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.

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.

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!

“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.

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.

“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.

Dear Dumbasses

I keep forgetting that I’m doing my blogs after work… 🙂

 

Dear Whiners who want the government to have more power so you feel “safer,”

Idiots like you who simply fall for whatever line you’ve been fed are jeopardizing our freedoms. All of our freedoms. Because you’re wimps. Allow me to explain.

 

Today I was looking at a HuffPo article about the Apple vs. FBI debacle. The article tries desperately to pass itself off as reasonable. Problem is it’s HuffPo, so I wasn’t fooled. The article opens with this:

Apple’s decision to challenge a federal court order to help the FBI “hack” into a shooting suspect’s iPhone 5C is drawing into focus a battle which has been brewing for the past several years.

The way this debate has been shaped thus far is, as follows: which do we value more, privacy or security?

Firstly, let’s talk some facts about the incident in question. The government FUBARed what happened in San Bernardino. We’ve already documented a lot of it, so lemme break it down here: terrorists were allowed into the country. They killed 14 people. The local authorities got access to the iPhone belonging to Farook. They effed it up by trying to access it, thereby resetting the phone. Now the FBI is demanding Apple write software which will undermine the security of all iPhones to get into “that specific phone.” And if you believe the FBI will only use that new software to access that one phone, you were born in a land before toilet paper.

Before you nuclear turd bombs say “But, but, the FBI needs access for US TO BE SAFE…”

 

Don’t. Spare me your spineless, weak, desperate attempts to sound intelligent. You’re a wimp. If you’re a man and you are siding with the government over this iPhone debacle, you’re without testicles. Which is convenient for your skinny jean-wearing ways. If you’re a woman, you’re probably a feminist. There’s no hope for either of you. I’m merely writing this post to expose just how pathetic you are. Trigger-warning: comparisons to bodily functions abound.

Here’s the deal: Yes, the government has a responsibility to keep the nation safe. But when it comes to the FBI vs. Apple, we’re well past safety. The government did not keep us safe. Proof? The terrorists were let into the country in the first place and they killed people. Also, our borders are as effective as a strainer is at holding water. If you think gaining access to all iPhones is the best solution to keep the country safe…

Here’s where all of you butt wiping-ninnies are missing the point: You think it’s about a phone. Wrong.

This is about a much bigger issue that begins with privacy and ends with freedom, the phone is just the vehicle. Let me try to illustrate my point. Your phone is an extension of you. Yes, this might sound silly, but bear with me for a second. Your smart phone has more than your photos. It has your financial information. It may have an app for your bank. It contains personal conversations with your friends, family, co-workers. It is a map giving you directions. It knows where you have been and where you are going. It can track your health, it reminds you of your tasks, it contains a schedule of your life. It knows who you call, who you have called, who you plan on calling. Your phone is an extension of you.

What the FBI wants is the ability to access that phone, which Apple built to be secure. If you’re dumb enough to say “well don’t keep anything on your phone you don’t want shared with the world…”

I volunteer you as tribute. Why stop at just the phone? Just let them into your house. If you don’t want the world seeing embarrassing things, don’t keep them in your house. You never know, one day the FBI might need to come in without a warrant. Your freedom, your privacy, is subject to the safety of the collective…as deemed by you.

That’s the real, bigger issue here. Safety vs. Freedom. It’s sadly a point that is lost on many who focus on a problem that isn’t the actual problem.

Are you seeing the bigger picture or you trying to figure out if the trees are poplars or pine?

You see, having freedom doesn’t always mean having safety. Yes, sometimes the world is a scary place. Sometimes when the government fails at what it’s required to do, like keep the nation safe from other nations or, in this case, terrorists who seek to do us harm, it’s easy to give up your rights in hopes you can sleep safely at night. But that’s how we lose our freedom. It’s been done countless times before, just ask any ten year old who’s been patted down by the TSA.

Having freedom, having privacy, requires personal responsibility. Sometimes that means you protect yourself. That’s why we at LwC love our Second Amendment rights. Which, incidentally, plenty of liberals also say we need to give up for the “safety of the collective.”

Sometimes you are not only responsible for your own finances, but your own safety. The government, after all, is just a collection of elected officials who employ other people and talk to the public with the use of a teleprompter. The government is people like a corporation is people. Except the government people take from the corporate people to finance their crap. Sorry, going down a bunny trail there…

They’re not better at life than you are. Surrendering a little bit of your freedom to these elected officials for a little more safety is insane. Also, “safety” is rarely defined. Put that in your pipe and smoke it before a liberal demands to stop smoking it because it affects them.

Here’s a mental exercise for you to bear in mind if you’re cheering on the FBI vs. Apple: Where’s the line? At what point do you say the government does not have a right to sacrifice your freedom for safety? Today it’s an iPhone, but what will it be tomorrow? Where is your personal line? If you think it’s okay for the government to have a backdoor entrance to iPhones, for terrorists or for you, you must have a personal line in the sand. So what is it? Think about it. For by the time the government has crossed the iPhone line, they’ll queue up to cross your personal line. If you’re willing to let go of freedom now for security later, you’ve already bought into the scam.

I’ll close with this quotation from our Founding Father Benjamin Franklin (often misatributed to Thomas Jefferson): “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

~Written by Courtney Kirchoff.

Freedom is Slavery

Brown University. You know, the place where students are whining that they are failing their classes because they are protesting so much…

Fall 2015: “The right to free speech is a protection against the abuse of power, not a guarantee of a platform for all ideas,” a group of students wrote in an op-ed for the Brown Daily Herald.

We are taught to extol the virtues of free speech. White people in particular are taught that our voices are always worth being heard. When we believe in free speech, we do so because it works in our favor. The problem is that freedom of speech is not a universal reality. Free speech assumes a level playing field among speakers that does not exist. Power always affects interactions and what people can and do say in the context of a given relationship, institution or society. In this case, at an elite, predominantly white university, race and class are inseparable from any social interaction, let alone the curation of content in an established campus publication.

These arguments for free speech are often deployed to silence voices of color. Colonial histories of civility aside, calling for “civil discourse” implies that expressions of pain and anger by people of color are not civil and have no place in the conversation.

Censorship is the exercise of power to suppress challenges to the status quo. People of color calling attention to racism does not constitute an overbearing power structure that will limit free speech. The oppressed by definition cannot censor their oppressor. (Brown U)

This is your future. Idiocy as “sensitive” “moral” “standards”. Ignorance as Strength.

Isn’t it just grand. 🙂

Far more pernicious is the self-censorship that is promoted at many campuses that may fear ending up in the media spotlight should students protest. For instance, after Brown University students prevented former New York Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly from speaking, many other campuses may simply decide that it is not worth the trouble to bring a speaker to campus who is associated with controversial police practices (in Kelly’s case, “stop and frisk”). This silent fear is potentially crippling free speech.

“Free expression for me but not for you” is simple hypocrisy. However, deeper forces are also at work. (USA Today)

Last fall, the student groups held an outdoor event displaying posters with examples of expression that had been censored on campuses across the country. Three other students filed formal complaints, claiming that some of the posters were “offensive” and “triggering.” In response, USC served Abbott with a “Notice of Charge” letter and launched an investigation for “discrimination,” threatening him with punishment up to and including expulsion for his protected speech.

Abbott and the campus chapters of YAL and the College Libertarians are now suing USC for violating their free speech rights.

“The University of South Carolina is so intolerant of free speech that students can’t even talk about free speech,” said Catherine Sevcenko, FIRE’s director of litigation. “Ironically, the university’s current marketing campaign features the slogan ‘No Limits.’ But as Ross and his fellow students learned, that does not extend to their free speech rights.”.

The Futures so Bright I have to wear a muzzle. 🙂

The Stupid Have Inherited The Earth

After 2,323 Blogs that started on August 31st, 2009 I am quitting. I may pick it back up some day.

I just don’t have any passion for this anymore. No one is listening. No One Cares. There is no “dialog” or “debate” anymore.

There’s just your way or the highway.

In 1995 someone ask me to sum my view of America. I said, “Unenlightened Narcissism”.

Now, a whole generation later, its more true now than it was before.

Millenials Love Socialism. They don’t even understand it. But at least it’s not Capitalism. 😦

What has undermined faith in our economic system and the very values needed to sustain it?

Much of the blame goes to crony capitalism, which is when government provides special favors to some people or businesses, and picks winners and losers in the marketplace. Cronyism certainly predates capitalism itself, as past rulers rewarded family and friends for eons. But it’s unfortunate that cronyism remains alive and well in a democratic society that trumpets the values of the free market. From tax breaks to no-bid contracts, crony deals wreak havoc on markets and capitalism both ethically and economically. Crony capitalism creates an uneven playing field and benefits the few over the many. (CNBC)

Both Parties are to blame for that. Its how the game has evolved. But it won’t change under Socialism one bit. You’ll trade your “free” security for freedom. And Millenials don’t seem bothered by that at all. Mostly because they don’t know any better. The Socialist in charge of Education for the last several generations were not generous with their “diversity” of knowledge and history.

My cynicism wins.

THE LAND OF THE IGNORANT AND THE HOME OF THE SLAVE.

We’ll either have a Republican Braggart (Crony Capitalist) or a Corrupt Socialist/Communist for the next President and no one seems to care anymore.

So I’m going to use the time for this blog in the morning for more productive uses.

 

But it seems that most people want it, not even knowing what it is.

The Constitution is dead.

So I am outta here!

 

The End

Well, it is the end and The moment has been Prepared for.

My Prediction: Supreme Court Justice Eric Holder today helped the Left disband The Constitution of The US to be replaced by the Orwellian Diversity, Fairness, and Inclusion Contract on America.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has died, the San Antonio Express-News reported on Saturday afternoon. He was 79.

Scalia passed away in his sleep while on a hunting trip in Marfa, Texas. Foul play is not suspected.

But the Foul stench of Sith Lord Obama is going to smell up the place for generations.

