The truest thing President Trump ever said was that the media are the enemy of the people. They were proving it true before he said it, and they have doubled down afterward. The Washington Post is chief among them, especially after it was made to rehire Karen Attiah, the leftist journo who lied and misquoted Charlie Kirk after his death to try and justify the violence.
Why they hired her in the first place, of course, is the real question. But then you read something like this, and you understand that Attiah wasn't an outlier at WaPo, she was the norm. This August 28 column proves that, arguing that Dolly Parton was loved despite not being a mother, and then saying childless people can advocate for children.
Column: Dolly Parton’s lack of children demonstrated that the world could in fact love a woman who wasn’t a mother.
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) August 26, 2026
But more importantly, she was proof that a person could be an advocate for children while personally choosing against parenting. https://t.co/y37KSOj2cv
Here's more:
In the early years of her 58-year marriage to Carl Thomas Dean, Parton has said, she tried unsuccessfully to get pregnant. But in 1978, when she was 32, Parton spoke plainly to the BBC about having decided, along with Dean, not to have children. “We don’t want children of our own,” she said, noting that five of her siblings had previously lived with her. “We don’t want the total responsibility. Because we both know what it’s like to know that joy of raising children, but [Carl] is free and independent. He’s as independent as I am in his way.”
At the same time, Parton made a name for herself as a dedicated, hands-on philanthropist for children’s causes, including literacy and pediatric health.
To me, Parton’s lack of children demonstrated that the world could in fact love a woman who wasn’t a mother. But more importantly, she was proof that a person could be an advocate and friend for children while personally choosing against parenting. She was a reassurance that voluntary childlessness doesn’t reflect inherent selfishness, and that parenting is far from the only way to invest in the kids who are all of our future.
They did not "decide" not to have children. Parton herself said she and her husband Dean planned to have children. Dean even picked out names. Unfortunately, Dolly had severe endometriosis — a condition where the cells that normally line the uterus show up in places outside the uterus — and Dolly had a hysterectomy at 38. What followed was a time of depression for Dolly.
She eventually came to terms with not having kids, and, leaning on her faith in God, spent time doing charitable work for children, including the Imagination Library.
And the fundamental difference between Dolly and the childless women trying to tell me how to raise my kids is this: Dolly never told me how to raise my children. She never injected a political ideology into her charitable work. She was not pushing for legislation that would strip me of my parental rights if I didn't get the COVID vaccine or refused to mutilate my child because he "identified" as a girl. She advocated for the very things the Left hates, actually: literacy, education, and independent thinking.
But that's what they do best: get it wrong, every single time. It's a new low for WaPo to pretend they're on the same level as Dolly when it comes to advocating for children. Dolly actually cared, WaPo only cares inasmuch as it can force its political agenda on another generation.
And therein lies the difference.
That's why the world loved Dolly. She did good without preaching to us. She did good without trying to get the government to force us to conform to her values. She actually cared without a political agenda behind it. The folks at WaPo are in favor of "advocating" for children in a way that is diametrically opposed to everything Dolly ever did.
