Blue-checkmark journalists are out of control.

Their insane musings based on far-left college indoctrination have spread like a pox.

And so-called “journalists” have announced that this commonly used term is both racist and fascist.

The Left are constantly in search of new grievances and new dragons to slay.

That’s why they comb through history and current affairs looking to be offended, or looking for something that affirms their progressive worldview.

And somehow, leftists have determined that tomboys are both racist and fascist.

Tomboy fascism 😂 pic.twitter.com/hpFTxvqOH1

— Lauren Southern (@Lauren_Southern) May 22, 2022

As silly as the idea may be, these are how all of the bad ideas that have infested American culture spread.

In a piece entitled “The Racist History of Celebrating the American Tomboy,” author Lisa Selin Davis argued, “

Nineteenth-century tomboyism was, in fact, connected to one of the white middle class’s great projects of the time: breeding the white race…An 1873 article stated that parents should ‘allow a girl to be as tomboyish as her inclinations lead her to be. . . . Let her ride, drive, row, swim, run, climb fences, and even trees, if she has a mind to. She is only laying the foundation for future good health.’ Good health, then, is a code, meaning: tomboy now, successful breeder of white children later.”

So according to Davis, tomboyism is racist because someone thought it promoted “good health,” which was code for breeding the white race.

Ironically, Davis, who is white, has become an enemy of radical transgender activists for her stance that biological sex is real and that tomboys are not trans males.

Progressives can see the absurdity of some leftist arguments while being oblivious togethers.

She continued, “So tomboyism was stitched to whiteness, a form of white privilege, in the nineteenth century, which redefined and broadened acceptable behavior for a subset of American girls…[M]uch of the documented history of American tomboys is white tomboy history; the term was rarely used in African-American newspapers in the 19th and early 20th centuries, and not much applied to people of color in white newspapers until the 1950s, as sports became desegregated and the profiles of African-American female professional athletes like Althea Gibson rose. Most of the psychologists, sociologists, and biologists who study tomboys are white women, and the great bulk of subjects in tomboy studies are white, which complicates—or oversimplifies—the research.”

Tomboys along with trees, rugged individualism, Protestant work ethic, and time itself are now considered forms of white supremacy.

There are no more guardrails on the Left.

The corporate-controlled media is apoplectic over the possibility that Elon Musk could buy Twitter.

Musk’s offer to buy the social media giant has exposed the Left’s real motives.

In fact, this Washington Post warmonger-in-chief even said Elon Musk buying Twitter is a threat to “democracy.”

The hypocrisy of the radical left seemingly knows no bounds.

It’s quite alright for billionaires like Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Oprah Winfrey, and George Soros to buy up newspapers, TV networks, social media platforms and even district attorneys.

But heaven forbid when someone not in their socialist sphere decides to join the fray.

Just look at the media’s attacks on Elon Musk over his attempt to purchase Twitter in order to restore it to its free speech origins.

You actually now have members of the 4th estate screaming that we must accept the end of free speech to ‘protect democracy.’

That’s right, members of the so-called “free press” are coming out in defense of censorship all because it’s not one of their own buying Twitter.

We’ve really reached that low point in American history.

And nowhere has this been more evident than at Jeff Bezos’ Washington Post.

The Post’s resident warmonger and pretend conservative Max Boot went absolutely nuts over Elon Musk’s potential Twitter buyout.

After tweeting out that he was “frightened” at the prospect of Musk buying Twitter, Boot then doubled down in a Washington Post column attacking Musk’s offer to buy the social media behemoth for more than $43 billion.

And of course, the sycophant Boot took pen to paper to defend himself for believing that the Tesla and SpaceX billionaire shouldn’t have a hand on Twitter because he “engages in online bullying and traffics hyperbole.”

“Anyone who thinks the problem with social media is too much content moderation, rather than too little, should not own one of the most powerful platforms online,” he wrote.

Boot said Musk, who seeks to end censorship on Twitter, will not bring “badly needed reform” that the phony conservative columnist believes needs to occur on the platform.

Boot furthermore said that ultimately Musk’s takeover bid will pose a threat to “our embattled democracy.”

That’s right, Max Boot, the man who many say never met a minority he didn’t want to bomb, a country he didn’t want to attack, a conservative he didn’t want to muzzle, is suddenly “worried about democracy.”