But Paul Ryan and The Republican will stop him….Really? If that’s our only hope then we need help, serious help.

No, it’s campaign season, and Hillary Clinton is fired up. Unfortunately, she’s fired up about who should nominate a judge to replace the late Antonin Scalia on the United States Supreme Court. Harry Reid and his coalition, which very likely includes the president himself, are urging President Obama to put up a nominee as soon as possible, while Mitch McConnell and crew maintain that the next president should make the decision.

Clinton has weighed in, and, as usual, the “progressive who gets things done” takes a shot at conservatives.

Statement on the passing of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia: pic.twitter.com/xazj9dDd5c

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton)

Mind you, she NOTHING BUT PARTISAN Herself.

Talk about NEVER LET A CRISIS GO TO WASTE!!  I’m surprised they haven’t got a nominee already (hence the Holder allusion at the beginning of this blog) for entirely partisan reasons.

And we all know how much the Left respects The Constitution. 🙂

Wait…why is Clearance Thomas trending??????????

— LMR (@LilMissRightie) February 14, 2016

Liberals wishing him dead. That’s where we are. Smdh https://t.co/UJJ6MfgiDk

— Kathleen McKinley (@KatMcKinley) February 14, 2016

It’s certainly no surprise that the No. 1 trending topic in the United States tonight is #Scalia, but why is Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas trending just a couple of steps behind?

The Liberals are on Death Watch. They are praying as hard as their non-secular hearts can go for all the Conservatives to just DIE!

Leftists, ever tolerant, loving assholes that they are, want him to die this weekend too.

— Amy Curtis (@moderncomments)

They have your best interests and the interests of The Founding Fathers and the Constitution at their core. 🙂

Their care and compassion overflow this Valentine’s Day with Love. 🙂

The love of Death to your enemies.

This is going to sound cold, but one down, one to go. Uncle Ruckkus (Clarence Thomas) needs to go next. Then our country can start healing.

— George freeman (@Numbers28)

Spread the Love. Here Comes Big Brother to give you Bear Hug. After all, The Constitution and Conservatives are the evil that must be exterminated for real compassion, caring and sensitivity to take over.:)

Now we just need the Grim Reaper to take out Clarence Thomas and Mitch McConnell and there’ll be #DancingInTheStreets!

— Rosetta_GhoSTONED ;D (@RedRoseQueen1)

So a moment of silence for the end. She was a grand country, but the rot is nearly complete.

Conservatives will be hunted down and “re-educated”.

The End is nigh.

(if you’re expecting the Establish Republicans or Paul Ryan to save you…Why?)

DUKEing It out

Fed up with the politically correct orthodoxy they claim has created a “climate of fear” on campus, students at Duke University are banding together to call for the restoration of academic freedom.

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

DIVERSITY IS SEGREGATION 🙂

ORTHODOXY IS DIVERSITY

“We seek to invigorate the Duke community’s commitment to supporting an open intellectual climate on campus,” the Duke Open Campus Coalition (OCC) declares in an open letter addressed to University President Richard Brodhead published in The Duke Chronicle Wednesday.

“All people should feel ‘safe’ when expressing their opinions on campus in an academic environment.”   

Hell NO! That’s politically incorrect and “insensitive” . 🙂

 

“During our time here at Duke, we have encountered a community that values identity politics over reasoned discussion and debate when confronting real—and at times misperceived—instances of injustice,” the students explain. “Actions taken that emphasize identity politics create a climate of fear on campus whereby people who publicly dissent from the policies being proposed are afraid of being personally attacked and slandered.”

They should be, because the Politically Correct will. The Ministry of Truth is all powerful, didn’t you know ? 🙂

The letter was signed by 12 students representing every class year, who say they were inspired by a similar group at Princeton University that was established in November after Princeton capitulated to an ultimatum from a group calling themselves the “Black Justice League,” particularly the university’s endorsement of a demand to create “safe spaces” for students based on race.

Malcontents and radicals… 🙂

The Princeton OCC acknowledged the Duke chapter’s formation on its Facebook page, applauding the Duke students for following Princeton’s lead and encouraging students at other schools to do the same.

Yet while the Duke group is reacting to issues that have arisen at colleges and universities across the country, the students feel that the climate of fear “has a particular character on Duke’s campus” that threatens to stifle open discussion.

Not only do “some students consider it morally acceptable to remove copies of The Chronicle from campus when they disagree with its content,” the letter claims, but “select members of Duke Student Government’s Executive Board have taken to intimidating first-year student government representatives to affirm ‘politically correct’ views regardless of whether they agree with them.”

CONFORMITY IS DIVERSE. 🙂

“With grave concern about the tactics of some protestors and the substantive demands they are making, we call for an open and inclusive campus—a campus where all members of the Duke community can communicate openly as Blue Devils without fear that they will be censored if their views differ from, or even offend, other people,” the letter states before outlining the group’s specific objections.

INCLUSION IS EXCLUSION

“First, while we are disturbed by acts of racism, homophobia, and bigotry on this campus, and agree that more can be done to combat intolerance, we do not believe that acts of bigotry committed by individuals implicate Duke as an institution,” they say. “We share the goals of increasing tolerance and punishing individual students who engage in behavior that harms other people, but we do not think these goals are best served by the policies some protesters have prescribed to advance them.”

One such policy involves expanding the university’s definition of hate speech to include “speech that offends or insults,” which the OCC describes as “a slippery slope to censorship.”

FREE SPEECH IS CENSORSHIP

The students likewise object to the demand that Duke introduce mandatory diversity and bias training, predicting the effort “will amount to mandatory reeducation classes” and further discourage faculty and students from expressing dissenting opinions.

They also contend that the activists’ demand that faculty demographic makeup be made consistent with that of the student body, arguing that “Instituting a quota system on staff members based on a student population that changes every year is not only unfeasible, but is wrong,” because it necessarily reduces quality to a secondary consideration in hiring decisions.

“Moreover, mandating minimum or maximum thresholds on employment or student enrollment on the basis of skin color or gender reduces people to immutable characteristics of their identity,” the students add, saying they “strongly denounce the idea that our interactions with one another should be defined by demographic traits like race and gender.”

QUOTAS ARE DIVERSITY.

The group also takes issue with the methods employed by student activists, claiming that “students from across the political spectrum were unsettled that protesters would vandalize Duke property, refuse to allow Duke administrators to ask questions during a community conversation, and seek to remove students on the Chronicle staff with whom they disagree politically.”

[RELATED: Duke students petition to ‘fire’ opinion editor for ‘inflammatory’ column]

{The change.org petition castigates Zhao’s alleged furthering of “racist stereotypes” and “misinformation about an entire group of people–a group of people to which the writer does not even belong.”

Zhao, who is a rising senior at Duke, came under fire after arguing in his column that the hurdles in the way of advancement for “black America” is no longer racism or social injustice.

“Instead of paving a road to prosperity,” Zhao wrote, “the self-defeating economic policies advocated for by the black community are shackles of poverty and disillusionment, miring blacks in a cycle of underachievement and social immobility.”}

“All people should feel ‘safe’ when expressing their opinions on campus in an academic environment,” the letter contends, calling attention to the contradictions in the activists’ demands. “The administration should not institutionalize a space where any member of this community, student or faculty, is protected from having even their most core values challenged and scrutinized.”

The OCC concludes the letter by commending the administration for taking steps to “methodically study bias and hate issues,” but counsels “creating an administrative channel to scrutinize policy proposals and streamline deliverables [to] help ensure all parties have a stake in ensuring we can combat bigotry.” (Campus Reform)

That’s what they have done. It’s called The Ministry of Truth.

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

FEAR IS HOPE

CENSORSHIP IS FREE SPEECH

 

Construct of Whiteness

Another great product of Liberal “education”. (aka indoctrination).

“White” is now synonymous with Evil. It’s the sum total of all evil in the world today. 🙂

Mind you this come from the “diversity” and “inclusion” crowd that preaches “tolerance”.

Orwell couldn’t do better.

The school says the month is an “educational project” exploring how the “construct of whiteness” creates racial inequality.

It’s not Black History Month… 🙂

Portland Community College has designated April “Whiteness History Month” (WHM), an “educational project” exploring how the “construct of whiteness” creates racial inequality.

“‘Whiteness History Month: Context, Consequences, and Change’ is a multidisciplinary, district-wide, educational project examining race and racism through an exploration of the construction of whiteness, its origins, and heritage,” PCC states on its website. “Scheduled for the month of April 2016, the project seeks to inspire innovative and practical solutions to community issues and social problems that stem from racism.”

Bullshit!

Whiteness “does not simply refer to skin color[,] but [to] an ideology based on beliefs, values, behaviors, habits, and attitudes, which result in the unequal distribution of power and privilege based on skin color.”  

And “Whiteness” is racist. So not only are White’s  inherently racist, but “being White” or “acting White” is… 🙂

 

The WHM site makes clear that the project is not a “celebratory endeavor” like heritage months, but is rather “an effort to change our campus climate” by “[challenging] the master narrative of race and racism through an exploration of the social construction of whiteness.” (“Challenging the master narrative,” PCC explains, “is a strategy within higher education that promotes multicultural education and equity.”)

Teach White people are evil and “Whiteness” doubly so. But they aren’t obsessed.

Another Option: The ‘White Privilege’ course description says ‘whiteness’ must be dismantled if racial justice will ever be achieved.
Students in the class will consider how non-white Americans ‘experience and negotiate skin privilege and white normativity.’

Why White People are racist and evil and how to stop them and you!

The course description states that “whiteness is the lynchpin of structures of racial meaning and racial inequality in the United States” and claims that “to preserve whiteness is to preserve racial injustice.”

“To preserve whiteness is to preserve racial injustice.”   

Students taking the course will “endeavor to make whiteness strange.” In order to make whiteness strange, the description says students must “interrogate whiteness as an unstable legal, political, social, and cultural construction.”

