7 Year Rash

Today is the 7th Anniversary of this blog. For a long time this year I considered making this one my last because, quite simply, The Stupid Have Inherited the Earth. Intelligence and Common Sense (let alone <gasp> Logic) are Politically Incorrect. Hell, some Leftists have decreed that just saying “politically incorrect” is Politically Incorrect. 😦

So instead I thought I’d revisit one of my favorites from the last 7 years.

This also goes out the #NeverTrump -ers who are so mindlessly obsessed with hating Donald Trump that they are willing Hillary into the White House.

Hate never felt so Right. 🙂

And a special shout out to the Sabotage Republicans (The Establishment ones and their followers) WHO ALSO want Hillary.

The Generations (and possibly permanent) of damage you want to inflict on what’s LEFT of this country is so short-sighted you deserve her.

It will be YOUR fault.

Agree with me or else!

To the future or to the past, to a time when thought is free, when men are different from one another and do not live alone — to a time when truth exists and what is done cannot be undone: From the age of uniformity, from the age of solitude, from the age of Big Brother, from the age of doublethink — greetings! -George Orwell

So with that in mind, cast your mindless adherence to January 21, 2012  and this Blog and see yourselves currently in it also.


They are just a zombie hoard.

Remorseless. Merciless. Incapable of shame, morals or ethics.

They want want what they want when they want it and because they want it and will do anything to get it. Relentlessly.

And what they want is YOU. You to be either converted or cow-towed to their every whim. To do whatever they want when they want it.

Evidence John King, the CNN Liberal Moderator of the South Carolina Debate. He opens the debate with a salicious question to Gingrich about his “open marriage” and Gingrich blows him to bits for it and the crowd goes wild.

He did this to prove his “courage” to stand up to the evil “right wingers” and puff out his chest that he was “journalist” and was going to bravely confront the issue. Meanwhile, anything remotely damaging to President Obama is ignored with great speed and spin.🙂

2016: Just Like they do with Hillary. The Debate will be set up to show that Trump is grumpy, unstable and mean. The fact that Hillary is a congenital, sociopathica Liar has no bearing on the debates whatsover.

Their will be more Candy Crowley moments than ever.

And the Zombie hoard will eat it up like candy. “Brains…”

“In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act”.- George Orwell.

And their has never been more deceit now than ever in American History and more mindless Zombie Hoards out to make sure “What difference does it make, anyways?”

Rush Limbaugh (who I rarely get a chance to listen to because of my work schedule): Now, let me tell you one thing here, folks: You cannot shame the mainstream media. If any of you are thinking that the media learned a lesson — if any of you believe that the media finally had it handed to ’em, if you believe that the media had their eyes opened and they are fully awake now and they understand what they’re dealing with — forget it. John King is proud of what happened last night. John King is a hero in the Main Street media because he didn’t back down, because he continued to illustrate how it is that the media does really control the agenda. That was a demonstration of the power they hold over every public figure’s head, that they choose to hold like a guillotine. John King… There may even be some jealousy and envy within the journalist ranks (well, not journalists; within the Democrat Party ranks) because John King is a guy that got in Newt’s face, stared him down — and the fact that Newt told him off? It’s a badge of honor. If you are thinking that John King was embarrassed and ran away with his tail tucked between his legs and learned his lesson and it’ll never happen again? Ah, ah, ah, ah. You cannot shame the mainstream media. They are proud of this. They delight in their power to destroy candidates that they don’t like.

And they don’t like anyone who doesn’t cow-tow to them.

2016: They made THEIR Choice. Now it’s you’re Zombie duty to vote for it or else.

“At the end of the day the message to every conservative who hasn’t run for office is: “You want a piece of this? You want some of this? You want Brian Ross hounding you and your ex-wife and then you want me asking you about it on national TV the next night? Come on in. We’re ready.” That’s the message from John King and CNN last night, and do not doubt me on this.”

2016: look at the evidence, every time new “evidence” comes out about Hillary they bury it. Every time Trump even raises his voice or say one less than perfect political phrase they are on it like flies on shit and they stick to it like super glue and blow it up.


So the alternative is to cow-tow. To live in fear of the Liberal wrath.

2016: To acquiesce. Given in, the Ministry of Truth has the system rigged.

Hell, the Democrats got caught rigging the Primary, blatantly.

No one really cared.

The Zombie Hoard just went, “oh” and moved on. The Media covered it up.

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz was sacrificed.

End of Story.

#2: Hillary is caught re-handed on the Email Scandal. The FBI even says so. But since Comey has connections to Clinton and doesn’t want to have a mysterious “accident” she is not prosecuted.

Future Hillary Supreme Court Nominee Loretta Lynch, Attorney General and Clinton Cronie refuses to prosecute her.

Other people not connected to Clinton aren’t so lucky.


And the reaction from the Zombie Hoard, “Yawn”.

Hillary is still leading in the Polls!


The Food Police. The TSA. The EPA. The Justice Department. Homeland Security. The FCC.

Because if they can’t make you a zombie, they can at least make you a peasant in fear of your Masters who will not challenge them or not have the power to challenge them.

“[…]you don’t have to be Sun freakin Tzu to know that real fighting isn’t about killing or even hurting the other guy, it’s about scaring him enough to call it a day.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

They’ll just turn your children into zombies instead. 12 years of Grade School and 4 years of College is a lot of Zombie Voodoo time after all. And “getting them while they are young” is entirely within the Zombie Liberal playbook. Make them a zombie before they even know what one is and then make them as immune as possible to any anti-virus and get them addicted to their own Kool-Aid. Feed it to them constantly through the Media and the Internet.

2016: They’ll DEMAND Segregation, “Safe Spaces”, “Diversity” and “Inclusion” mindlessly and will trample Free Speech because they don’t want to be “offended”.


WAR (Class, Gender, Race, Religion) IS PEACE


Hell, even white people getting a tan will set the little zombie off…

What it does is illustrate that they can be dealt with. But you can’t beat ’em. They’re not gonna be shamed. They’re not going to be shamed into stopping the coverage of conservatives as they do it. It’s going to continue. No matter what kind of shame you think they suffer in a contest like that — no matter how much money they lose, no matter how many of them get fired, no matter how many magazines or TV stations or newspapers get shut down — they are not gonna change. They are hard-core, leftists”

And as I have said over and over again, they are have no morals or ethics because they are governed not by logic and reason but by emotions, mostly the most basic of primitive emotions, Fear, Lust (for power), anger, jealousy, ENVY, etc. –Raw emotions.


Which is why when you engage them they sound and act like an immature 5 year old. And as we all know from childhood development the child has to develop a sense of shame by have having boundaries and limitations and consequences. And if they don’t, they will grow up with little to no sense of shame.


2016: “Microaggressions” anyone?

They are usually called sociopaths. I can call them Liberal Zombies.

2016: And the #Never Trumpers and Establishment RINOs.

Liberals have no shame. They want what they want when they want it because they want it.

2016: And the #Never Trumpers and Establishment RINOs.

“…one of the upsides that isn’t gonna happen is the media saying, “Gosh, we’ve been so mean to these people and so unfair. You know, maybe we ought to start being fair.” That’s not going to happen.

Liberals talk about being “fair” which means you’re being unfair to them and should do what they want.

Liberals talk about “compassion” but it’s to make you feel guilty, not them, and to do what they want.

Liberals will talk about “bi-partisanship” but that just means you have to compromise your principles so they can do what they want.

“Diversity” means you’re evil and need to do what they say to repent for your sins.

2016: “Inclusion” Means you include everything THEY say and do it without hesitation.

They are a remorseless hoard. They want what they want when they want it and on their terms only.

Give them everything they want or they’ll cry, scream, bitch, moan, pout and lash out at you.

2016: “White Privilege” anyone?

That is their primitive zombie hoard mentality. And they want YOU.extremists

“Lies are neither bad nor good. Like a fire they can either keep you warm or burn you to death, depending on how they’re used.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“Most people don’t believe something can happen until it already has. That’s not stupidity or weakness, that’s just human nature.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“Often, a school is your best bet-perhaps not for education but certainly for protection from an undead attack.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“Remember; no matter how desperate the situation seems, time spent
thinking clearly is never time wasted.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“I think that most people would rather face the light of a real enemy than the darkness of their imagined fears.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“They feel no fear, why should you?”– Max Brooks

“The zombie may be gone, but the threat lives on.”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

Get rid of one zombie, and 10 more will take it’s place. So you have to be ready to do battle constantly.

Look at 2010. The Democrats suffered the worst defeat in 80 years. Does it look like they learned ANYTHING?


As a matter of fact the zombie hoard is even tighter, even more determined than ever. They want it EVEN MORE.

So if we defeat then in 2012 will they go away?


2016: They weren’t defeated. Even more hoards joined them. So if they are beat in 2016 will they finally be defeated and go away.


They will just keep coming back like a remorseless zombie hoard until you are overwhelmed.

Which is why you will have to fight them all of your days, your kids days and their kids days until the infection is wiped out.

But like any good zombie plaque it only takes 1 to re-ignite it and spread it all over again.

And these zombies have Media and Internet outlets! (and Europe!)

“Looking back, I still can’t believe how unprofessional the news media was. So much spin, so few hard facts. All those digestible sound bites from an army of ‘experts’ all contradicting one another, all trying to seem more ‘shocking’ and ‘in-depth’ than the last one. It was all so confusing, nobody seemed to know what to do.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“The only rule that ever made sense to me I learned from a history, not an economics, professor at Wharton. “Fear,” he used to say, “fear is the most valuable commodity in the universe.” That blew me away. “Turn on the TV,” he’d say. “What are you seeing? People selling their products? No. People selling the fear of you having to live without their products.” Fuckin’ A, was he right. Fear of aging, fear of loneliness, fear of poverty, fear of failure. Fear is the most basic emotion we have. Fear is primal. Fear sells.
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

The Democrat Party in a nutshell.


My own personal Fourth Orwellian Precept (which includes WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH).

