***WARNING: This story contains pictures and passages that are sexually explicit in nature. But The Iowa Standard believes it is important people see the actual content of these books to understand what Democrats and mainstream media are defending.***
The mainstream media often struggles to tell the whole story. There is a reason the U.S. ranks last among 46 countries in trust in media. There is a reason Americans’ trust in the media has dipped to the second-lowest number on record. There’s a reason trust in the media — or the lack thereof — is considered a “crisis.”
And this staff editorial from the Cedar Rapids Gazette just provides one more reason for the distrust.
It is 414 words. The headline:
“Iowa Republican lawmakers suggest criminalizing education”
The Gazette took to task Senators Jake Chapman and Brad Zaun for their decision to take a stand for sanity.
Here is how the Gazette described what is happening:
“Johnston is among a trio of central Iowa districts where a series of books are being challenged by conservatives. Some are by LGBTQ authors and feature passages about sex. Chapman and others have held up those excerpts as proof the books are obscene.”
It goes on to state:
“These books may make Republican legislators uncomfortable, but it’s not about them. They’re on library shelves so LGBTQ students and others can find people like themselves in literature written by authors who have had experiences relevant to their own lives.”
And the Gazette states that it trusts the judgment of teachers and staff and sees no need for legislative intervention.
“No such bill should see the light of day at the Statehouse. Chapman and Zaun should be looking for ways to support and improve public schools instead of making education a crime,” the editorial concludes.
So, what is the Gazette defending? Good question. Not once in its editorial did it cite any portion of the books being challenged.
The Gazette’s definition of “education” is apparently pictures like this:
The Gazette’s definition of “education” is apparently passages like this:
“He reached his hand down and pulled out my d**k. He quickly went to giving me head. I just sat back and enjoyed it as I could tell he was, too. He was also definitely experienced in what he was doing, because he went to work quite confidently. He then came up and asked me if I wanted to try on him…He didn’t know I was a virgin, and I did my best to act dominant like my favorite porn star. I was an actor, and this was my movie.”
“I remember the condom was blue and flavored like cotton candy. I put some lube on and got him up on his knees and began to slide into him from behind. I tried not to force it because I imagine that would be painful and I didn’t want the moment to be painful, so I eased in slowly until I heard him moan…
“I was extremely nervous, but this was my ass and I was struggling to imagine something inside me and he was large, but I was gonna try.”
“I spend hours in the bathroom with a magazine that has 1,000 pictures of naked movie stars: Naked woman + right hand = happy, happy, joy, joy.
“Yep, that’s right, I admit that I masturbate. I’m proud of it. I’m good at it. I’m ambidextrous. If there were a Professional Masturbators League, I’d get drafted number one and make millions of dollars.
“And maybe you’re thinking, ‘well, you really shouldn’t be talking about masturbation in public.’ Well, tough, I’m going to talk about it because EVERYBODY does it. And EVERYBODY likes it.
“And if God hadn’t wanted us to masturbate, then God wouldn’t have given us thumbs. So I thank God for my thumbs.”
I would be shocked and appalled if only conservatives are disturbed by these books. If that’s the case, then the alternative to conservatism has officially lost its ever-loving mind. They’re gone. Given over to a truly depraved mind.
But how does the Gazette expect its readers to come to an informed decision on these books without providing any information from these books?
Or, could it be, the Gazette prefers its readers remain uninformed on the books? That its readers simply trust their judgment like the staff trusts the judgment of educators.
Why would the Gazette withhold such important information when it comes to such a story.
Because the Gazette isn’t media. It isn’t journalism — at least not the form of journalism it alleges it is.
It is advocacy journalism at best. It is attacking Republican lawmakers and refusing to supply pretty basic, important facts.
The Gazette is attempting to score political points for its partners in the Democrat Party at the expense of informing its readers.
It is too bad and it is one of many reasons Americans are losing the little trust they have for mainstream media sources.