The course readings and concepts are drawn, in part, from the field of “critical race theory.” According to Harvard University, critical race theory “combine[s] progressive political struggles for racial justice with critiques of the conventional legal and scholarly norms which are themselves viewed as part of the illegitimate hierarchies that need to be changed.”

More on that tomorrow…

The initiative was conceived by a subcommittee of PCC’s Cascade Campus Diversity Council, which noticed that “evidence from hiring data, student-­led research, surveys, focus groups, college-wide emails, and other sources have illuminated the underlying reality of whiteness embedded in the overall college climate.” In response, the subcommittee decided that “intentional action” was necessary across the district’s four campuses to honor PCC’s strategic plan, which calls on the college to “create a nationally renowned culture for diversity, equity, and inclusion.”

According to a sub-page defining the term (adapted from a definition developed by the University of Calgary), whiteness “does not simply refer to skin color[,] but [to] an ideology based on beliefs, values, behaviors, habits, and attitudes, which result in the unequal distribution of power and privilege based on skin color.”

It doesn’t refer to skin color but results in power and privilege based on color?

ATTENTION: ORWELL!  Doublespeak ALERT!!! 🙂

Not only does the concept of whiteness allow those who are “socially deemed white” to accrue benefits, the page asserts, but those benefits “are accrued at the expense of people of color, namely in how people of color are systemically and prejudicially denied equal access to those material benefits.”

Whiteness is just evil, period. 🙂

The ideology of whiteness, it continues, dates back to “at least the seventeenth century, [when] ‘white’ appeared as a legal term and social designator determining social and political rights,” a concept that eventually grew to include “thousands” of “special privileges and protections” for white citizens.

For those interested in learning even more about the study of whiteness, PCC provides a link to a portal on the school library’s site listing additional resources.

Planning for the event is still ongoing, with applications being accepted until February 1 from those who wish to “get engaged” by hosting a lecture, guest speaker, panel, film screening, discussion, art exhibit, or class field trip to local art or history museums.

Representatives for PCC had not responded by press time to Campus Reform’s inquiries as to whether professors would be allowed to assign grades for participating in field trips or on-campus events.

While details about the specific programming are not yet available, PCC does outline the objectives that it seeks to accomplish through the project, as well as the concepts it would like students to explore over the course of the month.

In the “Context” category, for instance, the school challenges students to explore the meaning and history of whiteness, specifically how it “[emerged] from a legacy of imperialism, conquest, colonialism, and the American enterprise.”

Following from that, PCC wants students to explore the “legal, cultural, economic, social, environmental, educational, and/or intrapersonal consequences of whiteness,” especially in terms of the winners and losers that result from it.

Finally, the school asks them to consider “alternatives to a culture of white supremacy … approaches and strategies to dismantling whiteness … [and] the roles and responsibilities of white people and people of color in C.”

Through the event, PCC says it hopes to improve its campus climate and bolster student retention and success, while also helping students to graduate “with local, national, and global sensibilities regarding the learning tasks of Critical Race Theory.”

Campus Reform has not been able to reach spokespersons for PCC, but this story will be updated if and when they provide a response.

You’re too “White” for them to respond to you.

The Diversity Games

CBS’ new Nancy Drew will look very different should the network move forward with the reboot.

CBS Entertainment president Glenn Geller revealed Tuesday that the network’s reimagining of the iconic character will be diverse.

“She is diverse, that is the way she is written,” the executive told THR immediately following his time in front of the press at the Television Critics Association’s winter press tour Tuesday. While Geller said it was too early in the process to explain just what he meant by diverse — whether Nancy is African-American, Asian-American or Latino, he said it would hinge on finding the right actress for the part. “[She will] not [be] Caucasian,” he stressed. “I’d be open to any ethnicity.”  

Nancy Drew first appeared in books in 1930 and was originally created by Edward Stratemeyer.

But White People are politically incorrect.

The news comes a day after Netflix announced it was teaming with Norman Lear for an all-Latino remake of his classic sitcom One Day at a Time, as networks make diversity a priority in a bid to attract new underrepresented communities and better reflect society.

During his time in front of the press Tuesday, Geller stressed that diversity is playing a major role in his development season. “We have a lot of new series in development, both series targeted to have full African-American or Latino casts but also many leads that are being developed [as diverse]. We’re not casting color blind, we’re casting color conscious,” he said. 

As we found out in yesterday’s blog, color blind is racist.

We’re not “racists” :), we just will not employ any more White people. 🙂

They win us no points in the Politically Correct “diversity” game. White people are not “diverse”.

We are “inclusive” of anyone EXCEPT white people.

“I’m just a gay guy from Indiana who doesn’t play basketball, but now I’m the president of entertainment at CBS,” he said to laughs.

Isn’t he wonderful? 🙂

No Wedding Pizzas for him…

No Straight White People need apply.

That’s The Diversity Games.

THR: Minorities make up 13.7 percent of writers rooms while comprising 37.9 percent of the population nationwide, with only 10 individuals of color (out of 73) on THR’s 2015 Power Showrunners list.

But there’s no quota. 🙂

There are no stats available on how many minority writers made it in TV without going through a program, though one Latino alum jokes: “John Ridley had to win an Oscar to get a television show.” Which is why new-talent development and “inclusion” programs, such as the ones every single broadcast network supports — no doubt part good business, part public relations, part social conscience — are a key part of writers room staffing. Like college scholarships for minorities, these programs are all about removing as many barriers to entry as possible, including financial ones. But with every good intention can come inadvertent side effects, from writers of color who are perceived as less qualified to the subsidization of first-season salaries that can lead to a “freebie” mentality among showrunners toward those scribes.

None of the programs guarantees a job afterward, but they work closely with graduates to provide them priority consideration for staffing, often as a diversity hire. (Diversity is nowadays defined broadly by the programs to include unique voices and experiences, but it usually refers to underrepresented demographics — chiefly minorities, women and LGBT individuals.) A diversity hire is a minority scribe who occupies a staff-writer position that is fully network-subsidized. Showrunners are thus incentivized to take on an unfamiliar face since his or her salary isn’t coming out of the show’s budget. There’s no limit to the number of times a writer can be the diversity hire, provided he or she is fine with staying at entry-level pay.

But there’s no quota and no discrimination against majority White writers of the same or better talent, right? 🙂

…the network-funded diversity initiatives that help writers rooms avoid homogeneity also have created a system that can condition showrunners to regard diverse writers as unpaid labor. “After they are no longer free, the vast majority of diversity writers are released from their shows,” says a Latina writer who wasn’t hired on her network program (she later was independently staffed on a cable series). Jones agrees: “Programs should stop pitching diverse writers as ‘free’ because it creates an affirmative action mentality.”

But affirmative action was “diversity” before “diversity”was all the liberal rage. So what if they lack respect and low pay, it’s “diversity” for “diversity” sake right? 🙂

On rare occasions when strained showrunners can’t cover the cost of a diversity hire beyond the program, Disney-ABC vp creative talent development and inclusion Tim McNeal will subsidize half the salary from a safety-net reserve called the breakage fund. “It’s important that shows don’t look at this as a free pass to get an extra body, so I ask them to match dollar for dollar so they have skin in the game,” he says. “This is a onetime payment.”

A Bailout!  How Leftist is that. 🙂

…as the Latina writer puts it: “I’d hate to see what our statistics would be like without these diversity initiatives.”

Evil Racist White people as far as the eye can see, of course.

It’s only Natural. 🙂

 

 

 

 

 

 

You Just Might Be A Liberal…

Are you not sure that you’re a liberal? Well, there’s an easy way to find out. You might be a liberal if…

1) ….Your newspaper calls people “bigoted” for being worried about bringing Syrian refugees to America, but you won’t run pictures of Muhammad because you’re afraid Muslims might kill you for it.

2) ….You think every man accused of sexual assault is guilty until proven innocent except Bill Clinton.

3)….You insist that anyone who questions global warming hates science even though you don’t understand any of the science behind it yourself and you say we have to do something about climate change primarily because you want to impress your liberal friends.

4) ….You are terrified that holding terrorists at Guantanamo Bay who are trying to murder Americans might make the other terrorists who are trying to murder Americans mad.

5) ….You believe there’s a “Republican War on Women;” yet you are okay with aborting baby girls for any reason, think any man who says he identifies as a woman should be able to use the women’s bathroom and you want to put Bill Clinton back in the White House.

6) ….You claim to constantly hear Republican “dog whistles” that 99% of the population misses; yet you’d deny you’re racist for insisting that black Americans aren’t competent enough to get an ID to vote.

 

7) …You think there’s a possibility that Obama might be able to have a productive conversation with radical Islamists who want to kill us, but dialogue with the NRA is impossible.

8)….You believe Hillary Clinton is telling the truth. About anything. Ever.

9) ….You simultaneously believe the police are violent trigger-happy racists who shoot people for no good reason and that we should disarm the populace so that only the government has guns.

10) ….You went to a talk given on your campus by a conservative just so you could scream at him for “invading your safe space.”

11) ….You think Chris Kyle was a monster for killing so many enemies of America while Bowe Bergdahl deserves to be treated with respect and compassion after deserting his unit.

12) ….You believe you’re a caring and compassionate person because you advocate giving other people’s money away to people you hope will vote for candidates you like.

13) ….You believe that anyone who dislikes Barack Obama must hate him because he’s a minority, but your hatred of Ted Cruz and Clarence Thomas is perfectly justifiable.

14) ….You think you are a sophisticated person with a deep understanding of complex political issues, but sum up every one with some variation of, “Republicans are evil, racist, and they hate you while liberals like me are nice!”

15) ….You think it’s vitally important to increase the number of Muslim immigrants coming to America so they can inform on all the other Muslims who are planning terrorist attacks.

16) ….You blame the Republicans for the failure of Obamacare even though none of them voted for it.

17) ….Your first response to a terrorist attack committed by radical Islamists who’ve sworn allegiance to ISIS is to try to disarm every law-abiding gun owner in the country.