Boot began his ridiculous column with his explanation of his earlier anti-Musk tweet, which was rightfully met with scorn and derision from what he described as “an online flash mob” of Twitter users. 

Boot’s original tweet read, “I am frightened by the impact on society and politics if Elon Musk acquires Twitter. He seems to believe that on social media anything goes. For democracy to survive, we need more content moderation, not less.”

Adolf Hitler and Joesph Stalin would be proud of Max. They too believed in more content moderation.  

Boot cited the criticism he received for his tweet from figures like Mollie Hemingway and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, (R-GA), he wrote, “too much name-calling, too much dishonesty, too many conspiracy theories. And there is a disturbing tendency for online flash mobs to create an echo chamber of crackpot opinions.”

Boot of course was an enthusiastic proponent of the anti-Trump Russiagate conspiracy theories, even appearing on CNN to promote his column outlining 18 reasons why former President Trump could be a “Russian agent.”

Max Boot is a perfect example of the hypocrisy and idiocy of the radical left.  

Stay tuned to Pants on Fire for more on this developing story.

Members of the corporate-controlled media aren’t even pretending to be impartial these days.

But one Associated Press writer took that to the next level.

And her “report” turned into a falsehood-filled work of fiction.

The Associated Press’ Lisa Mascaro wrote a story recently that was so “tilted” it fell outside what anyone could possibly consider a journalistic piece.

The headline alone was enough to cause any old-fashioned journalism professor to blow up: “Supreme Court nominee’s ‘empathy’ is flashpoint for Senate.”

She didn’t bother to mention those on the receiving end of Jackson’s “empathy” are pedophiles, child pornographers, and other perverts.

She also made some outlandish claims including that, “The first Black woman nominated to become a justice, Jackson brings a lifetime of experience never seen before on the high court, which has been filled almost exclusively by white men for most of its 233-year history.”

While Jackson is the first black woman to join the ranks of Supreme Court Justices, she isn’t the first woman, the first black person, or even the first woman who isn’t white.

Sandra Day O’Connor – the first woman on the court – was appointed by President Ronald Reagan back in 1981.

The first black man, Clarence Thomas, was nominated by President George H.W. Bush in 1991.

Sonia Sotomayor, the first “woman of color” (Hispanic) to join the court was nominated by Barack Obama back in 2009.

In fact, if you want to play the numbers game, Lisa Mascaro’s claims are flat out wrong.

“Democrats praise President Joe Biden’s choice of the Harvard-educated lawyer and appellate court judge as long overdue, making the judicial branch begin to look more like America,” Mascaro wrote.

But considering that blacks only make up only about 13% of the United States’ population, it’s not like they’re wildly underrepresented on the big court.

No doubt, what Democrats are really angling for is someone radical enough to make their most radical leftist faction happy.

But rather than stick to the issues – like whether Jackson has a thing for protecting perverts instead of children – this intrepid AP reporter decided the real issue is that Republicans can’t stand anyone with “empathy.”

“It’s not the first time the concept of empathy has been wielded as a disqualifying weapon against a nominee for the high court. Nor is it the only time the empathy standard was applied to the women tapped for the bench, rather than the much longer list of men,” Mascaro wrote.

She then went on to complain about Republicans lodging “similar arguments” against Sonia Sotomayor.

Chances are, it wasn’t “empathy” Republicans were pushing back against – it was confirming a partisan hack who would focus on towing the leftist line regardless of the truth.

More than a decade after she was confirmed, Sotomayor proved she’s still loyal to leftist causes when she blatantly lied about the effects of COVID-19 when she claimed, “We have over 100,000 children, which we’ve never had before, in serious condition, and many on ventilators.”

Of course, only 3,342 children were hospitalized with COVID-19 at that time – and many had actually been admitted for other reasons in the first place and just happened to have the virus.

We can’t even begin to imagine what Jackson will be up to a decade from now.

Unfortunately, exercising good judgment and focusing on truth seems to fall low on the list of things Democrats and their leftist allies in the Fake News Media are looking for when it comes to reshaping the Judicial branch.

Pants on Fire News will keep you up-to-date on any developments to this ongoing story.