United

The potential United States Assistant Secretary of Health can’t even get the record straight on her gender but Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) is the “monster” for expressing concerns about how someone like that might supervise America’s medical bureaucracy?

In an op-ed for The Washington Post, columnist and style reporter, Monica Hesse, went into attack dog mode against the Senator from Kentucky on February 26, after he refused to pull any punches while questioning of Biden’s potential Assistant Secretary of Health, Dr. Rachel Levine, during his Senate confirmation hearing. Hesse called Paul’s questioning of the appointee a “tirade” full of “ignorance” and “demeaning” questions.

Of course, let’s set the proper context here. Levine, a biological male who is now a “trans female” has endorsed controversial and dangerous transgender procedures being applied to children in the past. Though Hesse couldn’t be bothered to wonder if a Biden medical bureau helmed by a trans activist would have strange implications for the health of America’s children. Anyone who was skeptical, like Paul, drew her wrath. 

The columnist took issue with this question from the Senator: “Dr. Levine, you have supported [minors] being given hormone blockers, and surgical reconstruction of a child’s genitalia.” Hesse characterized it as a “tirade” and bashed him for comparing it to genital mutilation of the variety found in countries prone to human rights violations. 

The fact that Paul’s question about seriously consequential views regarding children’s safety and health was just glossed over and dismissed, is highly disturbing. Hesse ignored it, and on top of that, pivoted to what she saw as Paul conflating it with more serious issue of female genital mutilation (FGM), as if that should totally distract audiences from the horrors present in Levine’s views. Clever tactic. That’s like trying to get the jury to absolve the murderer because the prosecutor conflated the 2nd degree murder with 1st degree murder.

Though in all seriousness, is FGM, for example, any different than helping a child get his genitals surgically removed? Last time we checked, rape was the nature of sexual interaction with children under 18 in legal terms – even if they consented. The point is, they can’t consent. But now they can? 

Again, these are serious questions, and despite the implications of such an appointment, our columnist’s rebuttal boiled down to, well, she’s the “first publicly transgender federal official to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate.” Heaven forbid we ruin the woke moment. The piece even let Dr. Levine’s laughable answer to Paul’s question slide: “She would have been within her rights to be enraged by Paul’s ignorance, but she responded on Thursday by repeating a steady message: ‘Transgender medicine is a complex and nuanced field.’” 

Really? That’s it? There was nothing to her answer, but she was “steady” and yes, Mr. Paul was “demeaning.”

Ms. Hesse’s own justification for taking Levine’s side is the exact same as the trans doctor’s: “medical cases are complex, and there are fields of study and many experts who have dedicated their entire careers to thinking through ethical practices.” Mmhmm. So the argument is essentially, “it’s not what you think, bro.” Oh yeah, that’s convincing. 

Again the other main thrust of her argument was that, compared to Paul, Levine was so nice. Hesse wrote, “Levine spent three hours sitting behind a table, wearing a patterned blazer, a string of pearls, eyeglasses and a graying haircut. She occasionally sounded nervous, but always remained calm.” Oh that’s good. Nice equals good. You can convince little Timmy he can get a sex change as long as everyone stays “calm.” 

The piece added, “If you watched her exchange with Paul, you might have seen someone behaving monstrously. But it definitely wasn’t her.” And this is how they’ll justify future malpractice. They won’t answer our valid questions and they’ll just call us mean. What else is new?

The potential United States Assistant Secretary of Health can’t even get the record straight on her gender but Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) is the “monster” for expressing concerns about how someone like that might supervise America’s medical bureaucracy?

In an op-ed for The Washington Post, columnist and style reporter, Monica Hesse, went into attack dog mode against the Senator from Kentucky on February 26, after he refused to pull any punches while questioning of Biden’s potential Assistant Secretary of Health, Dr. Rachel Levine, during his Senate confirmation hearing. Hesse called Paul’s questioning of the appointee a “tirade” full of “ignorance” and “demeaning” questions.

Of course, let’s set the proper context here. Levine, a biological male who is now a “trans female” has endorsed controversial and dangerous transgender procedures being applied to children in the past. Though Hesse couldn’t be bothered to wonder if a Biden medical bureau helmed by a trans activist would have strange implications for the health of America’s children. Anyone who was skeptical, like Paul, drew her wrath. 

The columnist took issue with this question from the Senator: “Dr. Levine, you have supported [minors] being given hormone blockers, and surgical reconstruction of a child’s genitalia.” Hesse characterized it as a “tirade” and bashed him for comparing it to genital mutilation of the variety found in countries prone to human rights violations. 

The fact that Paul’s question about seriously consequential views regarding children’s safety and health was just glossed over and dismissed, is highly disturbing. Hesse ignored it, and on top of that, pivoted to what she saw as Paul conflating it with more serious issue of female genital mutilation (FGM), as if that should totally distract audiences from the horrors present in Levine’s views. Clever tactic. That’s like trying to get the jury to absolve the murderer because the prosecutor conflated the 2nd degree murder with 1st degree murder.

Though in all seriousness, is FGM, for example, any different than helping a child get his genitals surgically removed? Last time we checked, rape was the nature of sexual interaction with children under 18 in legal terms – even if they consented. The point is, they can’t consent. But now they can? 

Again, these are serious questions, and despite the implications of such an appointment, our columnist’s rebuttal boiled down to, well, she’s the “first publicly transgender federal official to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate.” Heaven forbid we ruin the woke moment. The piece even let Dr. Levine’s laughable answer to Paul’s question slide: “She would have been within her rights to be enraged by Paul’s ignorance, but she responded on Thursday by repeating a steady message: ‘Transgender medicine is a complex and nuanced field.’” 

Really? That’s it? There was nothing to her answer, but she was “steady” and yes, Mr. Paul was “demeaning.”

Ms. Hesse’s own justification for taking Levine’s side is the exact same as the trans doctor’s: “medical cases are complex, and there are fields of study and many experts who have dedicated their entire careers to thinking through ethical practices.” Mmhmm. So the argument is essentially, “it’s not what you think, bro.” Oh yeah, that’s convincing. 

Again the other main thrust of her argument was that, compared to Paul, Levine was so nice. Hesse wrote, “Levine spent three hours sitting behind a table, wearing a patterned blazer, a string of pearls, eyeglasses and a graying haircut. She occasionally sounded nervous, but always remained calm.” Oh that’s good. Nice equals good. You can convince little Timmy he can get a sex change as long as everyone stays “calm.” 

The piece added, “If you watched her exchange with Paul, you might have seen someone behaving monstrously. But it definitely wasn’t her.” And this is how they’ll justify future malpractice. They won’t answer our valid questions and they’ll just call us mean. What else is new?