18) ….You think an unemployed, white factory worker who’s struggling to feed his family has some sort of racial privilege compared to Barack Obama, Melissa Harris Perry or Al Sharpton.

19) ….You say fences don’t work and gun-free zones do, but if Republicans wanted the fence around the White House taken down and demanded that the Secret Service be disarmed, you’d accuse them of trying to get Obama killed.

20) ….You believe Bruce Jenner is a woman, Rachel Dolezal is black and Elizabeth Warren is an Indian.

21)  Food in any way can be a “microagression” based on race, religion, sex, or ethnicity.

22) Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength. Guns kill people so getting rid of Guns will kill less people.

23) The Power of Life and Death is “Pro-Choice”.

24) Any immigration is good no matter how it was done and anyone opposed to any immigration of any kind is “racist”.

25) A Religion is a Race, unless they are Christians, then they are just bigots.

26) Utter the word “islamophobia” and mean it.

27) Anything with a (D) after their name is ok and can do anything they want because it’s better than they alternative.

28) Democrats Lie, but it’s your fault not theirs.

29) A Tax is a Penalty, even after it’s ruled a Tax it’s still a Penalty.

30) “What Difference Does it Make?”

31) It was the fault of a You Tube Video.

32) That the Media is not biased and that people like Hillary and Barack are “moderates” and any Republican is “extreme”.

Words

Words. Without them we’d just grunt at each other. Given how some people use them, that might be an improvement. But no matter how you use or misuse them, they’ve always had meanings. At least until now.

Words always have evolved, naturally and over time. Some simply have fallen out of favor and no longer are used. “Swell” mostly has been retired, as has “groovy.”

That’s not what we’re talking about here. Now, statements given in plain language are followed by “clarifications,” and flat-out lies are treated as truth. It’s getting to the point we might as well grunt at each other.

President Obama can say ISIS is contained the day it kills 130 people in Paris, and we ignore the disconnect. He can declare the homeland safe from ISIS the day it slaughtered 14 in California, and everyone acts as though neither happened.

A man can go on a shooting spree near a Colorado Planned Parenthood, and before he’s even finished, he’s immediately declared indicative of every Christian and every conservative. But a radical Muslim couple goes on a well-planned killing spree in San Bernardino, and for days the media just can’t put its finger on a motive.

The purveyors of this bastardization of language are, oddly enough, those who work in words the most – the media. The media declared guns the problem after the San Bernardino shooting but rhetoric the culprit after the shooting in Colorado.

It took days of wild speculation about everything from bullying to postpartum depression before unequivocal evidence and an FBI decree forced journalists to admit radical Islamic terrorism in California. It took until paragraph 59 of a 61-paragraph piece on Colorado for The New York Times to report the monster in that case, according to an acquaintance, “‘wasn’t sleeping at all,’ and had ‘been talking about the Devil getting in his head and such.’”

One awful event led to the demonization of any and every American who has a moral opposition to abortion and the other to the demonization of one of the victims as a bigot who had it coming.

One attack led to fundraising by celebrities and media who had ascribed a political motive to the actions of a man who said he was trying to stop Satan from “getting in his head;” the other met with mockery of prayer and stoned silence on the killer’s self-declared “very liberal” politics.

Words have no meaning.

One party is on the verge of nominating someone whose husband questioned the meaning of the word “is.” Hillary Clinton also has vowed to have told the whole truth after each version of her evolving email server story. It was “no classified material” to “no material sent or received that was classified at the time” to “no classified material sent or received that was marked classified at the time.”

We’re now up to nearly 1,000 emails deemed classified. It’s like coming across a unicorn farm maintained by mermaids – we were told these things did not exist; now they’re everywhere.

Still, no consequences or continued questioning for Hillary. Which is weird considering each of those lies were told to journalists, each was “the whole story,” and none of them care.

Have you heard about Hillary’s emails lately? She spent 11 hours before Congress provably lying about it, and the media treated her appearance as if she’d cured cancer.

Now comes proof the military was not too far away to meaningfully help in Benghazi and that, in fact, it was “spinning up” to go to the aid of the Americans under attack but never received approval. A lie that undermines everything Obama and Hillary have said about Benghazi, but the consequence will be nothing.

Barack Obama allows only favorable media near him, as does Hillary. Her last interview was with a former employee and major donor to her charity who is now declared a “journalist” because ABC News wants it to be. Honestly, is there a bigger lie than calling George Stephanopoulos a journalist and allowing him to interview the woman he’d helped quell “bimbo eruptions” with?

If any of those words had meaning, last Sunday’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” would be one of the greatest punch lines to a joke ever. As it stands, the joke is on us.

As college campuses fall to language police, there may be little left to defend in the world outside the quad. If what we say isn’t what we mean, if it’s open to interpretation, clarification or justification after the fact, there’s little point in saying anything in the first place. Which, when you think about attacks on speech and those who speak them, is probably the point in the first place.

60 Years of Rosa Parks

On December 1, 1955, in Montgomery, Alabama, Parks refused to obey bus driver James F. Blake’s order to give up her seat in the colored section to a white passenger, after the white section was filled.
Now we have “safe zones” for blacks only. For example: In an ironic development, to say the least, protesters at the University of Missouri (MU) segregated themselves by race Wednesday night, having white students leave a gathering in order to create a “black-only healing space.”

Isn’t Liberal “diversity” and “tolerance” a wonderful thing for racial progress. 🙂

The CryBaby Generation at it’s finest, reversing history but it’s a ‘good thing’.

The bad old segregation kept “colored people” in specific spaces. The good new segregation reserves spaces for “people of color”.

DIVERSITY IS SEGREGATION!

INCLUSION IS EXCLUSION!

Orwell would be proud of you.

And if you violate their segregation you’re an insensitive racist. 🙂

Additionally, a “Hurting and Healing” event, described as “a *for POC, by POC* art show,” is scheduled to take place at Pomona College on December 5. “This show’s intent is to create a space that is pro-POC, pro-black, and anti-white supremacist,” states the event’s website. “While you may want to invite a white friend or ally, to make this a safe and comfortable space for other POC, we ask that you do not.”

Now that we’ve brought back racial segregation as a progressive value, maybe we can make a new progressive Klan that will only harass white people? Then again it already exists. They call it Black Lives Matter. (Front Page)

Dear Dr Martin Luther Kings: I’m sorry that your movement became an utter failure, spit on your grave, and that you died for nothing.

All in the name of “tolerance” and “diversity”. 🙂

Orwell couldn’t have done any better.

Portland, OR:“Black Joy: Self Care Saturday for Black Girls and Women” will take place on November 28 at The Center for Intercultural Organizing, though there will only be one culture welcomed.

Oldham promises, “the day will be a safe space centered around Blackness, community love and radical healing.”

“It’s a space to self care and uplift black folks.

Up Lift them by Segregation. 🙂

“It’s important to reclaim that Black folks do have a space here and we can create our own. I think it is also important to just have spaces that are for ourselves, without any allies,” Oldham said.

Yes, nothing beats racism like segregation. There was a time in this country when blacks not only had their own “spaces”, but also their own schools, bathrooms, water fountains, etc…and for some reason they weren’t real happy about that. In fact there was this whole thing call the Civil Rights Movement that fought against segregation. Oldham should look it up on Wikipedia. (Downtrend)

I’ve been amused recently by strident calls from black students at UCLA who demand a blacks-only dormitory.

SEPARATE BUT EQUAL!!!

Gee, where have I heard that before? 🙂

Brown Vs. The Board of Education 1954 perhaps… 🙂

And this time THEY WANT IT that way…. 🙂

Yet the irony of self-segregation isn’t lost on in that era of forced integration and hiring quotas based ONLY on race. The hilarity of “safe zones” is so Orwellian its very frightening.

Live and let live is not politically correct. Neither is do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Violate their “safe space” or “offend” then with disagreeing and your white, you’re automatically a callous, insensitive, evil, racist and bigot.

End of story.

As you’re well aware, social engineering is happening on a grand scale now. We see it from our dear POTUS, we see it in the courts, and we see it very clearly on college campuses. Since the new age of Sharpton and Jackson, blacks are learning and playing this game very well.

 

But when you have black students making demands on who and what color people are on a college campus we’ve gone to far. And even worse, now these brats want people punished for the simple act of not liking them.

In fact, there’s now a one-stop shop for Black Lives Matter activists and other campus whiners called TheDemands.org which posts ALL official demands from these groups. Take a look at it. You will not believe the crap they’re demanding.

As Steven Hayward writing for Powerline Blog reports, Nice of the protestors to gather all of their absurdity in one handy place.

Like this one from Tufts:

1. We demand that Black-identifying students make up 13 percent of Tufts undergraduate population.

 

“Black-identifying students?” Good to know Rachel Dolezal has a safe space waiting for her somewhere.

From Clemson University:

Additionally, we want a public commitment from the Clemson University Administration to prosecute criminally predatory behaviors anddefamatory speech committed by members of the Clemson University community (including, but not limited to, those facilitated by usage of social media).

So now Clemson is supposed to police Facebook and Twitter posts?

I’m surprised this demand from Middle Tennessee State University hasn’t received more media attention:

1. Change Forrest Hall, a group of students,faculty, and community members has one demand: the immediate removal of Nathan Bedford Forrest’s name from Middle Tennessee State University’s ROTC building.

How long before Washington and Lee University has to drop Lee’s name? And then Washington’s? Lewis and Clark? Can’t do that: imperialist exploiters. William and Mary? Nope: named for patriarchal privilege. Heck, why not drop all names from every college and university, and just go with “University?”