“If you believe you can accomplish everything by “cramming” at the eleventh hour, by all means, don’t lift a finger now. But you may think twice about beginning to build your ark once it has already started raining”
― Max Brooks, The Zombie Survival Guide

“When I believe in my ability to do something, there is no such word as no.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“. . . show the other side, the one that gets people out of bed the next morning, makes them scratch and scrape and fight for their lives because someone is telling them that they’re going to be okay.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“This is the only time for high ideals because those ideals are all that we have. We aren’t just fighting for our physical survival, but for the survival of our civilization. We don’t have the luxury of old-world pillars. We don’t have a common heritage, we don’t have a millennia of history. All we have are the dreams and promises that bind us together. All we have…is what we want to be.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

“…We were a shaken, broken species, driven to the edge of extinction and grateful only for tomorrow with perhaps a little less suffering than today. Was this the legacy we would leave our children, a level of anxiety and self-doubt not seen since our simian ancestors cowered in the tallest trees? What kind of world would they rebuild? Would they rebuild at all? Could they continue to progress, knowing that they would be powerless to reclaim their future? And what if that future saw another rise of the living dead? Would our descendants rise to meet them in battle, or simply crumple in meek surrender and accept what they believe to be their inevitable extinction? For this alone, we had to reclaim our planet. We had to prove to ourselves that we could do it, and leave that proof as this war’s greatest monument. The long, hard road back to humanity, or the regressive ennui of Earth’s once-proud primates. That was the choice, and it had to be made now.”
― Max Brooks, World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War

The Future is yours. So is living through “The Walking Dead” and “1984” for real.


-Ism Triggers are Everywhere!

Gone are the days when trigger warnings were saved for extreme subjects, such as rape, as a heads up to allow those who might have experienced such evil a chance to avoid reliving it.

Nowadays, just about any innocuous subject might prompt the modern college student to throw on a trigger warnings for a variety of reasons, mostly having to do with perceived oppression such as racism, sexism, classism, able-bodyism, heterosexism, and all the other isms.

The practice has been watered down since its beginning, becoming not only meaningless, but also infantilizing.

As a student at Barnard, a private women’s college in Manhattan, I come across trigger warnings daily. Most often, I see them in campus Facebook groups, but occasionally too in campus magazines or during in-class conversations.

Online, where I encounter them most frequently, these warnings take the form of captions at the top of posts. They say “trigger warning” or “content warning,” or simply, “tw” or “cw.”

Here are some of the topics I’ve recently seen trigger warnings on. (And no, trigger warnings aren’t given ironically. To do so would be insensitive, you jerk.)

Pokemon GO
Huh? Pokemon GO is problematic? Yes, of course it is. Everything is problematic. But why? Well, some people believe Pokemon GO is a racist and classist game. Not only that, but people have alleged that it’s ableist, too. So much for “it’s just a game.”

Barnard students are not the first to label Pokemon GO as offensive, however. Last month, racial advocate Aura Brogado led a long Twitter rant outlining why she feels Pokemon GO is a racist, sexist, classist, transphobic app deliberately geared for the “white male city-dweller” and inconveniently so for people who are “black or latinx.”

U.S. Constitution
I did a double take when I saw “tw: constitution” placed on a post rejoicing the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. The logic is simple: the U.S. is, according to some students and professors, a tyrannical and colonialistic empire founded via the genocide of Native Americans and the enslavement of Africans. For students, particularly those of color, the Constitution needs a trigger warning because it could prompt thoughts of oppression, persecution, genocide, and other social ills.

‘White men’
Contemporary feminism deems men as oppressors and threats. And in the hierarchy of oppressors, white men sit atop the food chain. So not only do I come across trigger warnings on posts about men — what they’ve said or done — but I also saw this one: “TW: white men” — used on an article on fraternity brothers behaving badly.

Donald Trump
At my school, contempt for conservatives is de rigueur. Anyone to the political right is considered not just bad, but dangerous. Thus, mentions of politicians such as Donald Trump, Carly Fiorina and Paul Ryan, or conservative values (such as gun rights), often come with a trigger warning attached. For example, it’s not uncommon to see a news article with something Donald Trump said tagged with “trigger warning: Trump, racism.”

The Police
Police.ThomasHawk.FlickrNeed I say more? I live in New York City; whenever the police are spotted on campus, my timeline erupts in trigger warnings. Statuses such as “Trigger warning: Just seen on Broadway Ave and 116th Street, NYPD vans. Stay inside!” are common. Police are associated with police brutality, racism, and the historical legacy of black oppression in America.

Traditional Gender Roles
The traditional male/female binary is oppressive, according to far-left logic. It limits women, we’re told. So, any references to gender roles can be hurtful. For example, it may be triggering to ask a female student if she wants children when she’s older, because to ask would be to play into the stereotype that women have an inherent maternal instinct, we have been warned.

There are other topics, of course. Thanksgiving. The Second Amendment. And so on. But to cite them all would be like trying to list all the “isms” — it’s an endless parade of affronts that seemingly has no end in sight.

Well, isn’t just disagreeing with or even challenging the little Narcissists enough to set them off?

They don’t anyone near that might ever have a different opinion and they sure as hell don’t want them expressed!

Freedom Speech is a Trigger Warning , in and of itself, after all. The Document that gives them that freedom is a Trigger Warning!

We are so doomed.


The Last Bastion Of Democrats

Kurt  Schlichter
Kurt Schlichter

This week we found out that 40% of Americans are irredeemably racist – isn’t that the takeaway from Hillary’s ad and her speech about how anyone voting for Trump is one step away from pulling a hood out of the hamper and firing up a cross? Then we found out that a bunch of bitter virgins sitting at keyboards who occasionally take a break from viewing My Little Pony-themed porn to tweet about their Nordic heritage are the major driver behind Donald Trump. Has anyone actually met a member of the Alt Right in real life? I haven’t, but then I don’t cruise Doritos-strewn basements.

It’s all a lie, and that’s to be expected from a malignant and corrupt monster like Hillary Clinton and her coterie of suck-ups and henchpeople in and out of the media. But it’s more than just a run of the mill, lie du jour like her straight-faced insistence that Comey’s devastating closing argument about her myriad email crimes was, in fact, an exoneration. This is the kind of lie that poisons a political culture, that does real and lasting damage, but what the hell do the progressives care about that? They have been destroying America’s political rules, norms and customs for decades, with the pedal fully to the metal during the last eight years. The only silver lining has been that President Mom Jeans would have caused even greater damage if he didn’t love golfing so much.

Hillary’s racism lie, in which she linked Republicans to the kreepy klown kar her party created and in which her senatorial mentor Robert Byrd served as a Grand Imperial Cyborg Wizard Dragon or something, was not just your typical leftist slander against normal Americans. It was an attempt to marginalize fully 40% of the electorate desperate enough to avoid her no-doubt catastrophic reign by voting for Donald Trump. She and the left want to write this entire chunk of the electorate out of any voice in their own governance by authorizing her progressive supporters to disregard any duty to consider, represent or respect those alleged troglodytes. When these aspiring fascists babble about “crushing Trumpism,” what they are really saying is that they wish to permanently disenfranchise anyone on board the Trump Train instead of the Clinton Express to Venezuela.

 But there is no such thing as “Trumpism” – to credit The Donald with an ideology is ridiculous. Instead, there is simply raw opposition to progressivism, which right now has coalesced around a billionaire adolescent, and that opposition is what they truly seek to crush.

We have already seen a preview of how she will rule for the benefit of the connected and favored – just look at Hillary visiting Louisiana. Oh wait, she’s didn’t – she was fundraising in Hollywood. She cares nothing for those waterlogged Louisianans because Louisianans, wet or dry, will never vote for her. And so they must be punished – this is her clumsy object lesson on the price of opposition to her rule. And there will be more of it. There will be two Americas under Hillary, the connected one and the enemy. Guess which America you and I will be part of?

This election cycle is already proving to be a preview of the Clinton presidency. She’s shamelessly lying, with a mainstream media covering for her with various levels of discomfort – some talking heads seem a bit embarrassed when trying to explain how Hillary isn’t really lying to their faces when she’s obviously lying to their faces, while others don the gimp suit to revel in the luscious contempt she shows for them. She is effectively announcing that she will be unaccountable, and she will be unaccountable by all normal political remedies.

It’s the abnormal remedies we should worry about. Once upon a time, presidents did not so blatantly pick and choose among their citizens, dividing them into the favored and disfavored so obviously and so cruelly. They did not openly insist that they would bypass the Congress by executive fiat and through unelected judges to effectively pass laws the people’s representatives rejected. They did not promise to restore unconstitutional laws that made criticizing them a crime. And the media did not openly admit their commitment to supporting their favored president by ignoring blatant corruption. The political coalition currently in power did not openly conspire to effectively exile a huge chunk of the electorate from participation in their own governance.

Abnormal actions spark abnormal reactions; when you throw out the rule book it becomes a very different game. Do they think the disenfranchised, many of whom defended this country in war, are just going to sit back and quietly accept that they no longer have any voice in their own lives, that they must obey the commands of hateful liberal bullies who delight in inflicting petty abuse and insults upon them? Or will there be a reaction? When you ignore the rules and customs and norms and laws, you should not be surprised when your opponents likewise ignore the rules and customs and norms and laws. And then what?

Because Hillary’s towering hatred for normal Americans is dwarfed only by the yawning chasm that is her wisdom deficit, she cannot see the fetid swamp at the bottom of the slippery slope she is rushing down. She will do something stupid, believing that people will simply obey her from habit as if the old legitimacy that made obeying the law habitual still applied. She is going to keep pushing, until at some point, someone is going to tell her “No.”

She will try to confiscate guns or attempt to eliminate dissident Christianity by eliminating tax deductions for churches or decide to thrill her pals in San Francisco by ruining the Lone Star state’s economy by banning fracking, and someone like Governor Greg Abbot is going to tell her “No. No, we aren’t doing that here in Texas. Your rules no longer apply here. Not unless you can enforce them. And trying to do that would be a very bad idea.”

And then that vindictive fool and her allies will have to decide what they will do when mere words and decrees are no longer enough to disenfranchise her opponents.


Snowflake Freakout

Social Justice Warriors Predictably Freak Out Over University Of Chicago's 'No Safe Space' Policy
Christine wrote about this yesterday, but the administrators at the University of Chicago are my new heroes. They straight up told the class of 2020 that there will be no safe spaces, no trigger warnings, no uninviting of speakers because some people are averse to diverse opinions. It’s a refreshing sign to see this higher education institution disembowel the political correctness culture in their sphere, though it has infested our college campuses. Well, to no one’s surprise, the social justice warriors’ blood pressure went through the roof when the news broke. Emily Zanotti of Heat Street had more on these precious liberals losing their hair over UoC declaring that they’re for academic freedom. What horrible people, right?

One student told DNA Info that the administration was asking students to “check their compassion and their experiences at the door.” Another, the head of the campus sexual assault survivors network, said that this was simply the latest failure by the college to cater to interest groups.“The administration has a huge problem with transparency, and they have been slow to address issues related to sexual violence, disability injustice, police discrimination and many more,” she said.

Vox posted an op-ed accusing the college of “exercising power” over its students, calling trigger warnings “pedagogical imperatives.” The piece also defended students who shouted down or ousted controversial speakers from other campuses, saying that they “challenge” academic professors and “hold us accountable” for their institutional biases.

