involvement: The school also engages with European policies promoting plant proteins in public institutions like schools and military catering, proposing that these institutions adopt sustainability criteria when purchasing food.

The initiative reflects a broader effort to alter dietary habits by targeting cultural identities and partnerships with influential community figures. By focusing on young men, the campaign aims to create a significant shift in dietary practices. 

https://nataliegwinters.substack.com/p/gates-backed-school-promotes-plan?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=3382126&post_id=216208858&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=6dl2nb&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Dems Promise An Impeach-O-Rama Next Year

The editorial from Issues & Insights discusses potential impeachment strategies the Democratic Party may pursue if they gain the majority in Congress. Instead of focusing on pressing issues, they seem to prioritize using impeachment as a political tool against Trump administration officials.

Impeachment as a Strategy: Democrats have voiced intentions to impeach several Trump Cabinet officials to hold them "accountable." However, critics argue their motives may be more about crippling the administration than ensuring accountability.

Targeted Officials: Potential targets for impeachment include War Secretary Pete Hegseth, Education Secretary Linda McMahon, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. The goal is to target officials who are not aligned with the Democratic agenda.

Political Consequences: Some Democrats recognize that impeaching Donald Trump himself may backfire, as it could energize Republican voters heading into elections. Thus, they are focusing on impeaching Cabinet members instead.

Historical Context: Only two Cabinet officials have been impeached in U.S. history. These past impeachments did not lead to convictions, raising questions about their effectiveness.

Democratic Disagreement: Not all Democrats support this approach. Senator Peter Welch has criticized the focus on impeachment, suggesting that the party should prioritize issues like affordability.

Potential Effects of Impeachment: The mere threat of impeachment could stifle agency work and shake up leadership in federal departments, as seen in past cases.

Future Speculation: If Democrats gain control of the House, they may initiate several impeachment proceedings, as suggested by House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and other party members.

The possibility of Democrats using impeachment to challenge Trump administration officials raises significant concerns about political motives and the prioritization of governance in Congress. While some party members caution against this approach, the push for accountability appears to be overshadowed by a desire to retaliate against Trump's policies and personnel. The emphasis seems less on addressing affordability issues, suggesting a shift in focus that could impact legislative effectiveness. 

https://issuesinsights.com/2026/09/22/dems-promise-an-impeach-o-rama-next-year/

How Bill Gates’ Billions Shape US Medical Research

 Bill Gates, known for his philanthropic work after stepping down from Microsoft, has recently faced criticism due to his connections with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and scrutiny over his relationships with women. This summary explores the potential influence of Gates and his foundation on U.S. health policy, particularly through his significant financial contributions to federal health agencies.

1. Philanthropic Influence: For nearly 25 years, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has donated hundreds of millions to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), raising concerns about how Gates' financial power is shaping U.S. health strategies to benefit his interests.

2. Investing in Health: The foundation seeks financial growth through investments, including stakes in vaccine companies. These investments blur lines between profit-making and the foundation’s health-related missions, affecting policies in vaccine development, particularly during the COVID pandemic.

3. Government Collaboration: Gates has influenced U.S. biomedical research by aligning with NIH officials rather than relying on traditional lobbying. Evidence suggests that the NIH prioritized projects initiated or supported by Gates, raising concerns over conflicts of interest.

4. Notable Donations: In 2003, the Gates Foundation donated $200 million to the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH), changing NIH priorities and ensuring that Gates had oversight over funded projects. His close partnerships with NIH allowed joint workshops and collaborations on health issues.

5. Controversial Projects: Gates has advocated for gene drive technology to control disease-carrying mosquitoes, which is controversial due to ecological concerns. Projects funded by Gates in various countries have met resistance, indicating potential issues of sovereignty related to foreign influence.

6. Public-Private Partnerships: Gates' involvement in federal health policies has often involved collaborations with consulting firms like McKinsey, which have faced scrutiny over conflicts of interest in past opioid crises. The extent of Gates' partnership with NIH has raised alarms about the merge of private interests with public health objectives.

7. Gates-NIH Workshops: Personal appearances by Gates at NIH workshops emphasized his influence. Meetings aimed at coordinating research and funding efforts showcased the growing alignment between Gates’ ambitions and NIH initiatives.

8. Recognition for Contributions: The FNIH awarded Gates and Pfizer for their substantial contributions to NIH, reflecting the agency's reliance on Gates’ financial support for major health initiatives.