Students today have been raised to care about and act only on feelings. Not logic and reason. Talk to any college kid and you’ll see. They want fairness — even if it means being unfair to someone else. They don’t get the relationship here. They want free college even though it means it would cause damage to most of the country. They want free health care even though it’s not even rational or possible. Why do they want all of these things and more? Because they just feel it’s right. Yes it is…in cloud cuckoo land. (Eric Hall via Allen West)

I feel sick. But I’m white (and male! boo hiss!) so I’m not allowed to feel anything but my seething bigotry and racism because that’s all that defines me in the Politically Correct age of The Crybaby Generation. 🙂

 

 

 

 

 

It’s Worse than We Thought

It’s reality but not as we know it

John Hawkins: How radical, weird and out of touch have liberals on college campuses gotten since Obama came into office? It’s worse than you ever thought and although there is an almost unlimited number of problematic incidents to choose from, these 15 are particularly effective at getting across how bad things have become.

1) “College Students Say Remembering 9/11 Is Offensive to Muslims…. The everything-is-offensive brand of campus activism has struck a new low: Students at the University of Minnesota killed a proposed moment of silence for 9/11 victims due to concerns—insulting, childish concerns—that Muslim students would be offended.”

2) “Portland State University Offers Course Teaching How to ‘Make Whiteness Strange’…According to Portland State University Professor Rachel Sanders’ ‘White Privilege’ course, ‘whiteness’ must be dismantled if racial justice will ever be achieved. The course description states that ‘whiteness is the lynchpin of structures of racial meaning and racial inequality in the United States” and claims that ‘to preserve whiteness is to preserve racial injustice.’ Students taking the course will ‘endeavor to make whiteness strange.’ In order to make whiteness strange, the description says students must ‘interrogate whiteness as an unstable legal, political, social, and cultural construction.’”

 

3) “A University in the San Francisco Area Actually Told Students To Call 911 if They Were Offended….Administrators at a Catholic university in the San Francisco Bay Area have rescinded an official school policy instructing students to clog up the regional 9-1-1 emergency reporting system to report ‘bias incidents.’

The school is Santa Clara University, reports Campus Reform…Until this month, however, Santa Clara administrators have been instructing students to report ‘bias incidents’ using the emergency service reserved for dispatching police, firefighters and ambulances.

‘If the bias incident is in progress or just occurred: ALWAYS CALL 911 IMMEDIATELY,’ the Santa Clara website instructed students in fierce, all-capital letters.”

4) “Educators in the Volunteer State are very concerned that students might be offended by the usage of traditional pronouns like she, he, him and hers, according to a document from the University of Tennessee – Knoxville’s Office of Diversity and Inclusion.

…For all you folks who went to school back when there were only him and her – here’s a primer: some of the new gender neutral pronouns are ze, hir, zir, xe, xem and xyr.”

5) “A Professor at Polk State College has allegedly failed a humanities student after she refused to concede that Jesus is a ‘myth’ or that Christianity oppresses women during a series of mandatory assignments at the Florida college. According to a press release from the Liberty Counsel, a non-profit public interest law firm, Humanities Professor Lance ‘Lj’ Russum gave a student a ‘zero’ on four separate papers because the 16-year-old did not ‘conform to his personal worldviews of Marxism, Atheism, Feminism, and homosexuality.’ The law firm has called for a full, private investigation of the professor and the course curriculum.”

6) “College Codes Make ‘Color Blindness’ a Microaggression…wait, what?…. UCLA says “Color Blindness,” the idea we shouldn’t obsess over people’s race, is a microaggression. If you refuse to treat an individual as a ‘racial/cultural being,’ then you’re being aggressive.”

7) “The phrase ‘politically correct’ is now a microaggression according to the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. The university’s ‘Just Words’ campaign is the work of UWM’s ‘Inclusive Excellence Center’ and aims to ‘raise awareness of microaggressions and their impact’—microaggressions like ‘politically correct’ or ‘PC.’”

 

8) ) “‘American,’ ‘illegal alien,’ ‘foreigners,’ ‘mothering,’ and ‘fathering’ are just a handful of words deemed ‘problematic’ by the University of New Hampshire’s Bias-Free Language Guide….Saying ‘American’ to reference Americans is also problematic. The guide encourages the use of the more inclusive substitutes ‘U.S. citizen’ or ‘Resident of the U.S.’ The guide also tries to get students to stop saying ‘Caucasian,’ ‘illegal Immigrant,’ ‘mother,’ ‘father’ and even the word ‘healthy’ is said to shame those who aren’t healthy.”

9) “Late yesterday afternoon, ACLJ filed a lawsuit on behalf of Brandon Jenkins against officials of The Community College of Baltimore County (CCBC) in Maryland for denying Brandon admission to its Radiation Therapy Program in part due to his expression of religious beliefs. As one faculty member explained to Brandon, on behalf of CCBC, the ‘field [of radiation therapy] is not the place for religion.’”

10) “A California school co-founded by a firebrand who once called for an ‘intifada’ in the U.S. has become the nation’s first accredited Muslim college.”

11) “According to Coastal Carolina University, sex is only consensual if both parties are completely sober and if consent is not only present, but also enthusiastic. This is a troubling standard that converts many ordinary, lawful sexual encounters into sexual assault, and it should frighten any student at CCU.”

12) “Clemson University apologizes for serving Mexican food…Students took to Twitter to call the event culturally insensitive and to question the school’s efforts to promote diversity….Clemson Dining issued an apology to ‘offended’ students after hosting a ‘Maximum Mexican’ food day.”

13) “All-Women’s College Cancels ‘Vagina Monologues’ Because it Excludes Women Without Vaginas.”

14) “The ‘Black Lives Matter’ leader who landed a teaching gig at Yale University delivered a lecture this week on the historical merits of looting as a form of protest, backing up his lesson with required reading that puts modern-day marauders on par with the patriots behind the Boston Tea Party.”

15) “Assistant Dean (at Cornell) Tells a Project Veritas Investigative Journalist that the University Would Allow an ISIS Terrorist to Hold a ‘Training Camp’ on Campus, Saying: ‘It Would be Like Bringing in a Coach to do a Training on a Sports Team.'”

 

BE AFRAID of the Crybaby Generation, Be very Afraid.

Support Censorship It’s Less Offensive that Way

Let’s start with the good news about Pew Research’s latest findings on the incredibly annoying delicate snowflake epidemic sweeping American higher education: these people aren’t the majority. It’s not even close. Sixty-seven percent of Americans support free speech (in keeping with past polling), while 28 percent think “government should be able to prevent” people from saying offensive things about minorities. Supermajorities of men, women, Democrats, Republicans, Independents, high school graduates, and college graduates all support free speech principles. Non-whites don’t have supermajority support, breaking 57/38 in favor of free speech. To no one’s surprise, Millennials are the generation where the largest proportion feels that government should curtail free speech rights (via Pew):

Four-in-ten Millennials say the government should be able to prevent people publicly making statements that are offensive to minority groups, while 58% said such speech is OK.Even though a larger share of Millennials favor allowing offensive speech against minorities, the 40% who oppose it is striking given that only around a quarter of Gen Xers (27%) and Boomers (24%) and roughly one-in-ten Silents (12%) say the government should be able to prevent such speech.

Compared with people we surveyed in dozens of nations, Americans as a whole are less likely to favor the government being able to prevent speech of any kind

I guess another silver lining (remember 40 percent is high, but it’s nowhere near a majority) is that we’re not becoming like Europe, even if Millennials in college are eating up this political correctness/safe space nonsense at the moment, which does actively seek to end discussions on certain issues.

At the same time, while it’s easy to classify all Millennials as hopeless, please watch Editor-in-Chief of DailyWire Ben Shapiro talk to Mizzou students, the ones who are rational, about the current climate on college campuses, especially the fiasco that has embroiled their institution to the point where their president and chancellor both resigned for pretty much being Caucasian. Young America’s Foundation hosted the event.

Katie added that Shapiro made clear that he doesn’t care about your feelings, and that students need to stop whining and grow up.

In light of the recent and absurd calls from University of Missouri students to self-segregate based on race, demands for “safe spaces,” the attempts to boot reporters from covering public protests, claims of a poop swastika and more, Young America’s Foundation decided to send Harvard Law Graduate and Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro to Mizzou to debunk false, progressive narratives swirling on campus and being promoted through national media.

The words “toughen up spoiled children” were written in chalk outside of the hall where he spoke and during his speech, Shapiro took protesters and the leftists who support them to task in epic fashion. The title of his lecture was, “Truth is a Microaggression.”

“I don’t care about your feelings. Lets make something perfectly clear, I care nothing about your feelings,” Shapiro said.

The entire speech is worth your time to watch.

 

 

 

 

Right to Offend

Mike Adams, a professor at the University of North Carolina-Wilmington is not your stereotypical left-wing teacher. On the heels of a report that showed that liberal arts professors overwhelmingly support Democrats, Adams’ semester-opening statement to his students has gone viral.

[Trigger warning: The following is extraordinarily insensitive and its candor may cause some students to be highly offended. Symptoms of being confronted with viewpoints other than one’s own may cause one to get “the vapors” and students have even been known to collapse in a fainting spell upon reading offensive literature. Reader discretion is advised.]

Here is what he said to his students:

Welcome back to class, students! I am Mike Adams your criminology professor here at UNC-Wilmington. Before we get started with the course I need to address an issue that is causing problems here at UNCW and in higher education all across the country. I am talking about the growing minority of students who believe they have a right to be free from being offended. If we don’t reverse this dangerous trend in our society there will soon be a majority of young people who will need to walk around in plastic bubble suits to protect them in the event that they come into contact with a dissenting viewpoint. That mentality is unworthy of an American. It’s hardly worthy of a Frenchman.

Let’s get something straight right now. You have no right to be unoffended. You have a right to be offended with regularity. It is the price you pay for living in a free society. If you don’t understand that you are confused and dangerously so. In part, I blame your high school teachers for failing to teach you basic civics before you got your diploma. Most of you went to the public high schools, which are a disaster. Don’t tell me that offended you. I went to a public high school.

Of course, your high school might not be the problem. It is entirely possible that the main reason why so many of you are confused about free speech is that piece of paper hanging on the wall right over there. Please turn your attention to that ridiculous document that is framed and hanging by the door. In fact, take a few minutes to read it before you leave class today. It is our campus speech code. It specifically says that there is a requirement that everyone must only engage in discourse that is “respectful.” That assertion is as ludicrous as it is illegal. I plan to have that thing ripped down from every classroom on campus before I retire.