The New Republicwhined that the University of Chicago was “attacking academic freedom” by telling students to think more critically about shutting down speakers and shutting off conversation.

Zanotti also found some tremendous tweets from this meltdown:

Well, a) yes, you have the right to be offensive; b) It’s not the Milton Friedman Institute For Screwing The Third World; it’s the Hugo Chavez Institute—and they’ve thoroughly and brutally screwed over Venezuela; c) it’s conservatives that have been the victims of your precious political correctness agenda, so dear wee lads—they’re going to be able to express themselves without having the fear of torches and pitchforks showing up outside their dormitory.

I hope the university of Chicago stands their ground. I hope they don’t cave, and I hope other liberal institutions smash this incorrigible anti-American (and anti-intellectual), progressive agenda to dust. Liberals and conservatives can express themselves without fear of harassment. That’s not controversial. The whole world thinks your safe space nonsense is a joke. Moreover, the fact that you feel like a no safe space policy is going to create a scene akin to the atomic bombing of Hiroshima is also utterly laughable.

Yes, liberals will remain the dominant force on campus, or at least until the alumni start paying taxes and get jobs, but conservative at UoC can feel somewhat better I guess that an administration won’t be kowtowing to a rather vicious anti-free speech agenda.

I wish you well in your studies, freshman.

“Poking fun at other people’s beliefs, while it may seem frivolous and offensive, is a non-negotiable right. It is a principle that underpins free speech, the basis for progress.”
maajid nawa
free speech

Tanning Your Privilege

I was home sick on Friday. So in my misery I decided to think up a ridiculous thing that mindless, brainless, zombie Liberals could be “offended” by that was utterly ludicrous.

I came up with White people getting a Tan.

And wouldn’t you know it, The Huffington Post obliged (several months ago apparently).

Swedish company Emmaatan came under fire on Friday for selling a dark-colored self-tanner called “Dark Chocolate,” after pictures were posted to its social media pages that featured white models with skin that appeared to mimic black skin. With other products that have names like “Caramel” and “Dark Ash Onyx,” some black people argued that Emmaatan was yet another example of white people appropriating black features. 

Image result for emmatan dark chocolate

The Owner of the Salon in Teen Vogue: “I’m a small tanning business in Sweden and I’ve been working with beauty for 2 years in August. I’m a hard working owner of emmaatan and love working with beauty cause I get to appreciate all types of looks and figures. I’m in [shock] for the response I’ve gotten and may have responded and commented the wrong way because I expect Ppl to know how Spraytan works . I’ve got a lot of feedback and mostly been called “black face” and racist. Ppl looks at my pic I’ve posted and without a blink assuming we desire to look black, I understand why it might seem that way and I apologise for the miss understanding,” Alm wrote.

“My color isn’t going for black it’s going for a natural golden tan when you wash it off. I never want my customers to look unnatural or too dark since we usually have a lighter skin tone . You also have to understand I have ppl with dark and pale skin tone and therefore look darker or lighter. I love all skin types and that’s why I think ppl should be able to choose for what they feel good in, as long as you respect ppl around you. I understand a lot of you don’t agree with the tan industry but I don’t want you to think we want to go for a crazy black tan, we don’t!”

In a statement posted by Emmaatan via their Instagram, the company’s owner Emma Patissier apologized for “the misunderstanding.” But she insisted that her products weren’t designed to mimic black skin, she wrote: “I never want my customers to look unnatural or to [sic] dark since we usually have a lighter skin tone.”

So in this case, because it’s the Leftist SJW whacko agenda, “intent” and “misunderstanding”is not good enough to get you off the hook with them.

Image result for emmatan dark chocolate
But when they use it as an excuse you MUST buy it because it’s the truth, right? 🙂
Like SUNY Binghampton and their “Stop White People” training course.

“For those who were familiar with the hashtag used in the title, it was understood not to be literal,” writes Rose, reaffirming what he stated in his previous message to the public. “Nonetheless, the program should not have been so titled. Out of context, it is offensive and alarming. That was not the intent.

Well, that’s ok, then, it’s not like you were spewing racist assumptions about white people.

Forgive and Forget when they say it. But when you do it, well, there is no forgiveness and they never forget. Funny how that works out. 🙂

So Let’s all get mad and upset about Tanning instead. Then we’ll move onto the next target of outrage.

Rose’s first statement said he had “no indication that this particular program was inconsistent with the respectful environment we hope to support and sustain,” adding that the hashtag is “commonly used ironically.”

Isn’t it ironic that they don’t understand irony? 🙂

But they can go banana fruit cake crazy about a Tanning!

Jessica (blackgirllonghair.com): [..] i think the fundamental issue here is that whiteness is a privilege and blackness is not. [..] This is black face. No matter how you spin it. This is bottled blackness, made for the appropriation of privileged white consumers.

This is why we have a Liberal Zombie Apocalypse in 2016.


Snowflake Alert

University of Chicago class of 2020, get ready for a college experience filled with debate, discussion — and possibly discomfort.

In other words, reality.

Conservative cheered and liberals frowned. Over at Vox, Emily Crockett writes about safe spaces and what they mean:

“For me as a black woman, it’s really nice to just go out with other black women sometimes,” said Sabrina Stevens, an activist and progressive strategist. “I have to do so much less translation. When you’re black around white people, you have to explain every little thing, even with people who are perfectly nice and well-meaning.”

White people are stupid and insensitive, after all. But she’s not racist… 🙂

One college administrator has taken a bold stance against the demise of free speech on America’s campuses, warning newly admitted students that they will find no “safe spaces” at his school.

John Ellison, Dean of Students for the College at the University of Chicago, welcomed students to campus with a warning, but not the kind typically issued at a university.

“Academic freedom means that we do not support so-called ‘trigger warnings,’…[or] intellectual ‘safe spaces’.”   

“Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so called ‘trigger warnings,’ we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual ‘safe spaces’ where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own,” Ellison writes in the letter, a copy of which was obtained by Intellectual Takeout.

Indeed, UC has been praised for its stance on free speech ever since a faculty committee released a commitment to freedom of expression last year, a policy that has since been adopted by several other schools.

Accordingly, Ellison touted UC’s free speech policy as one of its “defining characteristics,” saying this is “captured in the university’s faculty report on freedom of expression.”

“Members of our community are encouraged to speak, write, listen, challenge, and learn, without fear of censorship. Civility and mutual respect are vital to all of us, and freedom of expression does not mean the freedom to harass or threaten others,” he continues. “You will find that we expect members of our community to be engaged in rigorous debate, discussion, and even disagreement.”

Acknowledging that ”at times this may challenge you and even cause discomfort,” Ellison nonetheless insists that “fostering the free exchange of ideas reinforces a related university priority—building a campus that welcomes people of all backgrounds.”

As colleges across the country wrestle with balancing academic freedom and open discourse with student health and safety, University of Chicago Dean of Students John Ellison told incoming freshmen in a letter what they should expect on campus.

“Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so-called ‘trigger warnings,’ we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual ‘safe spaces’ where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own,” the letter said.

Trigger warnings — used to alert students of sensitive material that might be uncomfortable, offensive or traumatic to them, such as discussions about race and sexual assault — and safe spaces, designed to shelter students from certain speakers and topics, have become more common and controversial on campuses across the country.

According to a survey of more than 800 college educators by the National Coalition Against Censorship, a majority — 62 percent — said they think trigger warnings have or will have a negative effect on academic freedom. Only 17 percent reported favorable views of trigger warnings, meaning that they have or could have a positive effect on education and classroom dynamics.

And while formal policies on trigger warnings are rare — fewer than 1 percent of respondents said their institution had one — 15 percent said students had requested trigger warnings in their courses, and 12 percent said students complained about the absence of such warnings, according to the report from the coalition of more than 50 national nonprofits supporting First Amendment principles.

At the University of Chicago, fostering the free exchange of ideas helps build a welcoming campus, Ellison told students in the letter, which accompanied a book titled “Academic Freedom and the Modern University: The Experience of the University of Chicago” by John Boyer, a university dean and professor, a university spokesman said.

The letter included a link to a university report issued by its Committee on Freedom of Expression, established in 2015 to articulate the university’s policy on free expression.

“It is not the proper role of the University to attempt to shield individuals from ideas and opinions they find unwelcome, disagreeable, or even deeply offensive,” the report states. “Although the University greatly values civility, and although all members of the University community share in the responsibility for maintaining a climate of mutual respect, concerns about civility and mutual respect can never be used as a justification for closing off discussion of ideas, however offensive or disagreeable those ideas may be to some members of our community.”

The university is preparing students for the real world and would not be serving them by shielding them from unpleasantness, said Geoffrey Stone, chair of the committee, law professor and past provost at the U. of C.

“The right thing to do is empower the students, help them understand how to fight, combat and respond, not to insulate them from things they will have to face later,” Stone said.

While the university doesn’t support, require or encourage trigger warnings, it does not prohibit them, he added. Professors are still free to alert students to certain material if they choose to do so.

Jane Kirtley, a media ethics and law professor at the University of Minnesota, called U. of C.’s move “refreshing.” She said colleges should resist setting limits on what views and opinions are acceptable to air in open forum and should encourage students to discuss things they find uncomfortable.

“If universities are not providing platforms for people to be offensive, then I don’t think that they’re doing part of their job,” Kirtley said. “If listening to Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton is going to make your blood pressure go up 400 points, then fine, don’t listen to them. But that doesn’t mean you can say we can’t have Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton speaking on campus because it would be offensive to even know they were talking.”

Another Midwestern institution has followed the University of Chicago’s lead. In 2015, the board of trustees at Purdue University in Indiana endorsed the principles articulated in the U. of C. report.

“Our commitment to open inquiry is not new, but adopting these principles provides a clear signal of our pledge to live by this commitment and these standards,” board Chairman Tom Spurgeon said in a statement at the time.

Purdue last week held a free speech panel moderated by faculty and administrators, and featuring student skits, as part of its orientation program to make incoming students aware of First Amendment principles and how to use their own voices to speak out against ideas they disagree with, said Steve Schultz, legal counsel for the university.

“We want them to be aware they will see things on campus, be involved in situations where others will inevitably say things they may not agree with, and we want them to know that’s OK,” he said.

The debate over freedom of expression and safe spaces has played out at other universities in the Chicago area and across the country.

Earlier this month, DePaul University denied a request to have conservative commentator Ben Shapiro give a speech at the university, citing security concerns, after his talks had sparked protests on other campuses. And in May, a protest disrupted and forced the cancellation of an appearance by Milo Yiannopoulos, a conservative blogger with Breitbart News Network.