Bill Gates has played a significant role in reshaping U.S. health policy through his foundation's financial contributions to the NIH. While his intentions may involve improving global health, the intertwined relationship between his wealth, investments, and government health strategies raises critical questions regarding conflict of interest and accountability in public health decision-making. With ongoing investigations and new revelations, the dynamics of philanthropic influence on government health policy remain a topic of concern and discussion.

https://brownstone.org/articles/how-bill-gates-billions-shape-us-medical-research/

Trump’s Greenland Deal Makes The World More Secure, And Makes The Media Less Relevant Than Ever

 The Trump administration has announced a security deal with Denmark regarding Greenland, causing surprise among some media and foreign policy experts. The evolving views on the deal, particularly from earlier predictions, illustrate the disconnect between public rhetoric and private negotiations.

Initial concerns in January portrayed Trump’s interest in Greenland as aggressive and reminiscent of historical invasions, likening him to Hitler.

In contrast, as of September, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and Greenland Premier Jens-Frederik Nielsen expressed positive sentiments about the new security agreement, emphasizing its benefits for NATO and European security.

The deal is framed by the Trump administration as an expansion of an earlier agreement from 1951, avoiding the need for Senate ratification while seeking legislative approval in Denmark and Greenland.

The agreement includes a permanent U.S. military presence in Greenland, safeguarding the territory's strategic significance.

The deal resulted from months of discreet negotiations, highlighting the difference between public outcry and private discussions in diplomatic affairs.

The narrative shift from alarm to acceptance regarding the security deal signifies the impact of well-managed negotiations behind the scenes, contrasting sharply with initial media coverage that leaned towards sensationalism.

https://thefederalist.com/2026/09/21/trumps-greenland-deal-makes-the-world-more-secure-and-makes-the-media-less-relevant-than-ever/

Lessons from Nikole Hannah-Jones’ School Experiment

 Nikole Hannah-Jones, known for her work on the 1619 Project, reflects on her decision to send her daughter, Najya, to a poorly performing public school in Brooklyn. This choice was based on her belief that upper-middle-class parents could help improve schools by being involved. A decade later, she acknowledges the negative impact this decision had on her daughter's education.

1. Original Decision: Hannah-Jones thought that sending Najya to a bad public school would be beneficial, believing that upper-middle-class parents could improve school environments for all students.

2. Poor School Conditions: Hannah-Jones recounts troubling experiences at Najya's school, such as a lack of supervision during lunch, frequent teacher absences, and inadequate grading, which contributed to my daughter's poor academic performance.

3. Failures of Public Education: The essay emphasizes that schools labeled as underperforming often provide no real education. Children, like Najya, experience neglect rather than learning, growing frustrated with the lack of homework and structure.

4. Importance of Early Education Choices: Hannah-Jones’ reflections suggest that early schooling has a significant impact on a child's ability to adapt later to different educational settings.

5. Lessons for Policy Makers:

Parents naturally seek the best education for their children, and policies must consider this instinct.

Teachers' unions can protect ineffective teachers, making it difficult to improve school quality.

The myth that underfunding is the primary problem in schools distracts from essential discussions about effective educational practices and reform.

6. Privilege and Education: There is a contradictory expectation that parents in progressive circles should avoid the best schools for their children, yet aim for prestigious higher education for them later. It reflects a flawed morality where having a strong educational foundation for children seems socially undesirable.

7. Need for Real Reforms: Nathaniel's experience highlights the failures in the education system, challenging the belief that nothing can be done to improve schools for disadvantaged students. Successful changes in school management can yield positive educational outcomes.

Hannah-Jones' admission of her mistake serves as an eye-opener about the realities many children face in failing public schools. The implications of her experience suggest that effective educational reform is critical, and it requires a serious reevaluation of the factors contributing to school failures. Rather than criticizing individual choices, the conversation should focus on ensuring quality education for all students, particularly for those from marginalized backgrounds.

https://www.thefp.com/p/coleman-hughes-lessons-nikole-hannah-jones-school-experiment?utm_campaign=realclearpolitics

How Abortion Politics Led to a Broader Revolt Against Biology

The abortion politics have influenced cultural values surrounding women, autonomy, and biology. It argues that the feminist movement's focus on female autonomy has led to a disregard for biological connections, contributing to complex societal issues, including the rise of transgenderism and tragic events such as the Lindsay Clancy case.