One of my grandfathers served in World War I. My step-grandfather served in World War II. My sixth great grandfather enlisted in the American Revolution when he was only thirteen. These great men did not fight so we could simply relinquish our rights to the enemy within our borders. That enemy is the Marxists who run our public universities. If you are a Marxist and I just offended you, well, that’s tough. I guess they don’t make communists like they used to.

Unbelievably, a student once complained to the Department chairwoman that my mention of God and a Creator was a violation of Separation of Church and State. Let me be as clear as I possibly can: If any of you actually think that my decision to paraphrase the Declaration of Independence in the course syllabus is unconstitutional then you suffer from severe intellectual hernia.

Indeed, it takes hard work to become stupid enough to think the Declaration of Independence is unconstitutional. If you agree with the student who made that complaint then you are probably just an anti-religious zealot. Therefore, I am going to ask you to do exactly three things and do them in the exact order that I specify.

First, get out of my class. You can fill out the drop slip over at James Hall. Just tell them you don’t believe in true diversity and you want to be surrounded by people who agree with your twisted interpretation of the Constitution simply because they are the kind of people who will protect you from having your beliefs challenged or your feelings hurt.  🙂

Second, withdraw from the university. If you find that you are actually relieved because you will no longer be in a class where your beliefs might be challenged then you aren’t ready for college. Go get a job building houses so you can work with some illegal aliens who will help you gain a better appreciation of what this country has to offer.

Finally, if this doesn’t work then I would simply ask you to get the hell out of the country. The ever-growing thinned-skinned minority you have joined is simply ruining life in this once-great nation. Please move to some place like Cuba where you can enjoy the company of communists and get excellent health care. Just hop on a leaky boat and start paddling your way towards utopia. You will not be missed.

Earlier this year, Adams won a court victory against the school, when he sued, asserting that he was not promoted due to his outspoken conservatism. (IJR)

AMEN.

Flag on The Play

A University of New Mexico student says he was instructed by a school employee last week to remove an American flag he proudly had displayed from his dorm room window.

“UNM didn’t want to start drawing a line between what you can hang in public spaces, because you can see the flag from my window,” the student, Bobby Schofield told KOAT-TV. “He told me that if someone were to hang, say, the Confederate flag or a Third Reich flag, they didn’t want to have that showing, and so to make it easier on them, they said no flags.”

Son they drew a line anyways. One of Political Correctness. Ban everything. Especially, when it offends the Politically Correct. After all, a Confederate Flag is equivalent to The American Flag because they are both Flags! 🙂

And you wouldn’t want to “offend” a PC liberal, now would you? 🙂

Schofield said that one of the public university’s resident advisers explained the policy was needed to keep students from displaying offensive material from their dorm rooms.

“It’s definitely a First Amendment violation for them to have to take down any kind of flag.”

 

The school’s handbook states that “room decorations are to be in the interior of your room and may not extend into public spaces.” A university spokesperson told college news website Campus Reform that “a window is considered ‘public space.’”

Nevertheless, some students consider the order to remove the flag to be a First Amendment violation.

“It’s definitely a First Amendment violation for them to have to take down any kind of flag. I think it’s ridiculous,” student Ryan Taylor told KOAT.

“There are probably some things that cross the line somewhere, but in general yeah what’s wrong with it,” another said.

However, UNM student Michael Aguilar, who is also president of the school’s Young Americans for Liberty chapter, told Campus Reform that the recent enforcement effort is not consistent with his general experience.

“I lived in the dorms; I had a flag up and nobody ever told me anything,” Aguilar said, adding that he considers flags a frequent sight in windows on campus.

“I see state of New Mexico flags in windows all the time,” he claimed. “If they’re banning American flags, why don’t they ban New Mexico flags, as well?”

Saying that the only word for the policy is “ridiculous,” Aguilar also argued that he considers it a violation of First Amendment rights.

“Personally I think you have freedom of speech, and that extends to expression,” he explained. “I think you should be able to hang any flag that you want, as long as it doesn’t incite violence.”

Because it’s not Politically Incorrect, that’s why. It hurts the tiny, “open-minded” “tolerant” diversity” obsessed Liberal mind so it must go. They can’t handle anything that is outside their mindset.

Anderson referred Campus Reform to two other UNM officials for an explanation of the university’s rationale for banning all decorations from dorm room windows, but neither had responded by press time.

And now the Political ass saving bureaucrats…

UPDATE: UNM Residence Life Manager Megan Chibanga told Campus Reform that while she was not present for the interaction between Schofield and his RA, she “can fully understand why the RA might explain the policy by referencing other flags,” though “it is not a specific concern that these flags might be shown.”

Suggesting that the RA may have been attempting “to explain the policy rational[ly] via an example instead of merely outlining the specific wording in the policy itself,” she noted that the description was nonetheless incomplete.

“The rational[e] behind the policy is first and primarily to prevent damage to our rooms, including the doors and windows,” she explained, observing that less damage to rooms allows both students and the university to save money.

“Secondly, the subjectivity of any one person’s perspective about what is or is not offensive when it is displayed within the public spaces of the residence halls could create an environment where students, faculty, and staff are subjected to what they consider offensive materials on a regular basis, instead of an environment which is supportive of the academic mission of the university,” she continued.

And we all know, there is great offense to be had by the American Flag!! But since the Liberal response to any nuance to go extreme…

“I hope to make it clear, we are in no way saying that students cannot hang an American Flag, or any flag for that matter, in their rooms, but as it is a personal room decoration, it simply needs to remain on the interior of their space, not in a shared public space such as a window.”

Keep your bigotry inside, like your politically incorrect opinions. Don’t express them because you may cause distress to a Politically Correct Liberal!

Meanwhile in North Carolina…

The Daily Tar Heel, the student newspaper at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, has decided it will no longer use the word “freshman.”

According to an article in Monday’s edition, “[i]n the interest of inclusivity, The Daily Tar Heel will from now on use gender-neutral language in its stories… we all see a pressing need to be inclusive in the way we write about people.”

“UNC is such an interesting campus, always challenging its students, faculty, staff and administration to be more inclusive…”    Tweet This

The student publication will undergo several changes, including the use of the term “first-year” in place of “freshman.” Additionally, the paper will use gender-neutral terms such as “spokesperson” and “chairperson” instead of “spokesman” and “chairwoman.”

In other instances where a gendered term would be commonly used, the paper says it “will find a gender-neutral alternative.”

And the sad fact is, these idiot liberals have no cognitive function that tells them they are anything other than “inclusive” and just so much better than you intellectually.

“UNC is such an interesting campus, always challenging its students, faculty, staff and administration to be more inclusive, more understanding and more accepting…”

And you’ll be swatted down inclusively if you dare cross them.

You bigoted little shit! 🙂

http://www.koat.com/news/unm-student-asked-to-take-american-flag-from-window/35362006?utm_campaign=KOAT&utm_content=55fcd39204d3015765000001&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=trueAnthem:%2BNew%2BContent

Next time try the Flag of Iran… 🙂

Free Speech

“Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”– George Orwell

Trigger warning: This column will include discussion of ideas that may conflict with your own and some might find “offensive”. 🙂

There is one area where suppression of free speech has blossomed. That is at our universities and colleges. It started ages ago. In 1993, it exploded into the consciousness of America when Eden Jacobowitz, a student at the University of Pennsylvania, disturbed by noise outside his dorm room yelled out his window “Shut up, you water buffalo.” The case challenged the right of free speech against a campus harassment code.

These speech codes created by the professors and left-wing administrators (mainly former professors) were being used to control two principal groups. First and foremost, fellow scholars seeking to become colleagues that had to run the gauntlet of becoming tenured. Second, students who wished to express contrary views in a classroom or in a paper. To a point those wielding these policies succeeded on campuses, but they created their own uncontrollable monstrosity.

The students started their own efforts to suppress freedom of speech. It became overtly public whenever a speaker deemed inappropriate in their positions was invited to a college campus. People like Ann Coulter or David Horowitz were being harassed off campuses. If they were allowed to speak they would be heckled instead of respectfully listened to or ignored. An opposing opinion became repugnant. The expression of open thought that universities for which were formed had become the suppressor. The guardians of free speech had been thrashed.

It then spread to college commencement speeches. People like former Secretary of State Condi Rice were run out of addresses. The professors and their minions would not allow an unapproved thought to pierce their ears. Only properly-vetted speakers who spoke “the gospel” were allowed.

Next it spread to comedians. You know — those people who have the job in our society to make fun of our worst tendencies. They make sure that we do not take ourselves too seriously. Not at colleges. Jerry Seinfeld, possibly the leading stand-up comedian of his generation, abandoned performing on college campuses because of the obliteration of free speech. When it went public he made clear he was not the only one when he said “I hear that all the time, ‘I don’t play colleges,’ but I hear a lot of people tell me, ‘Don’t go near colleges. They’re so PC.” Chris Rock deserted the circuit and so has Larry the Cable Guy. The students don’t want to be offended.

The narrowest, most repressive minds are the closed minded Liberals who preach “diversity” and “tolerance”. Orwell could not better.

The students are now demanding what they call “triggers” (warnings about upcoming material) from their professors. The American Association of University Professors stated in a committee report, “A current threat to academic freedom in the classroom comes from a demand that teachers provide warnings in advance if assigned material contains anything that might trigger difficult emotional responses for students. This follows from earlier calls not to offend students’ sensibilities by introducing material that challenges their values and beliefs.” The professors are now experiencing the wrath of their creation.