In a statement to the Tribune after the Shapiro cancellation, DePaul spokeswoman Carol Hughes said: “DePaul University’s Office of Public Safety determined, after observing events which took place when Mr. Shapiro spoke elsewhere, that it was not in a position to provide the type of security that would be required to properly host this event at this time.”

In 2014, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice backed out of giving the commencement speech at Rutgers University after student protests centered on her involvement in the Iraq War during the George W. Bush administration.

That same year, after a debate over sexual assault on campus was scheduled, students at Brown University organized a safe space on campus with counselors, bubbles, Play-Doh and pillows. The space was designed to give students who might find the discussion troubling a place to recuperate, The New York Times reported.

And last year, a Northwestern University professor who wrote a controversial essay on how colleges police faculty-student relationships sparked a national debate over academic and sexual freedom. After the publication of the essay by communications professor Laura Kipnis, two students filed Title IX complaints contending that Kipnis created a “chilling effect” on their ability to report sexual misconduct. Kipnis, who was cleared after an investigation, made clear that sexual abusers should be punished but also chided the university for its ban on faculty members dating students, arguing that such policies treat students as vulnerable children.

Northwestern also waded into controversy last year when it proposed moving some Campus Inclusion and Community offices into the Black House, the social and academic epicenter for black students, professors and staff on campus for decades.

The backlash was swift and strong. Many said the purpose of creating the Black House in the late 1960s was to give black people on campus a dedicated place to share experiences unique to them.

Northwestern later abandoned its plans.

Northwestern officials declined to comment for this story, but in a January editorial in The Washington Post, President Morton Schapiro cited the Black House controversy as an experience that helped convince him that “safe spaces” were necessary on the Evanston campus.

“I’m an economist, not a sociologist or psychologist, but those experts tell me that students don’t fully embrace uncomfortable learning unless they are themselves comfortable,” Schapiro wrote. “The irony, it seems, is that the best hope we have of creating an inclusive community is to first create spaces where members of each group feel safe.”

Colleen Crane, a University of Michigan lecturer in social work, supports the use of trigger warnings in some cases.

Crane included a trigger warning on her syllabus for a course that involved 16 hours of discussions on personal trauma, in part to prepare students to have the same kind of talks with potential patients.

“A trigger warning gives a pause and reflection for the student in that classroom,” Crane said. “I think it’s kind of important to remind people that the content can be triggering, and to almost prepare yourself mentally, emotionally and physically to be discussing this in the context of a classroom.”

Crane said that in some cases the warning helped free students who wanted to share personal stories. But she said she’s also received several evaluations from students who said they still didn’t feel prepared for how agonizing and distressing the class sessions would be.

But college professors are not responsible for students’ emotional health, according a report issued by American Association of University Professors. That responsibility lies with counselors and other mental health experts.

“Some discomfort is inevitable in classrooms if the goal is to expose students to new ideas, have them question beliefs they have taken for granted, grapple with ethical problems they have never considered, and, more generally, expand their horizons so as to become informed and responsible democratic citizens,” an AAUP committee wrote in a 2014 report on the issue. “Trigger warnings suggest that classrooms should offer protection and comfort rather than an intellectually challenging education. They reduce students to vulnerable victims rather than full participants in the intellectual process of education.” (Campus Reform and Chicago Tribune)

But Liberal like “victims”. They thrive on “victims”. They self-perpetuate them.

#Stop White People

The State University of New York (SUNY) at Binghamton is now offering a course called “#StopWhitePeople2K16” as part of routine training for residential assistants.

Nothing screams tolerance and diversity like a university workshop designed to target white people.

The university’s residential assistant training schedule lists “#StopWhitePeople2016” on its roster, with the mission of giving RA’s an “overview of disabilities in Higher Education.”

The presenters of the course, Ciaran Slattery, Nicholas Pulakos, and Urenna Nwogwugwu, are all RAs at the state-funded college, which describes itself as New York’s highest-ranking public college. They state their purpose is to “help others take the next step in understanding diversity, privilege, and the society we function within,” presumably the “white” society they plan to “stop” at the event.

The three RAs claim they will give “#StopWhitePeople2K16” course attendees the “tools” to respond to “uneducated people” with “‘good’ arguments.” You know, the people who preach mutual respect, equality under God, and constitutional freedoms. Those people.

They also state they will help other RAs at the state-funded college “hopefully expand upon what they may already know”: that white people are cancer, of course.

Get a load of the course description:

“The premise of this session is to help others take the next step in understanding diversity, privilege, and the society we function within.”

I developed a micro-aggression just reading that nonsense. (Todd Starnes)

The hilarious fact that they are, in and of themselves RACISTS, is almost as hilarious as the fact that if you presented that to them their brains would be totally incapable of processing such thoughtcrimes and they’d just consider you “uneducated” and probably say something condescending and sanctimonious.

“We verified that the actual program content was not ‘anti-white’,” said Brian Rose, vice president for student affairs.

Orwell’s work is done.

“The terrifying implication here is not that students on campus think it is appropriate to call an event by that name, but that the university seems to endorse it as a proper part of a RA training,” wrote Howard Hecht in the Binghamton Review. “If Binghamton University is going to endorse ‘stopping’ someone due to his or her skin color, without any explanation for why he or she must be ‘stopped,’ would that not be a real example of racism on campus?”

The training session obviously did not invent the phrase “stop white people.” The line is a popular one among social media users and is used to critique alleged ignorance of white privilege, ranging from jabs at overtly offensive behavior to jokes about petty subjects like white people dancing — the class’ name was probably a reference to this cultural meme. 

Thanks to the SUNY Binghamton class, the hashtag #StopWhitePeople was trending on Twitter Wednesday. Although, while many posted about SUNY Binghamton, many users ignored the news story in favor of unrelated posts with the hashtag. The trending topic also led to an angry backlash from people upset about the potentially divisive interpretations of the hashtag. 

Ya think?

Racism as “civil rights”. Wow! Orwell’s work is done. Their brains are overcooked mush and they have no clue that it is.

Binghamton University has not commented on it, but the Daily Caller points out the school’s official R.A. guide encourages “an environment where interaction between people of different cultural and ethnic backgrounds as well as the sharing of divergent opinions and beliefs are respected and welcomed.”

So when the course attendees  are given the “tools” to respond to “uneducated people” with “‘good’ arguments” that would be the people with divergent opinions and beliefs, right?  🙂

In other words, White People, Conservatives, and Religious People (or just ANYONE who disagrees with them at all). The Un-Persons of the Liberal “tolerance” and “diversity” cult.

From Binghamton Review


Bayou Bullshit

Remember the charges of “flying over” and “not caring enough” during Katrina?

The FEMA Trailers and the $2500 Debit cards?

Well, Louisiana suffered major flooding that the state’s capital that has more than 106,000 residents and households to register for assistance from the Federal Emergency Management Agency. More than 60,000 homes were damaged, officials said, and 13 people were killed.

No outcry from the Media and the Leftist like Katrina. Hmmm…

But Obama was too busy vacationing at Martha’s Vineyard (remember the cracks about Crawford, Texas or Kinnebunkport,ME??) to be bothered.

Hillary doesn’t care.

The Media let it slide. After all, they are their side.

Trump went down there, not for a photo-op, and was criticized by the Leftist for it.

Typical. But don’t worry, they aren’t biased. 🙂

Hillary Clinton, Trump’s Democratic opponent, said Monday that she too plans a trip to the flood site. Her campaign said in a statement that she would come to the state at an unspecified time in the future.
“This month’s floods in Louisiana are a crisis that demand a national response,” she said. “I am committed to visiting communities affected by these floods, at a time when the presence of a political campaign will not disrupt the response, to discuss how we can and will rebuild together.”
I’ll be there when I feel like it. Right now, you aren’t important enough for me.

So what difference does it make, anyways?

playing through

The people finally shame our Dear Leadr in a pity Photo-Op stop and what does he do?

He lectures them on his Agenda!

President Obama can’t be bothered to cut his vacation short to do his job as residents of Louisiana grapple with disastrous flooding, but his administration does have time to send an offensive memo.

The Washington Times reported that the Obama Department of Justice sent a 16-page guidance to Louisiana residents on Tuesday who are receiving federal disaster assistance, warning them not to engage in “unlawful discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin (including limited English proficiency).”

The memo states that the guidance’s frameworks “highlight the importance of complying with nondiscrimination requirements of civil rights statutes, addressing the needs of the whole community, and ensuring equal opportunity to access recovery efforts.”

Louisianans are struggling to help themselves and their neighbors with food and shelter in a disaster that has seen the deaths of 13 people as well as the damage of over 40,000 homes, but the Obama administration thinks a lecture on diversity is most important.

Some were rightfully offended by the inappropriate memo, including The American Conservative’s Rod Dreher, who said in a post on Thursday: “E]verywhere you look you can find black folks and white folks loving on each other, helping each other through this crisis.”

Dreher referenced Obama’s refusal to leave his vacation in his rebuke of the “long bureaucratic memo” sent to Louisianans by the “Department of Justice and many other agencies of the executive branch overseen by He Who Cannot Be Troubled to Leave Martha’s Vineyard.”

The memo cited instances they deem discriminatory from previous disasters such as Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005, including “numerous media reports [that] showed images of African Americans stranded on roofs in New Orleans.”

The guidance claims the images “exposed significant inequalities in access to emergency response and recovery efforts”

The memo also referenced a renter who preferred to rent to “two white females” in an ad directed to disaster evacuees. Funny, I don’t remember a memo going out about the Claremont Colleges students who put an ad out where they refused to room with white people…

While Drehrer said that Louisianans need to “own our mistakes” when it comes to discrimination, he noted that during this disaster, the last thing they needed was a lecture that ignores the way the community has come together including people of all races.

Drehrer cited a local man named Jimmy who told him in an email that “not many things get me seething, but this does,” and called the Obama administration”dividers instead of uniters.”

The email went on to say: “Look no further than this ‘guidance’ press release telling us in the middle of it to be sure not to be racist, y’all. Meanwhile, our President enjoys golfing and Martha’s Vineyard and sunny skies. No visits, not even that reviled [George W.] Bush flyover. Just politically motivated, radically laced memos.”

Nice job Obama, way to miss the mark yet again! (endingthefed.com)

But a bullsit bulleye for ticking off Agenda items. And the media will no doubt be gushing over his “compassion” and “sensitivity”.


Social Justice Warriors Beware

From Chicks on The Right:

I’ll be curious to see how the raging lunatic SJWs take this news (or if they’ll simply ignore it).

They’ll ignore it. Thoughtcrimes are always ignored. Facts not on the Agenda, doubly so.