1. Abortion as a Sacred Issue:

Abortion is seen as a near-sacred right for feminists and many women, despite traditionally nurturing behaviors associated with motherhood. The rising acceptance of abortion appears to clash with historical female instincts.

2. Impact on Fertility Rates:

Fertility rates in developed nations are dropping below replacement levels, which the author connects to advancements in feminist ideologies that promote abortion as a means to liberate women from the burdens of reproduction.

3. Separation of Sex and Reproduction:

Unrestricted access to abortion breaks the link between sexual activity and reproduction. The article suggests that this freedom allows women to engage in sexual behavior without the same worries as men, redefining gender equality.

4. Emergence of the Transgender Movement:

The logic supporting abortion—viewing reproduction as optional—has extended to the transgender movement. If women can choose whether to reproduce, it follows that they should also be able to choose their gender identity freely.

5. Medicalization of Gender Transition:

Similar to how abortion became normalized, medical interventions for gender transition have rapidly gained acceptance, despite evidence suggesting significant risks and high rates of desistance from transgender identities, particularly in youth.

6. Lindsay Clancy Case:

In a tragic incident, Lindsay Clancy killed her children and claimed to do so due to mental health issues. The defense sought to absolve her of guilt, mirroring the justifications used within the abortion and transgender debates. There’s a troubling inconsistency in societal views on women’s actions based on pregnancy and motherhood.

7. Uncritical Acceptance of Actions:

The author criticizes the immediate acceptance and rationalization of Clancy's actions as reflecting the same pattern observed in the abortion and transgender movements, where female autonomy is prioritized over accountability.

8. Consequences of Feminist Ideals:

The overall message suggests that feminist ideals, aimed at providing women more choices, have inadvertently led to negative outcomes such as decreased birth rates, increased singlehood, and a cultural shift that views pregnancy as disruptive rather than an integral aspect of womanhood.

The author warns that the cultural shift towards prioritizing women's autonomy, particularly in relation to abortion and gender, may have dire consequences for society, including the normalization of tragic actions like those taken by Lindsay Clancy. As these ideologies continue to evolve, the author fears further moral and societal degradation may follow. 

https://spectator.org/how-abortion-politics-led-to-a-broader-revolt-against-biology/

Why Are AP Scores Rising? The College Board’s Answers Don’t Add Up

In recent years, there has been a significant increase in the scores of Advanced Placement (AP) tests, raising concerns about whether these changes reflect actual student performance or if scores are being artificially inflated. The College Board, which oversees the AP program, claims that new scoring methods have corrected previous underestimations of students' capabilities. However, evidence supporting this claim is debated.

1. Increase in Passing Rates: Over 70% of students now pass AP tests in subjects like English Literature and U.S. History. Historically, pass rates were lower, around 40-50%.

2. College Board's Justification: The College Board argues that the new scoring system, called Evidence-Based Standard Setting (EBSS), accurately reflects students' readiness for college. They maintain that the increased pass rates are a return to "historical" norms. However, data shows that the average passing rates were around 58% prior to the changes.

3. Doubts About Transparency: Critics express concern over the College Board's lack of clear information about the new scoring methodology. Attempts to clarify these changes have often introduced more questions than answers.

4. Potential Consequences for Students: If AP tests have inflated passing rates, students may be encouraged to take advanced courses for which they are not ready, potentially weakening the academic value of AP credentials.

5. Historical Context of Scoring Changes: The College Board altered the scoring system in 2022, having previously updated it every 5 to 10 years. The new EBSS system supposedly stabilizes pass rates but has resulted in unusually high scores across the board.

6. External Observations: The University of California has raised its concerns about the College Board’s scoring methodology, reflecting wider skepticism across the educational community regarding the validity of these new standards.

7. Financial and Equity Considerations: The College Board has faced financial challenges, and there are speculations that increasing pass rates could make the AP program seem more valuable, attracting more participants. Additionally, there's a push for greater accessibility for historically underrepresented students, which may be influencing the scoring changes.

8. Call for Clarity: There is a strong demand for greater transparency from the College Board about its scoring methodologies. Without more information, it is challenging to conclude whether the rising scores represent genuine improvements in student performance or a lowering of standards.

The dramatic rise in AP exam scores and the College Board's new methodology prompts significant debates about the credibility and reliability of these assessments. While the Board claims that the changes are beneficial, the circumstances raise questions about the implications for students and educational integrity. Enhanced transparency is necessary to address these concerns and restore confidence in AP scores. 

https://www.city-journal.org/article/ap-test-scores-college-board