The term “Microagression” was coined by Harvard Professor Chester M. Pierce in 1970 to describe insults and dismissals he said he had regularly witnessed non-black Americans inflict on Blacks. It has now been expanded to include any perceived insult against anyone who feels they have been insulted. As you know the largest university system in the United States (University of California) issued guidelines for professors to help them from hurting the feelings of their students. It was stated by the UC administration that they are just guidelines, but no one believes that and speech is once again suppressed as the students stomp out academic freedom in the name of protecting their little hearts from being hurt.

LGBTQI Departments at Universities,a whole vast bureaucracy dedicated to the prevention of “offense” in the name of “tolerance” and “diversity”.

Orwell could never have done better. The Doublespeak is breathtaking.

It used to be that the universities were the center of free thought. Scholars were the center of that going back to Socrates. Colleges were the center of the defense of free speech and resistance. If it was a revolt, it started with the students. The U.S. anti-war movement on college campuses in the 1960s was the center of the free speech movement. So were the fights against Communist regimes. The fights to overturn the dictatorships in Egypt and Iran were led by the students.

The most famous resistance within Nazi Germany was The White Rose (a film of the same name was made). White Rose were students from Munich University. The Nazis always feared the free speech of the intellectuals. Hitler would not have to do such today. In America the students are the center of the suppression of free speech.

Instead of defending the First Amendment the professors have created a monster which is halting the First Amendment and their own right of free speech. The people who are historically the highest advocates for free expression have become the shock troops of abolition of such. Never would dictators think the universities and their students would be the principal source of free speech suppression. Never would they dream that their main source of grief would self-inflict the squelching of speech.

Hitler would be proud. So would Stalin, Mao, the Ayatollah…….. (Bruce Bialosky)

And Orwell.

“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

“So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don’t even know that fire is hot.”

“The very concept of objective truth is fading out of the world. Lies will pass into history.”

Perfect example: Commentor Monty Hebert on a WP article about this very topic:

<Kathleen> Parker is in agreement here with a book asserting that both college campuses and “the liberal media” suppress free speech! Her concern seems more than a little disingenuous given that some (though certainly not all) colleges are among the last places left where liberal is not a dirty word. Free speech on college campuses is about as big a problem as the so called war on Christmas and Christians or discrimination against white males. If Parker wants to address a real problem she should express alarm and outrage at the way millions of people in my home state of Texas and across the South have been manipulated via Fox News, radio talk shows and truly vicious internet sites into distrusting and even hating the federal government, and demonizing the president of the United States. It is not the left that has profited from abolishment of the Fairness Doctrine.

The Ministry of Truth’s perfect warrior for the faith.

A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Yet, there are on college campuses all over the country.

And this is our future.

Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid.

Ministry of Microagression Part II

As parents gear up to fork over $20,000 to $60,000 for college tuition, they might benefit from knowing what greets their youngsters. Deceitful college officials, who visit high schools to recruit students and talk to parents, conceal the worst of their campus practices. Let’s expose some of it.

Christina Hoff Sommers is an avowed feminist and a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. She’s spent a lifetime visiting college campuses. Recently, upon her arrival at Oberlin College, Georgetown University and other campuses, trigger warnings were issued asserting, in her words, that her “very presence on campus” was “a form of violence” and that she was threatening students’ mental health. At Oberlin, 30 students and the campus therapy dog retired to a “safe room” with soft music, crayons and coloring books to escape any uncomfortable facts raised by Sommers.

Kumbya! Don’t annoy or confuse the Liberal with actual facts.

The problem for students and some professors is that Sommers challenges the narrative, with credible statistical facts, that women are living in a violent, paternalistic rape culture. As a result, she has been “excommunicated from the church of campus feminism” in order to protect women from her uncomfortable facts. This prompted Sommers to say, “There’s a move to get young women in combat, and yet on our campuses, they are so fragile they can’t handle a speaker with dissenting views.” I wonder whether there will be demands for the military to have therapy dogs and safe rooms in combat situations.

That’s about “equality”. The Therapy and how evil men are comes later.

The University of New Hampshire published a “Bias-Free Language Guide,” which “is meant to invite inclusive excellence in (the) campus community.” Terms such as “American,” “homosexual,” “illegal alien,” “Caucasian,” “mothering,” “fathering” and “foreigners” are deemed “problematic.” Other problematic terms include “elders,” “senior citizen,” “overweight,” “speech impediment,” “dumb,” “sexual preference,” “manpower,” “freshmen,” “mailman” and “chairman.” For now, these terms are seen as problematic. If the political correctness police were permitted to get away with it, later they would bring disciplinary action against a student or faculty member who used the terms. The offender would be required to attend diversity training, the leftist equivalent of communist re-education camps. In a rare instance of administrative guts, UNH President Mark Huddleston said he is offended by many things in the guide and declared that it is not university policy.

FOX: The Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts reversed a controversial decision to replace the terms “mother” and “father” with “parent 1” and “parent 2.” 

“After receiving feedback regarding a recent change made to the permanent parenting plan form, the AOC has reviewed the procedures and determined that, before making any changes to the form, the AOC should consult with the Domestic Relations Committee of the Tennessee Judicial Conference,” the office said in a statement. ” We have reverted to the previous form and the Committee has been notified.”

“Why are heterosexual parents having their rights violated?” she asked. “So now it’s improper and inappropriate in a court of law to refer to a parent as a mother and a father?

Why yes, Dorothy, it is because it’s discriminatory! The fact that they discriminate against the politically incorrect heterosexuals is irrelevant to the Leftists and the Politically Correct.

Family law attorney: “I am exercising my right to free speech, freedom of religion and I am being a conscientious objector,” she declared. “I refuse to go to court with a parenting plan that refers to Parent 1 and Parent 2 instead of mother and father.”

The PC police will come looking for you, Barbara…

Florida State University has an “Equal Opportunity and Non-Discrimination Statement,” which says, “Behavior that may be considered offensive, demeaning, or degrading to persons or groups will not be tolerated.” That’s both broad and troublesome. Say that you’re a Muslim student and offended by homosexuality. Can you demand termination of campus activities that support homosexual activities?

I want to see that PC cat fight! 🙂

When they had the case of the Lesbian haircut in a Muslim Barbershop in Canada it ended in a draw because they couldn’t decide which Politically Correct group was “offended” more.

A 2014 report by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education found that 59 percent of the 427 higher-education institutions it analyzed have policies that infringe on First Amendment rights. FIRE found that the University of Connecticut prohibits “actions that intimidate, humiliate, or demean persons or groups, or that undermine their security or self-esteem.” The University of South Carolina prohibits “teasing,” “ridiculing” and “insulting.”

You mean like this blog? 🙂

In 2012, FIRE listed the “12 Worst Colleges for Free Speech.” In no particular order, they are the University of Cincinnati, Syracuse University, Widener University, Harvard University, Yale University, Saint Augustine’s College, Michigan State University, Colorado College, Johns Hopkins University, Tufts University, Bucknell University and Brandeis University.

University presidents, other academic administrators and faculty members all too often find the well-worn path of least resistance most attractive. They give support to claims of oppression and victimhood. These close-minded people are simply the “grown-up” leftist hippie generation of the 1960s and ’70s.

You might ask: What’s Walter Williams’ solution to these problems? For starters, benefactors should stop giving money to universities that endorse anti-free speech and racist diversity policy. Simply go to a university’s website. If you find an office of diversity, close your pocketbook. There’s nothing like the sound of pocketbooks snapping shut to open the closed minds of administrators.

In the name of “inclusiveness” and “diversity”, of course. 🙂

The Ministry of Microagressions

Microaggressions – considered examples of subconscious racism. Because on the left everything and everybody is about racism. It is their greatest control mechanism ( call it micro-totalitarianism– Thomas Sowell does).

It is the whip they will wield to make you obey them. Thoughtcrimes are Racist and Racism is a Thoughtcrime.

You’re all racists and everything you do and say is racist so you must controlled to stop all those racist thoughts like:

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” –Dr. Martin Luther King.

Man what a naive racist! 🙂

George Orwell said, “There are some ideas so absurd that only an intellectual could believe them.” If one wants to discover the truth of Orwell’s statement, he need only step upon most college campuses.

Faculty leaders of the University of California consider certain statements racism and feel they should not be used in class. They call it micro-aggression. To them, micro-aggressive racist statements are: “America is the land of opportunity.” That is seen as perpetuating the myth of meritocracy. “There is only one race, the human race.” Such a statement is seen as denying the individual as a racial/cultural being. “I believe the most qualified person should get the job.” That’s “racist” because it gives the impression that “people of color are given extra unfair benefits because of their race.”

An initiative of UC President Janet Napolitano (former Head of Homeland Security -“Big Sis” to Big Brother- and Governor who never met an Illegal she’d didn’t love), aim to teach how to avoid offending students and peers, as well as how to hire a more diverse faculty (diverse meaning not white, not male, not christian). After all, inclusive is very exclusive. 🙂

These expressions don’t exhaust the list of micro-aggressions. Other seemingly innocuous statements deemed unacceptable are: “Everyone can succeed in this society, if they work hard enough,” “When I look at you, I don’t see color,” or “Affirmative action is racist.” Perhaps worst of all is, “Where are you from or where were you born?” For more of this, see a document released by The College Fix titled “Diversity in the Classroom,” UCLA Diversity and Faculty Development.

Star Trek’s IDIC (Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations) is racist.

“And the ways our differences combine to create meaning and beauty.”— Miranda and Spock, “Is There In Truth No Beauty?”

EVIL!

“I am pleased to see that we have differences. May we together become greater than the sum of both of us.”— ‘Surak’, “The Savage Curtain”

Racist!

Actual diversity is racist but the Left does it to promote diversity. The ultimate in Orwellian Doublethink and Doublespeak.

Perfect. 🙂

The handout also describes “raising the bar” as “elitist.”

University representative Shelly Meron said in an email Tuesday that “These seminars are not an attempt to curb open dialogue, debate or classroom discussions.”

Oh really?

“The quotes you referenced are taken directly from research done on this topic. We present this research literature/climate survey responses as examples so that faculty leaders can be more aware of the impact their actions or words may have on their students, and to provide faculty members with potential strategies to create an inclusive learning environment for all students.”