According to this, the scholarly journal “The New Atlantis” published a research study about sexuality and gender. The study basically debunks EVERYTHING popular opinion has told us about human sexual orientation and gender identity being innate. Bottom Line: The argument that “I was born this way” does not hold up under scientific scrutiny –

The belief that sexual orientation is an innate, biologically fixed human property—that people are ‘born that way’—is not supported by scientific evidence.


Likewise, the belief that gender identity is an innate, fixed human property independent of biological sex—so that a person might be a ‘man trapped in a woman’s body’ or ‘a woman trapped in a man’s body’—is not supported by scientific evidence.


Only a minority of children who express gender-atypical thoughts or behavior will continue to do so into adolescence or adulthood. There is no evidence that all such children should be encouraged to become transgender, much less subjected to hormone treatments or surgery.


Non-heterosexual and transgender people have higher rates of mental health problems (anxiety, depression, suicide), as well as behavioral and social problems (substance abuse, intimate partner violence), than the general population. Discrimination alone does not account for the entire disparity.

Oh gee, denying your biological makeup in favor of your FEEEEEEEEELINGS leads to mental health problems? Who could have guessed?

In this clip, the editor of the journal interviews the top researchers on this study, Dr. Paul McHugh and Dr. Lawrence Mayer, both of Johns Hopkins University –


“Science is never settled.” Dr. McHugh – you are my new favorite person!

Note how Dr. Mayer points out that there just isn’t enough long-term data for how transgenderism – particularly in children – affect people over the course of their lives. Yet people are insisting that children AND adults can just “feel” that they were born in the wrong body and they have to go through all these mental and physical hoops to get there, as well as forcing the rest of society to deny what is right in front of our faces!

We’ve talked about medical and scientific professionals’ findings on this subject before and, more often than not, we get quite a bit of blowback from the left about it. This is just adding one more scientific source that says “Biology doesn’t work like that.” And certainly not on the scale that social justice Tumblrinas would have you believe (you spend enough time on Tumblr, you’d swear that EVERYBODY in the world is LGBTQIAAXYZWTFBBQ).

I’m not surprised that these researchers came to these conclusions. I think I’m more surprised that The New Atlantis actually published it (admittedly, this is the first I’ve heard of The New Atlantis. But then again, I don’t keep tabs on the eleventy-skillion scholarly journals that exist out there). Politically correct academia doesn’t typically make it a habit of publicly admitting findings that are going to hack off their Cult of Social Justice masters. So, I have to applaud The New Atlantis for having the brass ones to actually do this.



I just got to watch the Star Trek 50th Anniversary Special that was The History Channel last weekend (I was distracted by my computer crash) and it made me weep. It really did.
Mostly because we as humans don’t seem to aspire to the aspirations of Star Trek anymore and that makes me sad. I have found recently that one of the reasons I am drawn to both Star Trek & Doctor Who is that innate sense of hope that pervades both series. Hope, that I don’t have or see. That inspires.
But especially in the last few years I see not only less of this I see it’s polar opposite – Political Correctness- and that makes me sad. Where we can’t debate or disagree with one another anymore. It’s all “I’m right” and that’s it. Where you get banned for making a point that someone else thinks is potentially “offensive”. But the essence of Free Speech is to be able to offend people. To make them think. To make them question. That’s what Star Trek all the time. They said what was considered ‘radical’ like having a Black Woman as an Officer on the Bridge. To wonder why being Black on one side of your face makes the guy with the black on the other side so different that you hate them. That may have been a bit blunt in it’s metaphor but it had a profound effect on me as a kid.
But I guess that was just my “White Privilege” speaking. After all, it the current thinking that all White people are inherently racists, right?
People who disagree with you are inherently hateful  and disrespectful.
Where pettiness and grievances is all that we have left in common.
That’s not Star Trek.
That’s “Day of The Dove”. 🙂
That’s Orwell.
That’s not Freedom.
It’s not Hope.
It’s not Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations.
It’s just hate. Hate with an Agenda.
And I’m good at hate. Trust me.
It comes from growing up the way I did. Always being excluded. Always being made fun of. Never, ever, being a part of anything.
That’s why I like Star Trek. Why I like Doctor Who. So much more.
It’s so much more. We can be so much more.
But we have to want to be.
That’s why fandom is important to me. It gives me hope.
But I look at “microagressions” and “diversity” and “inclusion” and “hate speech and the Wars of Race, Gender, Class, and so on and I don’t have that hope.
Hope is fantastic thing. I don’t think we have much of it anymore and I don’t think man”y people want us to have it.
That’s the sad part.

Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow. The important thing is not to stop questioning.”–Albert Einstein

But we have stopped, haven’t we. Because we don’t to be a (insert demeaning label here) or we don’t want to hear what the other person says because it doesn’t “respect” our views. Meanwhile, we don’t “respect” there’s anyhow.

“Hope is being able to see that there is light despite all of the darkness.” Desmond Tutu

“We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope.” Martin Luther King, Jr.

“Let your hopes, not your hurts, shape your future.” Robert H. Schuller

it’s statistically unlikely that I will see Doctor Who or Star Trek’s 100th Anniversary in 2063 and 2066 respectively but I can still Hope, can’t I? 🙂



My man Derek Hunter scores again.

In a social media-driven world, everyone is a brand. When everyone becomes a brand, virtue signaling is destined to become an epidemic. When you’re a liberal, the best way to show how much more virtuous you are than other people is to become offended. The more trivial the issue you are offended by, the more caring, enlightened and, yes, virtuous you appear to other liberals. Moreover, if you think white privilege, racism and rape culture are running rampant, you’ll want to find ways to distinguish yourself from the masses, whom you view as troglodytes.  

I got banned from a Facebook Page I had been on for years by a Liberal because I said that Klinger (from M*A*S*H) could now go to the bathroom at Target.

It was deemed “potentially transphobic and political”.

And the Liberal was offended. So, I merely thanked him for his commitment to “Diversity” and got banned for not taking their Orwellian Political Correctness “seriously” enough.

As the great Thomas Sowell has said, “The charge is often made against the intelligentsia and other members of the anointed that their theories and the policies based on them lack common sense. But the very commonness of common sense makes it unlikely to have any appeal to the anointed. How can they be wiser and nobler than everyone else while agreeing with everyone else?”

Liberals are so wise, so noble, so unlike all you racists out there reading this that they’re offended by things that no one else would even think about. For example…

1) The Color Of Park Ranger Uniforms: Apparently, we need to change the color of Park Ranger uniforms because it might frighten illegal aliens entering the parks illegally or something….

For a minute there I thought he said Power Rangers, because this was too stupid to be read correctly. But that’s Liberalism for ya….

“The Park Rangers have offended someone, but not just anyone or any single individual. It seems the Rangers have offended and are said to be scaring an entire race of people. Yes, after 100 years of Park Ranger uniforms not offending anyone, it seems now the “Latino community” has a palpable fear of them.

And probably “always has” but NOW they are speaking up. After all, Liberals view themselves as COURAGEOUS in the face of bigotry and hatred.

Just not when they are being bigoted and hateful. 🙂

We know this because the designated representative of the entire Latino community said so. Wait, Maite Arce is not the duly elected, rightfully chosen representative of all Latinos everywhere? No – apparently not. She does, however, speak for a radical leftist group, similar to La Raza, the Hispanic Access Foundation (HAF), who promote the causes of illegal aliens – but only Latinos. If you are a Norwegian illegal – she doesn’t care.

La Raza, “The Race”. The people who want the US to give all of Southern Arizona back to Mexico because white people stole it in the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hildago!

Now what could possibly be her and her groups beef? It seems Park Ranger uniforms too closely resemble those of the border patrol and I.C.E. agents. Oh, the horror!

But The Border Patrol was neutered years ago by Obama and Holder (and now Lynch).

Near Gila Bend, AZ  (80 Miles south of Phoenix and several hundred miles from the Border!)

…Arce says that, “We are calling for drastic and scary change. One example I can give you is with the Latino community, especially among the border states, but even nationwide, just the simple color of the uniforms that rangers wear. It’s such a shame that something as simple as the uniform and its similarity to the border patrols’ uniform – in the coloring – could be very threatening to certain segments of the Latino population.”

Of course it’s not one example – it’s the only example and we all know what “certain segments of the Latino population” she is referring to – the only “segment” who might be concerned with being caught and deported. Sadly I don’t know where this fear originates. I.C.E. and the Border Patrol are under orders to catch and release if they even catch. So why on Earth should illegals fear the Park Rangers?”

2) “Vote Trump” Written In Chalk On The Sidewalks Of College Campuses: We’ve now reached the point where liberal students have become so sheltered that merely seeing support for a candidate that they don’t like sends them into a tizzy.

Just hours before four bombs ripped apart two transportation systems in Europe, Emory students were dealing with their own supposed terror situation. Sometime on Sunday night, someone had the audacity to scribble “Trump 2016,” “Vote Trump,” and “Trump!!!” with a writing utensil preferred by toddlers. The erasable chalk around the campus, with a simple political message, was all it took for these easily offended people to completely lose it, suffering emotional unrest that officials were forced to deal with.


The campus publication, The Emory Wheel, actually took this “chalk situation” seriously, seemingly siding with the crybaby college students who demanded to know how someone could rape their “safe space” with a candidate’s last name. Rather than walking over the words, or simply wiping away the words instead of their tears, 40 students banded together to protest this sidewalk “terrorism” inside the administration building.

…“I’m supposed to feel comfortable and safe here,” one female student said. “But this man is being supported by students on our campus and our administration shows that they, by their silence, support it as well … I don’t deserve to feel afraid at my school.”

Been there done this one in the past.

3) Calling America A “Land of Opportunity”: “The University of California sent a handout to faculty recently that includes a list of offensive statements. According to the handout, ‘America is the land of opportunity’ will be banned from campus.


…A University of California faculty leader-training handout instructed professors not to say that “America is the land of opportunity” because that’s a racist, sexist microaggression.

According to the handout, called “Tool: Recognizing Microaggressions and the Messages they Send,” the statement assert’[s] that race and gender [do] not play a role in life successes’ — despite the fact that saying opportunities exist and saying that opportunities are more easily attainable for some people than others are not mutually exclusive assertions.

Other microaggressions listed on the document include asking, ‘Where are you from or where were you born?” (because it suggests that the person you’re asking is “not a true American’); asking a post-doctoral minority student whether he or she is lost in the halls of a chemistry building (because it makes ‘the assumption that the person is trying to break into one of the labs’); and having students fill out forms on which they have to check a box indicating whether they’re male or female.

The school will now ban the phrase, ‘America is the land of opportunity.'”

4) Using the word “wife”: “A document provided to Breitbart News shows the investment banking behemoth JP Morgan Chase has joined a long line of major corporations in putting pressure on employees to sign up for the cause of gay rights. And they have not-so-subtly let each employee know not signing up will be noted.

