NYT: ‘Far Right’ Spreads Baseless Claims About Biden’s Whereabouts
CNN's Gen Z Correspondent Explains Ties Between Kamala Harris Campaign and ‘Brat Summer’
Congressman Introduces Articles of Impeachment Against Kamala Harris
FINALLY! Just Stop Oil Loons Are Facing Long Prison Sentences, and They Deserve...
Alyssa Milano Shares a Weird Picture Crying Over Kamala
A Real-Life Episode of 'Veep': Kamala Harris Cackles Her Way Into Wisconsin
Read This NYT Hagiography of Joe Biden From Two Days Before the Debate
Mayorkas, Wray Decline to Appear at Assassination Hearings
Ana Navarro's Political Car Chronicles Quickly Devolved into a Weird Kamala Fairy Tale
Jim Acosta: 'Irresponsible' for Trump to Say What Secret Service Admits (That They...
If You Like Your Plan, You Can Keep It (Not!): Kamala Harris Wanted...
Stochastic Terrorism Alert: After Assassination Attempt, Harris Ad Calls Trump 'Existentia...
‘Prepare Yourselves’: Kamala Harris Has ‘Got The One-Handed Egg Crack Down’
Chill, Keith! Olbermann LOSES IT Over Cardinals Using Trump's Fist Gesture, Deletes Post...
Elon Musk Opens Up to Jordan Peterson: 'My Son Is Dead, Killed by...

THEY'RE NOT YOUR KIDS! Corey DeAngelis Obliterates Call for Federal Regulation of Homeschooling


The left is filled with organizations whose names seem to be diametrically opposed to the causes they advocate. There's the American Civil Liberties Union which loves to file lawsuits in favor of more government power (as long as that power is controlled by Democrats, that is). Then there's Planned Parenthood, which loves to kill babies and prevent people from becoming parents.


In the world of periodicals, perhaps no publication is more ironically named than Scientific American. Contrary to actual biological and genetic science, Scientific American believes that men can become women, just to choose one example.

More recently though, Scientific American is abandoning any pretense of science at all (not to mention being American), with articles promoting the pro-Hamas protesters on college campuses. 

Most recently, the publication dismissed science in favor of advocacy by wading into the homeschool debate: 

Here is a taste of 'the science' behind the call for federal regulation of homeschooling: 

Home­schooled students have won the National Spelling Bee; one was the most prolific mathematician in history. Many are well-rounded and well-adjusted children who go on to thrive as adults. But others do not receive a meaningful education—and too many have suffered horrific abuse. The federal government must develop basic standards for safety and quality of education in home­school­ing across the country.

If you're wondering what the basis is for these accusations of no education or worse, even abuse, the source seems to be, 'Trust us, bro.' The article cites ZERO studies backing the first claim and only one dubious study (limited to only 17 children) behind the second. 


What's worse, the article claims -- again with no supporting evidence -- that the studies SUPPORTING the effectiveness of homeschooling are 'methodologically flawed.' 

Again, 'trust us, bro.'

Scientific American made one fatal miscalculation though in publishing this fact-free hit piece. It forgot about noted school choice advocate Corey DeAngelis. 

BIG mistake.    

Twitchy has often covered how DeAngelis brings the receipts to any argument about funding students and not systems. Many times, he trains his sights on corrupt teacher's union boss Randi Weingarten or her allies when they lie about school choice. 

But he takes on all comers and after this article, it was Scientific American's turn to get laid to waste by DeAngelis' receipts. 

The evidence for child abuse in public schools seems to be A LOT more well-documented than any claims of child abuse from homeschooling parents, doesn't it? 

As for homeschooling being not as effective as public schools, well, that wasn't even a fair fight. 


Others also chimed in with more receipts of the failure of public schools.

Maybe they forgot that they wrote that article just one year ago. 

But DeAngelis also honed in on the REAL reason Scientific American was trying to have homeschooling regulated by the federal government. 

There it is. The left hates religious families. Probably because they want to brainwash children to worship THEM as gods.

DeAngelis then rattled off a series of 'HELL NO' tweets directed at Scientific American and its proposed federal regulations. 


They. Aren't. Your. Kids. 

Shout it louder for the people in the back. 

You hear it all of the time from leftists like Weingarten and creepy California state representative Scott Weiner and every trans activist who speaks publicly on TikTok: 'Our kids.'

They're not. They never were. They never will be. And it's gross to suggest they are. 


Federal regulation seems to be far closer to the problem than it is to the solution. 

It's grotesque. 

There isn't even a whiff of scientific analysis in this article from Scientific American. 

Especially if you are in a public school in a blue city, as DeAngelis and others demonstrated. 

The left in America is not interested in education, not even a little bit. They want indoctrination. And they can't achieve that if increasing numbers of parents are educating children on their own outside the walls of a corrupt, failed government system. 


This has been obvious to Corey DeAngelis for a very long time. It is encouraging to see that it is rapidly becoming obvious to so many others. 

And no amount of propaganda disguised as science in 'Scientific American' can stop that awakening. 

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Twitchy Videos