The inclusiveness of exclusivity! Free Speech by limiting it. Free Thought by thoughtcrime.

Orwell would be proud.

This micro-aggression nonsense, called micro-totalitarianism by my colleague Dr. Thomas Sowell , is nothing less than an attack on free speech. From the Nazis to the Stalinists, tyrants have always started out supporting free speech, and why is easy to understand. Speech is vital for the realization of their goals of command, control and confiscation. Free speech is a basic tool for indoctrination, propagandizing, proselytization. Once the leftists gain control, as they have at many universities, free speech becomes a liability and must be suppressed. This is increasingly the case on university campuses.

You have Free Speech as long as it is not a Thoughtcrime. And since basically everything is a thoughtcrime… 🙂

Daniel Henninger, deputy editor of The Wall Street Journal’s editorial page, writes about the campus attack on free speech and different ideas in his article titled “Obama Unleashes the Left: How the government created a federal hunting license for the far left.” He says that in the Harvard Crimson, an undergraduate columnist wrote: “Let’s give up on academic freedom in favor of justice. When an academic community observes research promoting or justifying oppression, it should ensure that this research does not continue.” The student was calling for the suppression of the research of conservative Harvard government professor Harvey Mansfield.

Oberlin College proposed that its teachers be aware of politically controversial topics such as “racism, classism, sexism, heterosexism, cissexism, ableism, capitalism and other issues of privilege and oppression.” The presumption that students must be protected rather than challenged in a classroom is at once infantilizing and anti-intellectual.

But perfectly Orwellian. The Ministry is proud.

Last year Vassar College faculty and students held a meeting to discuss the school’s movement to boycott Israel. Before the meeting, an English professor announced the dialogue would “not be guided by cardboard notions of civility.” That professor’s vision differs little from Adolf Hitler’s brown-shirted thugs of the paramilitary wing of the Nazi Party in their effort to crush dissent.

Azusa Pacific University “postponed” a speech by political scientist Charles Murray to avoid “hurting our faculty and students of color.” Brandeis University officials rescinded their invitation to Somali writer and American Enterprise Institute scholar Ayaan Hirsi Ali, whose criticisms of radical Islam were said to have violated the school’s “core values.” Brandeis officials claimed that allowing her to speak would be hurtful to Muslim students.

Western values of liberty are under ruthless attack by the academic elite on college campuses across America. These people want to replace personal liberty with government control; they want to replace equality before the law with entitlement. As such, they pose a far greater threat to our way of life than any terrorist organization or rogue nation. Leftist ideas are a cancer on our society. Ironically, we not only are timid in response, but also nourish those ideas with our tax dollars and charitable donations.

And these are the place your sending your little cherubs of joy to- to be indoctrinated and trained to be Leftist foot soldiers in the Army of Big Brother.

All Hail President Bernie Sanders! 🙂

 

Bo Knows Dukes

Amen. The focus should be on the people murdered by a crazy SOB. But the Left never passes up a chance to push their Agenda, after all, the ends justify the means in their tiny control freak little minds.

And the spineless reactionary fear of these Agenda Nazis is no better.

And the fact that these Confederates, wer in FACT, Southern DEMOCRATS!  The irony is lost on The Left, The Leftist media, the mindless and the spineless. Which is most everyone it seems.

So what will the Thought Police go after next, and when will they come after you!

In a 2001 documentary about the making of “The Dukes of Hazzard,” show creator Gy Waldron said the Confederate flag that appears on a car featured on the show — like the Good Ol’ Boys themselves — was never meanin’ no harm.

“Painting the Confederate flag on the roof of the car was done very innocently,” Waldron said, “because in the ’50s and ’60s it was very common to find Confederate flags painted on cars. There was never a political statement to be made by it. It was just part of the tradition. And once we had put it in there I saw no reason to bow to any pressure groups. We’re not making any statement regarding slavery or post-slavery or integration or anything like that.”

John Schneider — that’s Bo Duke to those who follow the Good Ol’ Boys — agreed that the General Lee, as the car is known, was far from a symbol of hate.

“It amazes me that anyone could take offense to the General Lee,” Schneider said in the documentary. “… If there was ever a non-racist family, it was the Dukes of Hazzard.” (WP)

Hollywood Reporter: The Duke boys are being put on the bench.

TV Land has pulled reruns of Dukes of Hazzard in light of the recent uproar over the Confederate flag, which is emblazoned on the roof of the show’s iconic General Lee 1969 Dodge Charger, The Hollywood Reporter has confirmed.

The show has faced criticism over the depiction of the controversial flag in the wake of the June 17 shooting in Charleston, S.C., that left nine dead, and what many viewed as South Carolina’s delayed decision to take the flag down.

Confederate merchandise has since been dropped by Walmart, Target, Amazon and other businesses after the shooting, which took place at a historic black church.

Shortly after the attack, photos surfaced showing alleged shooter Dylann Roof burning one American flag and stepping on another, while waving and posing provocatively with Confederate banners.

Warner Bros.’ consumer division announced on June 24 that it will stop licensing toy cars and models featuring the General Lee with the flag.

In a recent interview with THR, Dukes of Hazzard star John Schneider defended the series’ use of the flag. “Labeling anyone who has the flag a ‘racist’ seems unfair to those who are clearly ‘never meanin’ no harm,'” he said. His co-star Ben Jones has also come out in defense of the flag, saying it represents the “indomitable spirit of independence.”

The Parents Television Council weighed in TV Land’s decision Wednesday. Although the organization said they did not oppose the reasoning behind TV Land’s actions, the council blasted the network and its parent company, Viacom, for “blatant hypocrisy” they say the media company demonstrated.

“When media companies are criticized for marketing programs that glamorize drug and alcohol use, or for sexualizing minors in television programs and movies, or for selling violent entertainment to children – despite overwhelming evidence of harm – or for trivializing rape, child sex abuse and pedophilia, all in the name of ‘entertainment,’ they are quick to wrap themselves in the banner of Free Speech,” wrote PTC president Tim Winter.

“Restraint and responsibility do not infringe on the First Amendment and do not encroach on Free Speech rights. If TV Land is willing to pull The Dukes of Hazzard, out of concern for its harmful impact on our society (and it is good that Viacom is publicly acknowledging its programming can have a harmful impact on our society), they cannot then hide behind the First Amendment to refute the compelling evidence of harm from the violent and sexualized media content they continue to produce and air with impunity.”

Dukes of Hazzard ran on CBS from 1979 to 1985.

It’s all about “tolerance”, remember. 🙂

“Fundamentally transform America” — Barack Obama.

The Thought Police are Watching you!

https://wordpress.com/post/9253893/new

Move Forward

Well, now that the Gay Mafia has the Federal Government’s stamp of approval to destroy anyone who gets in their way I think we should turn it up a notch on them.

Polyamory.

Where Multiple Men (or Women) can have multiple wives.

If the definition of marriage that has existed for 10,000 years is on the trash heap of Political Correctness and no longer valid, then is the 1 person and 1 person definition not the next logical step in this ridiculous arms race of hedonism and narcissism?

If marriage is solely the purview of “love” and “commitment” then why is 1 on 1 a limitation? The line we won’t cross.

If 6 guys and 15 women want to be “married” to each other why not allow it?

If a 14 year old wants to marry a 30 year old out of “love and “commitment” is it discrimination to deny them the tenet of marriage?

You broke the tenet of 10,000 years of history so why stop there?

If I want to marry my cat, is it discrimination to prohibit it?

There are no limits, or limitations now.

So I say, we need to start a campaign to legalize Polyamory and Polygamy because anything would be “discrimination”.

Wouldn’t it? 🙂

“If you are among the many Americans—of whatever sexual orientation—who favor expanding same-sex marriage, by all means celebrate today’s decision. Celebrate the achievement of a desired goal. Celebrate the opportunity for a new expression of commitment to a partner. Celebrate the availability of new benefits. But do not celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it,”  Justice Roberts wrote.

It was about “equality”. So why is polyamory not legal then?

Is “discrimination” ok if it’s not on your ideological agenda?

And there will be no “equality” anyhow. The Leftist control freaks will see to that. But they set the standard that marriage is not strictly defined as it has been for millenia, so who is the number of men and women restricted?

Why can’t I have 15 wives if I and they choose to? Why would I be “discriminated” against? You’re just a “bigot” if you don’t allow it.

Being a single-minded ideologically zealot does have it’s consequences.

Time they paid up.

The game is afoot…

The editorial board of PennLive/The Patriot-News in Harrisburg, Pa. is taking a hardcore stance against those who disagree with the Supreme Court ruling to legalize gay marriage.

“As a result of Friday’s ruling, PennLive/The Patriot-News will no longer accept, nor will it print, op-Eds and letters to the editor in opposition to same-sex marriage,” they declared. 

After receiving strong pushback, the newspaper’s editorial board, which is overseen by Editorial Page Editor John Micek, quickly revised its policy. Freedom of speech will be allowed — but only for a “limited” period of time.

Remember what I said about freedom of speech yesterday…. 🙂

The Supreme Court and the American people at the polls in 2016 need to decide whether this country will respect their First Amendment rights, including their fundamental right to dissent.

Judge Alito shares this anxiety. “Today’s decision … will be used to vilify Americans who are unwilling to assent to the new orthodoxy,” he writes. In particular, he objects to the comparison between bans on same-sex marriage and the bans on interracial marriage that were widespread before the Court overturned them in 1967 in Loving v. Virginia. “The implications of this analogy will be exploited by those who are determined to stamp out every vestige of dissent,” he argues.

The Holy Warriors of The Left are far from done with you!

Opposition to their Ideology will not be permitted.

In our age there is no such thing as ‘keeping out of politics.’ All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia.

 To the past or to the future, to an age when thought is free, from the Age of Big Brother, from the Age of the Thought Police, from a dead man — greetings!- Orwell

Welcome to the Age of Big Brother!