Employees are being told “to help create an environment for open and honest dialogue.” The document notes descriptors such as “wife” and “boyfriend” are frowned upon, and “partner” is preferred. Not referring to your wife as your wife “offers up the opportunity for more inclusive conversations.”

5) The Word “Man” Being Too Much For Students At Princeton: “The Princeton University HR department has largely wiped the word “man” from its vocabulary.

The relatively new policy in effect at the Ivy League institution spells out the directive in a four-page memo that aims to make the department more gender inclusive.

Instead of using ‘man,’ employees are told to use words such as human beings, individuals or people.

…The memo goes on to list a variety of occupations that typically include the word ‘man’ in them and offers replacements: business person instead of businessman, firefighter instead of fireman, ancestors instead of forefathers, and so on.

…In a statement to The College Fix, John Cramer, Princeton’s director of media relations, said the guidelines ‘reflect the university’s initiative of fostering an inclusive environment.’

While Princeton’s language policy for its Offices of Communications and Human Resources, Princeton’s LGBT Center also offers a guide on various gender pronouns for those who identify as “transgender, genderqueer, and other gender-variant,” suggesting ‘ze, zie and hir,’ ‘they and theirs,’ and ‘Ey, em, eir and emself.’”

6) Applying The Word “Childless” To Women Without Children: “The Sex And The City star, who has been married three times, said she finds the term ‘childless’ offensive.

Miss (Kim) Cattrall, 59, believes that although she is not a biological mother, she is still a parent because of the role she plays in the lives of young actors, actresses and her nieces and nephews.

… The actress told the show how she dislikes the term ‘childless’.

She said: ‘It’s the ‘less’ that is offensive – childless – it sounds like you’re less because you haven’t had a child.”

7) The Name “Lynch”: “Students are demanding that (among other things) [Lebanon Valley College] administrators remove or modify the name of the “Lynch Memorial Hall” — not because the man it was named after was a racist, but because these students cannot handle the word “lynch.” Lynch, of course, is a term that means to put to death (as by hanging) by mob action without legal sanction.

Well, AG Loretta Lynch must give the Orwellian Thoughtcrime nightmares then. 🙂

…The hall was named after Clyde A. Lynch, who served as president of the college during the Great Depression and raised more than $500,000 for the physical education building that bears his name.”

Since when did history or truth matter to Liberals! 🙂

playing through

Check Your Privilege

Appalachian State University students must walk past a “privilege board” denouncing their white, male, able-bodied, Christian, or cisgender privilege any time they enter the Student Union.

The bulletin board is located in Plemmons Student Union (PSU), which the school calls “the centerpiece of the Appalachian campus,” and was apparently put up by a student group last semester, but has been allowed to remain in place to date.

“This makes me wanna go to my safe space!”


The bulletin board features fliers from the “Check Your Privilege” campaign started by professors at the University of San Francisco, and features memes with phrases such as “Look at all the privileges I haven’t checked.”

This isn’t the first time the board has shown up, though.

In 2015, Campus Reform reported the existence of a nearly-identical display at Appalachian State this one located in the East Hall dormitory, and reportedly placed there by a resident assistant.

Later that month, another bulletin board surfaced in the Cannon Hall dormitory telling students to check their “Christian privilege,” prompting at least one unknown student to colorfully express their objections with a ball point pen.

Associate Dean of Students Judith Haas confirmed that “the bulletin board is currently on display in the Student Union,” telling Campus Reform that “it was put up at the end of last semester by a student organization,” but declined to elaborate further.

Although the university appears nonplussed by the privilege board, students and others have mocked it mercilessly on social media.

“If you can express your political opinions without being called racist, sexist, bigot, etc. you have Liberal Privilege,” one post states.

“This makes me wanna go to my safe space!” declares another, while a third beseechingly calls for someone to confirm that the privilege board was meant ironically.

The PSU Mission Statement currently states that it is “run by and for students,” and “exists to create a safe and inclusive environment in which the Appalachian community strives to enhance students’ academic achievement and social experience.”

The facility also maintains a web page outlining its advertising policies, which includes specific sections for banners, bulletin boards, marquees, and display cases. Registered student organizations are allowed to post banners and marquees advertising upcoming events for up to one week prior to the event, and may reserve display cases “for event promotions” for up to two weeks.

Similarly, the policy on bulletin boards states that “advertisements must be for public events or membership recruitment functions held on campus, but cannot advertise weekly meetings,” and stipulates that “flyers must be no larger than 11”x17””

Spokespersons for Appalachian State University did not respond to requests for comment from Campus Reform, and Haas declined to offer additional comment or answer any further questions.

Incoming students at Amherst College will attend a mandatory screening of “I’m Not Racist…Am I?”, a film about racism and white privilege, during their new student orientation.

The Amherst orientation schedule says incoming students will attend a two hour event titled, “‘I’m Not Racist … Am I?’ Film and Discussion – MANDATORY”.

“People don’t do what you’re doing in here, which is why we freaking have so much racism.”   

The film “I’m Not Racist…Am I?” is a 2014 documentary that follows twelve New York City teens of varying races over the course of a year. Throughout the year, the teens participate in five workshops about racism, including playing a board game called “The American Dream,” making a song about racism, and discussing the “N-word.”

While the film website says the teens were aware that racism existed before the start of the project, they had to “push through naiveté, guilt and some tears” in order to reach a more “significant definition of racism.”

A counselor in a workshop claims to the teens, “People don’t do what you’re doing in here, which is why we freaking have so much racism.”

Emma Vallo, one of the teens featured in the film, talked to the Wall Street Journal about her experiences attending the workshops. At first, she said, she was put-off by an assertion by a workshop facilitator that all whites are racist because they benefit from an “institutionalized racist system.”

However, Vallo “ultimately came to agree with that position, prompting difficult conversations with her two adoptive dads.”

Another teen in the film says during a group discussion that, “you learn not to mess with the white people…that’s just how it is.”

Viewers will also question their ideas of race and privilege, says the film’s website.

“By the end of their time together, we’ll realize the hard work has only just begun, and these courageous teens won’t be the only ones asking, ‘I’m Not Racist… Am I?’”

Campus Reform reached out to Amherst College for comment but did not receive response by press time.

Dear Liberals,

How does your political bent threaten my and my sons personal liberty, you ask?  In your irrational attempt to classify things such as clothing, shelter, health care, employment, and income as basic human rights, you are placing a demand upon my time, my treasure, and my talents.  If you believe that you have a right to health care, and you are successful in persuading enough shallow thinkers to think as you do, then it will place a demand upon me to provide it to you.  If you believe that you have a right to a job, and more than half of America agrees with you, as a business owner, I am obligated to provide one to you, even if it means making my business less profitable.

When you demand $15 a hour and my labor cost double 1 of two things will happen, neither of them good. I will raise my prices, risking losing business or I will lay you off because I can’t afford your “entitled” ass.

The fact is, you can rail against my conservatism all you wish.  You can make fun of my Tea Party gatherings, and you can ridicule patriots in tri-corner hats until you wet yourself from mirth, but one thing is for certain: my political philosophy will NEVER be a threat to your freedom.

But you can’t say the say, can you. Your philosophy is all about obedience is pleasure and freedom is slavery.

 If you feel a burning responsibility to the poor, conservatism will never prevent you from working 80 hours per week and donating all of your income to charity.  If you feel a strong sense of pity for a family who cannot afford health insurance, my political philosophy will never prevent you from purchasing health insurance for this family or raising money to do so, if you cannot afford it, personally.  If you are moved with compassion for a family who is homeless, a conservative will never use the police power of government to prevent you from taking that family in to your own home or mobilizing your community to build one for them.

However, you cannot say the same for liberalism.  If I choose not to give to the poor for whatever reason, you won’t simply try to persuade me on the merits of the idea – you will seek to use the government as an instrument of plunder to force me to give to the poor.

And call me all kinds of childish name and wage a War on “rich” people. Meanwhile, you’ll vote for the most corrupt rich person you can find that is a Democrat.

 If we are walking down the street together and we spot a homeless person, using this logic, you would not simply be content with giving him $20 from your own pocket – you would hold a gun to my head and force me to give him $20, as well.

But we all know that Liberals are immune to actual logic. They “feel” everything. They are subjective, narcissistic and like a child want what they want, when they want it…

Everything that modern liberalism accomplishes is accomplished at the barrel of a government rifle.

So you bully everyone and then lecture them on the evils of bullying. 🙂

 You do not trust in the generosity of the American people to provide, through private charity, things such as clothing, food, shelter, and health care, so you empower the government to take from them and spend the money on wasteful, inefficient, and inadequate government entitlement programs.

You think everyone is too greedy. But who the more greedy…

“I have never understood why it is greed to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else’s money.” — Thomas Sowell

You are greedy with everyone elses money. Then you want to keep your own. Now THAT’s Greedy.

 You do not trust in the personal responsibility of the average American to wield firearms in defense of themselves and their families, so you seek to empower the government to criminalize the use and possession of firearms by private citizens.  Everytime you empower the government, you lose more of your personal liberty – it’s an axiomatic truth.

And you lie about it to start another War. After all, War, is Peace, right? 🙂

What angers me the most about you is the eagerness with which you allow the incremental enslavement to occur.  You are the cliched and proverbial frog in the pot who has actually convinced himself that he’s discovered a big, silver jacuzzi.

And we must all be forced to jump in.

 Somehow, you’re naive enough to believe that one more degree of heat won’t really matter that much.

What difference does it make? 🙂

I have the utmost respect for a slave who is continuously seeking a path to freedom.  What I cannot stomach is a free man who is continuous seeking a path to servitude by willingly trading his freedom for the false sense of security that government will provide.

I am reminded of Samuel Adams’ impassioned speech where he stated:

“If ye love wealth (or security) better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, — go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!”

Servitude can exist in a free society, but freedom cannot exist in a slave nation.

Freedom is Slavery. 🙂

 In a free country, you have the liberty to join with others of your political ilk and realize whatever collectivist ideals you can dream up.  You can start your own little commune where the sign at the front gate says, “From each according to his ability; to each according to his need”, and everyone can work for the mutual benefit of everyone else.  In my society, you have the freedom to do that.

In your society, I don’t have the same freedom.  If your collectivism offends me, I am not free to start my own free society within its borders.  In order for collectivism to work, everyone must be on board, even those who oppose it – why do you think there was a Berlin Wall?

In conclusion, just know that the harder you push to enact your agenda, the more hostile I will become – the harder I will fight you.  It’s nothing personal, necessarily.  If you want to become a slave to an all-powerful central government, be my guest.  But if you are planning to take me and my family down with you, as we say down here in the South, I will stomp a mud-hole in your chest and walk it dry.

