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.

THE ZOMBIE HOARD

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.

mountain

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.

David_Petraeus

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

Hillary is still leading in the Polls!

“Brains…”

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”.

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

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

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

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.

2016: THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS!

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.

disagree

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?

No.

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?

HELL NO!

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.

HELL NO!

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.

FEAR IS HOPE!

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.

truth

-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.

extremistsIndoctrination

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.

kapernickIndoctrination

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.

disagree

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