Bring it. (Jeremy Chaote)


Target Monkey

Target is trying to get the monkey off it’s Politically Correct back. Let’s see if appeasing it will help.

Big-box retailer Target will add single-stall bathrooms at all of its stores where that option is not currently offered, reflecting a direct response to the debate that erupted earlier this year over its new transgender-bathroom policy.

Target Chief Financial Officer Cathy Smith told reporters Wednesday that the company would invest $20 million to add single-stall bathrooms.

The bathroom expansion is a relatively minor adjustment. According to Target spokeswoman Katie Boylan, 1,400 of the company’s 1,800 stores already have single-occupancy bathrooms. The remaining stores will be outfitted by early 2017. (so it’s a minimalist effort)

That would be the unisex “family” bathrooms in most Targets. They are located in the back of the bus…:)

The company already had single-stall bathrooms that anyone can use at about 1,400 of its 1,800 stores, Target spokesperson Katie Boylan said.

Target is not altering its transgender bathroom policy, which allows people to “use the restroom or fitting room facility that corresponds with their gender identity.” That policy, announced this spring, drew opposition from some conservative activists who vowed to boycott the chain.

Boylan acknowledged that Target has received feedback from customers who are “very, very supportive” and “some who are not.”

Mine was “not”. 🙂

Cathy Smith, the chief financial officer of Target, acknowledged in a conference call with reporters, that public reaction has been mixed. “Some of our guests clearly are uncomfortable with our policy, and some are supportive,” she said.

So like a politician, we’ll hedge our bets and try to satisfy (or is that mollify) everyone.

That would be the 1.4 million on the Boycott list. Not to mention me. 🙂 who just bought a less desirable computer monitor at WALMART because that way I didn’t have to go to Target. 🙂  I had already been to Best Buy,  so my choices in my area were limited.

I’ve been doing that a lot lately. 🙂

“The impact to the business is not material at this time,” she said.

That’s why they reported lower earnings and their stock price was down. The 7% drop in sales compared to a year ago (CNN) and an 18 percent drop in the company’s stock since they announced the policy.

“That’s a whopper!” Danhof wrote on the National Center website. “For Target to deny any correlation between its announcement and its tanking stock is ignorance of the highest form. Offending millions of investors and consumers, then denying the financial implications, borders on fiduciary negligence.”

Further, Breitbart reported that data tracking firm RS Metrics has been following Target since the boycott began.

“We observed a noticeable fall off in traffic at Target during the last week in April and a meaningful pickup at Walmart during that same time,” Richard Chmiel, chief executive of RS Metrics, told Breitbart. “We suspect the bathroom boycott which was gaining momentum at that time contributed to the shift.”

So we have put a minimalist effort out there to say “we care” and lets kiss and make-up, right?

But Boylan said Target decided to add single-stall, lockable bathrooms in all of its stores “because we’re listening.”

Yeah, will the bigots please shut up and use the bathroom in the back of the stores. 🙂

“We get it. Some like it, some don’t. We’re committed” to offering a welcoming environment for everyone, she said.

You’re committed alright. To your Political Correctness.

Personally, if your that committed to Political Correctness why not just have a Unisex bathroom and NOTHING else?

Isn’t have a “Men’s room” and a “Women’s Room” discriminatory on its face? If you believe that anyone should be able to use whatever bathroom they “identify” with?

Oh, right, you still do, but you want to try and appease the Politically Correct Master and the Politically Correct Capitalist Monkey on your back by hedging your bets and saying that Men who “self identify” can use the Women’s bathroom anytime they want but there is the option in the back of the bus also.

The White Bathroom.

The Black Bathroom.

The Gray Bathroom at the back of the bus….

Hmm. Yeah, that’s the ticket.

doctor obamablm

And Obama was too busy golfing to care and the Media was too lazy to ask why?

Diversity is Division

Karith Foster

Death to Diversity! Yes, as a black woman, married to a white man, with biracial children and years of dedication to diversity and inclusion work—that is what I am calling for.

Because “diversity” as we know it is officially a good word gone bad. Much like “feminist” and “liberal”, it is a word that has been overused, misconstrued, and it is now a pejorative with the often underlying interpretation of “us vs. them” i.e. straight white males against everyone else, or to be fair, vice versa.

That would be me. 🙂

“Diversity as we know it is officially a good word gone bad.”   

Regardless of who is on what side of the interpretation, we have traversed into a territory where we are now doing more harm than good and we are alienating ourselves from one another.

star trek

I am far from alone in this way of thinking. Superstar television show-runner Shonda Rhimes and film director Ava DuVarney have both acknowledged their disdain for the word. While I can only speak for myself, I feel confident in explaining that using the word “diversity” as terminology for increasing positive all-encompassing relations, be they in an academic or professional setting, now has the exact opposite effect of the intent of those behind it.

However, none of this should come as a surprise—“diversity” has the same root as the words divide and division. So why are we shocked and not fully recognizing that its implementation is polarizing?

It’s perfect for Thought Police Democrats. Who would be against “diversity”? Only unpeople. 🙂

Probably because we have all been duped into thinking that if you make something mandatory and you force feed it to people that will make a difference. That is the futile premise behind what traditional diversity training programs have been about so far.

A fantastic article in the Harvard Business Review—“Why Diversity Programs Fail”—hits the nail on the head addressing why traditional diversity programs are not only miserably inadequate but have had counterproductive results. I am in no way saying there is no longer a need for diversity training; nothing could be further from the truth given the current climate. But there is a need for a major overhaul in how we teach each other about one another. We need a way that it is truly effective.

Let me address it in simpler terms. Have you ever tried to make someone eat something they weren’t comfortable or familiar with? As the mother of small children, I can tell you what trying to force-feed my kids a food they aren’t ready for or not in the mood for does. It does not end well. Can we say tantrums, resentment, and a hot mess on the floor that now needs to be cleaned up?! Well, the same goes for adolescents and adults when we try to ram thoughts and ideas onto them.

It does not matter how well-intentioned or good it might be. When we do this we are taking away an individual’s rights and freedom to come to conclusions on their own. We are not treating one another with respect, nor acknowledging that we are all thinking, feeling human beings capable of processing right from wrong or good from bad; we are certainly not supporting the cause when we’re condemning one group or victimizing another.

But we are sanctimoniously proclaiming that we are better than you and shaming you into doing our bidding. Or else… 🙂

That is exactly why I created the program Stereotyped 101™. I combined my years of corporate HR experience, with my stand-up comedy career and over a decade of speaking and performing on college campuses across America to address issues of unconscious bias in a unique way that infuses humor with heartfelt reality and experiences. My goal is for people to C.A.R.E. This acronym stands for Conscious empathy, Active listening, Responsible reactions and Environmental awareness.

Since we are all a collection of our personal experiences and our reality is our truth, this approach gives my audience the freedom to come to grips with their reality while being able to honor the reality of others. My focus isn’t about “diversity”—what makes us different—but rather inversity™.

I coined the term inversity™ because we need another word to start new ideas flowing; to remove the stigma and inherent idea of separation. This word is the perfect combination of diversity and inclusion; and it encompasses the ideology that to change anything and create a path for progress we must flip the switch and the dialogue; and most importantly we must first look inside.

Inversity™ is about celebrating the individual for their worth, value, and what they bring to the table. It’s not about shaming anyone because of the life they created for themselves or the life they were born into—good or bad. This is about recognizing that each of us has worth and the need to be valued and respected based solely on our humanity.

Inversity™ is not about ignoring what make us different; we cannot do that without invalidating someone else’s personal experience. It is about seeing others, their differences, and embracing our one commonality—our humanity.

In a perfect world, we would all agree that we cannot change the state of things without changing how we think. It’s a natural algorithm. Thoughts lead to words. Words lead to actions. Actions lead to change. So anything socially monumental has to begin inside with how we think about ourselves.

for salecharitable donation

The Cleansing

“As painful as it is to hear Donald Trump talk and as embarrassing as it is as an American to hear him talk, I think it’s good,” Smith said overseas. “We get to hear it. We get to know who people really are and now we get to cleanse it out of our country.” — Will Smith in Dubai.

The same country that refused entry to a Transgender by the way. Oh, and what do they do to gays in Dubai? Or The Middle East, in general?? 🙂

So exactly were you planning on “cleansing” the country of people like me Will?

Please elaborate.

Listen, while I’m not exactly the biggest fan of Donald Trump, I think it’s a bit hysterical to say things about cleansing his supporters from the country. Trump supporters have every right to live in the United States as Hillary supporters , Gary Johnson, and Jill Stein supporters. This kind of thinking makes Smith no better than Trump.

But he has Liberal Sanctimony on his side. Mr Big Celebrity. He “slammed” Islamophobia, they say. He put Donald Trump in his place. A beat down…

Further, why are we asking actors questions about American politics?

Come Together

Well, computer crashes are fun. So my old computer retired itself unexpectantly, but at least it isn’t expecting a “living wage” pension. But it does mean that I got the pleasure of birthing a new $900 baby.

So with that out of the way. My man Kurt Schichter has a fun words to impart today.

Here’s the thing – a slight majority of my friends in the conservative sphere are #NeverTrump and disagree with my reluctant conclusion that voting for Trump is slightly less devastating to America than abstaining in light of Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit’s looming regime. And I intend to remain friends with them. Our enemies would love to divide us forever, and I refuse to let that happen. If it does, it will be someone else’s choice. If all of us refuse to be permanently torn asunder, if all of us refuse to choose to let our strategic and tactical disagreements drive a wedge between us, then we won’t be torn apart. And when the smoke clears in November, however it goes, we can fight on together.

Now, I spend a tiny bit of time on Twitter, and it can get intense. People disagree about the proper reaction to the The Donald. Some board the Trump Train, and others want to blow up the tracks and derail it. I think of myself as embracing the least-worst option, pumping on a hand car behind the caboose, occasionally weeping.  

Let me be the first to admit that it boggles my mind when people don’t see how clearly, unequivocally, and completely correct my position is. Yet, the people who have come to a different conclusion also suffer mind boggling when people don’t see how clearly, unequivocally, and completely correct they are. It’s almost like people of good faith can look at the same evidence and come to different conclusions. 

But it’s pretty important that we all work to make sure good faith disagreements remain a thing. Now, here are some suggestions on how to be constructive with other conservatives who see things differently.

Realize You Don’t Have The Moral High Ground: I’m doing what I think is morally right and so are you. And I don’t need lectured about how I’m not meeting your exacting standards and I’m pretty certain you won’t welcome me lecturing you. Plus, if you’ve suddenly decided that you’re vastly more moral than everyone else you’ve been fighting for conservatism alongside for the better part of a decade, then you should also concede that your moral sense is somewhat defective since you only recently noticed that everyone else is terrible.

Stop Trying To Play The America/Vets/Apple Pie/Puppies Card: The “If you [like/hate] Trump, then you hate [America/Vets/Apple Pie/Puppies]” gambit never works. Who is the guy who is told “You clearly hate your fellow vets!” who thought, “Gosh, I should totally pull a 180 because some guy on Twitter said that if I don’t conform to his viewpoint I must hate my fellow vets?” That sort of nonsense always seems to end up embarrassing the guy who tried to play that card (Yeah, it’s snarky – I didn’t say being chill was easy).


These People Did Not Become Terrible Overnight Because They Disagree With You On One Point: I am simply not going to disregard people I’ve read and listened to for years because we disagree on this one thing. That’s crazy talk. In fact, I’m going to read and listen to them more closely because echo chambers where you hear only what you want to hear tend to make you dumb. Look, the guys I disagree with have some good points – regardless of whether any of them think I have any good points. Ben Shapiro, Jim Geraghty, Jonah Goldberg and Bill Kristol are suddenly wrong about everything because I think they are wrong about one thing? That’s an actively stupid notion, and I refuse to embrace it. 

We’re Not Purging Anyone: I sometimes hear how various mainstream cliques, clans, crews, and coalition components must be purged from the GOP upon Trump’s victory/defeat. Nope. Besides the practical problems of actually purging large chunks of the coalition, there’s the troubling insanity of thinking that subtraction equals addition. So one’s purging anyone. Now, you can choose to leave – America’s a big country with plenty of sulking space. But no one gets to ethically cleanse anyone else. 


Be Nice: Channel Swayze in Roadhouse, and be nice even when your erstwhile allies are jerky. It’s hard. I can’t always be nice. But I’m going to try, because it’s less important that I get the transitory satisfaction of smacking someone around than making it possible for my opponent to be there with me in the fights to come. It doesn’t mean don’t disagree – it means be nice about it.

How does this work in the real world? Let me give you an example. There’s a guy out there who holds a completely opposite view of the Trump voting strategy than I (We largely agree on Trump himself). To call him #NeverTrump is way too mild; he’s against allowing the name “Trump” to ever be uttered aloud again. I won’t name him, but suffice it to say he is associated with a lesser war college than my own Army alma mater. 

Now, he’s a solid guy. He says important things. And he’s come to his conclusions for coherent reasons and after a lot of thought. We interact, and I point out where I think he’s off base and he returns the favor. Sometimes he gets frustrated with me and vice versa, and when that happens we walk away and chill – like freaking adults. Oh, and when he’s unfairly attacked by people sort of on my side, I defend him – and he does the same for me. 

And when November rolls around, regardless of the outcome, I expect we will be able to work together again to try and save our country.

Sure, I get plenty frustrated, especially when someone on Team Conservative floats the electoral air biscuit of voting for Hillary. But when I do need to vent, I do it somewhere where it is not going to create problems down the road when I need to be in the foxhole with these folks again. That’s why there are private Twitter DMs. There are some things you just don’t say if you ever want to have a constructive relationship, so don’t say them.

And yes, we need that constructive relationship again. The parties (both of them) are in flux. Coalitions are shifting. We’re cursed to live in interesting times. And we need all hands on deck if we are going to fight on to save our country. So don’t be in a hurry to jump, or toss anyone else, overboard.

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Caught in a Trap

It’s always interesting, from a cynical point of view, to watch people who want to play the middle between rational thought and political correctness squirm. The wishy washy nonsense makes no one happy as they try to make everyone happy.

You may remember the piece I did on the college students who didn’t want a white roomate (and they weren’t racist!) 3 days ago (https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2016/08/10/evidence-for-the-persecution-2/).

Well, it’s better. And cynically, better. 🙂

  • Pitzer College’s President and Vice President offered very different reactions to a Facebook post in which students advertise a housing option but refuse to accept white applicants.
  • President Melvin Oliver responded by condemning the post, but also noted that “Pitzer is a community of individuals passionately engaged in establishing intracultural safe spaces for marginalized groups.”
  • VP Brian Carlisle, however, directed his ire at the “Twitter trolls” who objected to the post, urging students to join him in supporting the students who left the discriminatory post.

Melvin Oliver, the incoming president of Pitzer College, and Vice President for Student Affairs Brian Carlisle issued statements to the entire Pitzer student body, faculty, and staff regarding the Pitzer College student leaders’ refusal to live with whites.

“Pitzer is…passionately engaged in establishing intracultural safe spaces for marginalized groups.”   

“Recently, an article in local media quoted Facebook comments made by Pitzer students regarding their preference in race for their roommates in non-Pitzer housing. Specifically, the post indicated that only people of color should inquire about the housing option,” President Oliver stated in his first-ever email to the Pitzer College community. “While Pitzer is a community of individuals passionately engaged in establishing intracultural safe spaces for marginalized groups, the Facebook post and several subsequent comments are inconsistent with our Mission and values.

“Pitzer College’s Mission is to create engaged, socially responsible citizens,” Oliver continued. “We come together to live and work in a shared learning environment where every member is valued, respected, and entitled to dignity and honor. Our shared goal is to create a balanced approach to engaging complex intercultural issues, not to isolate individuals on the basis of any protected status.”

Shortly after incoming President Oliver sent out his email condemning students who refuse to live with certain people based on the color of their skin, Vice President Carlisle reached out to the Pitzer College community with a different message.

“Our dedicated resident assistants have been targeted by Twitter trolls who publicly defame them and attack their contributions to our community,” Carlisle wrote. “Now, more than ever, is the time to come together as a community to celebrate and support our amazing resident assistants and student affairs staff. Please join me in thanking them for their work in furthering our mission and for keeping our campus a safe place to work, live, and study.”

Students were unimpressed with the administrators’ inconsistent responses.

“I think it’s important that our administration takes a firm stance on this,” stated Nick Toro (PZ ’18). “What we saw in those Facebook posts and comments was a disdain for a certain group of people, in this case, white people. If Pitzer wants to stay consistent with their values of racial harmony and multiculturalism, they must speak out against comments like this.

“What’s even more important than racial diversity is the diversity of thoughts and ideas. Only then can we learn to understand each other.”

Caught in a Thought Police trap…. 🙂


For Whom The Bell Tolls…

I just saw “Air Force One” for the first time, a quaint 1997 action movie with Harrison Ford as the tough-as-nails President who kills terrorists and wins the day.

I am struck by how old-fashioned that is. How Politically Incorrect. How alien it is to now.

How depressed it makes me feel.

Especially when we have a President now who creates terrorists (Muslim Brotherhood, etc). He encourages them. He gives them Billions of Dollars in funding. He releases them back into the wild to kill again. He pays them off in secret and if you dare question him about it he will scold you for being “islamophobic” and get his Ministry of Truth to call you a racist and fear monger.

And then his chosen successor has the Father of the Orlando killer at her Rallies and you aren’t allowed to point this out because you’re just being partisan.

They use fear and intimidation to shut you down. Speaking the Truth is verboten.

A President who is thoughtcrime locked and can’t say “Radical Islam” and can barely even mention terrorism at all. For they are not terrorists to him. They can’t be, so they aren’t.

And anyone who disagrees with him must be silenced.

His political enemies are the only terrorists.

And millions of people want to vote for his successor.

Happily, with joy in their hearts.

This is how freedom dies.

For Whom the bell tolls…It tolls for thee…



Segregate Me! Censor Me!

A Massachusetts college allows students to reside in “identity-based” housing communities, provided they have a “unique social identity” that has “historically experienced oppression.”

“These residential spaces give support to members of our community with social identities that have been historically marginalized in this country, and strive to counter systemic oppression,” Hampshire College explains on its website, adding that its promotion of such living arrangements “arises from our commitment to fostering diverse, socially just, and inclusive communities.”

“[New groups] must be unified by a social identity (such as race, culture, gender, or sexual orientation).”   

An accompanying informational booklet further elaborates that “identity-based housing is an institutional structure designed to assist members of historically oppressed groups in supporting each other,” and “helps to create an added level of psychological comfort and safety for those who choose to live in those spaces, often providing the foundation for those students to be able to engage fully in the greater community.”

One section of the identity-based housing program consists of “permanent” mods, covering categories such as LGBTQQIAAP, Queer, Students of Color, and Women of Color. The “not-yet-permanent” mods include Marginalized Gender Identities, Asian Heritage, and Pan-Afrikan Diasporia [sic].

Students can also apply to establish new identity-based mods, though all such groups “must be unified by a social identity (such as race, culture, gender, or sexual orientation)” and “must currently experience or [have] historically experienced oppression within or outside the Hampshire community.”

Identity-based housing arrangements are part of Hampshire’s “intentional housing communities,” many of which are based on shared interests rather than demographic qualities, and all of which must hold two educational programs per semester related to their particular focus.

The Musician’s Mod, for instance, contains “a group of students who intend to create an inclusive, respectful, and encouraging environment for music lovers, creators, and listeners of all shapes and sizes.”

The Mindfulness Mod, meanwhile, fosters “a space where students support one another to be mindful and cultivate moment-by-moment, non-judgmental, focused attention and awareness.”

“Self-identified Womyn” can congregate at the Spiritual Womyn’s Mod, “a collective space to support and guide spiritual paths and encourage the mindful growth of the Hampshire community,” which advertises that “female and/or female self-identified continuing students [are] welcome to apply.”

Spokespersons for Hampshire College had not responded by press time to requests for comment from Campus Reform.

“We don’t need any more racist, sexist, xenophobic bigots here at Clemson. We already have enough,” the anonymous user continues. “I’ve already begun the protest planning—drums, whistles, posters, and chants.”-Clemson University Student.

Another WeRoar member, Alexander Cullen, aptly noted that college students are “traumatized” by the mere notion of free speech.

“Milo [Yiannopoulos] is a cultural litmus test,” Cullen told Campus Reform, asking, “If he comes to your campus to express and exercise free thought and students at that school are traumatized by that, what does that say about the intellectual maturity on that campus?”

“College students are unable to emotionally cope with ideas that conflict with their own,” fellow WeRoar member Kyle Brady added. “This has created a progressive movement nation-wide to limit free speech. Whether it be through safe spaces or vague speech codes, millennials have begun to strip themselves of their own right to free speech. Milo shatters this idea of self-restriction and sounds a wake up call to millennials across the nation.”

Which is why their thoughtcrime brains can’t handle it.

My greatest desire is for some world leader or another to completely remove the right to free speech from the people who disparage it, and then force them to explain why they deserve to have it back.
They’d still probably miss the irony. “–Kevin Dahmer.

They would indeed.