Gay Patriot Header Image

When Arrogant, Out-Of-Touch Liberal Bigots Attack

Posted by V the K at 4:22 pm - December 6, 2016.
Filed under: Arrogance of the Liberal Elites

Paul Krugman went on a snippy little Twitter rant the other day. (In case you forgot, Paul Krugman is the NY Times columnist and Nobel-prize-winning economist who predicted the stock market would crash on Trump’s election and never recover. Within a week, it hit record highs.) He was just gob-smacked that some people are saying elite New York Times columnists are out of touch with the rest of America.

A lot of people seem to be settling on the narrative that Trumpism reflects a backlash against the arrogance of liberal elites. Really?

Yes, in no way should Trump’s victory over the favored candidate of the political and media class be seen as a case of millions of Americans turning on the political and media class who have been running the country.

Also, how can you say that liberals, who worried about wage stagnation etc. don’t care about workers? IN terms of policy, liberals have been on white working class’s side, much more than the election victors.

Why, we’re the ones who brought you Obamacare, the $15 minimum wage, the War on Coal, and all those third world migrants crowding your schools. (Not a lot of Somalian refugees at Sidwell Friends.)

The answer seems in part to be that liberals haven’t been willing to promise to bring the coal etc. jobs back because they cannot, in fact, be brought back — but insisting on being realistic is perceived as elitist, arrogant, and uncaring

Actually, the answer lies in liberal policies of over-regulation, cronyist central planning, and massive third-world immigration have been killing jobs in the first place; including coal jobs.  “Hey, we killed your manufacturing job, but we will retrain you to wait tables at Buffalo Wild Wings. Because we care.”

Plus there’s the sense that liberals don’t respect the culture of the WWC. What’s odd is that I don’t see anything like the blatant way conservatives denounce “New York values”, or declare that large parts of the country aren’t the “real America”. Sure you can find some dismissive remarks about flyover country or something — but never in political discourse, from actual politicians. So what is it?

You don’t see it? Well, I’m pretty sure fish don’t see water, either.  As far as not hearing it from “actual politicians,” refer to… “And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.” Or, does that not count?

One answer is anti-intellectualism — the very act of trying to figure out how to solve problems makes some see you as arrogant.Another answer — which you know is partly true — is anger that liberal elites don’t respect ordinary folks’ prejudice.

In other words, “At the end of the day, people who don’t agree with liberals are stupid bigots.”

Yeah, Trump’s election will forever be a mystery to Paul Krugman and his ilk.

Arrogance Goes Before an Electoral Defeat

The Huffington Post has climbed in off the ledge long enough to put together a piece that says maybe … just maybe… it was the Clinton campaign’s loss was maybe less about “hate and racism” and maybe somewhat due to “neglect” of the upper midwestern states like Michigan and Wisconsin, and also Pennsylvania (which is culturally midwestern outside the suburbs of Philadelphia) and “a touch of arrogance.”

In Michigan alone, a senior battleground state operative told HuffPost that the state party and local officials were running at roughly one-tenth the paid canvasser capacity that Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) had when he ran for president in 2004. Desperate for more human capital, the state party and local officials ended up raising $300,000 themselves to pay 500 people to help canvass in the election’s closing weeks. By that point, however, they were operating in the dark. One organizer said that in a precinct in Flint, they were sent to a burned down trailer park. No one had taken it off the list of places to visit because no one had been there until the final weekend. Clinton lost the state by 12,000 votes.

Neglect? Sure, I can buy that. Those states that were sneered at as ‘The Rust Belt’ by East Coast liberals were also part of ‘The Blue Wall;’ states that hadn’t gone to a Republican since the 1980′s. And it’s easy to write them off when totes everyone in the media (including the Huffers) was telling her, “This is in the bag for you, Madam President.”

But it was a lot more than just a “touch” of arrogance.

From the outset, the Hillary campaign sought to project a hip, young, urban image. From the choice of hipster Brooklyn for their headquarters, to their appointment of a gay millennial as campaign manager, to campaign themes that reflected the obsessions of urban hipsters: Climate Change, gun control (which did not play well in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, or Wisconsin),  socio-ethnic “diversity Pokémon,” feminism, and income disparities. The concerns of the working class were treated as an afterthought that could be assuaged

The insularity of the Clinton campaign was reflected in the graphic design of the ubiquitous “Stronger Together” slogan, rendered entirely in shades of light blue and dark blue. No red. The message was clear. “We’re ‘stronger together,’ without red America.”

So, I imagine that while it’s very likely the HIllary campaign simply took “the Rust Belt” for granted, there was also probably an aversion, a disdain among her staff members for even paying attention to them, much less getting out there and working the streets. “You’re sending me to Michigan?” you can imagine a staffer crying. “Why? What have I done?”

Having grown up in the Midwest and lived for a long time in the environs of Washington DC, I know the attitude people have there toward the Midwest. This Onion Article — DNC Aiming To Reconnect With Working-Class Americans With New ‘Hamilton’-Inspired Lena Dunham Web Series – is one of those satirical piece that cuts so close it’s painful. (Ms. Dunham, BTW, is off talking to rocks {I am not making this up} at an Arizona Spa to cope with the electorate’s repudiation of coastal hipsters.)

13510922_10209630660746030_3877919482145094581_n

The American Midwest as imagined by Coastal Hipster Democrats.

DC Elites Worry About Losing Hipster Cred Under Trump

Liberal elites are fretting that DC will lose its chic hipster elan when Trump and the Deplorables take over. Pretty much the Kamehameha of #FirstWorldProblems.

Michelle Obama has burned off her date-night meals at Washington’s new generation of acclaimed restaurants by pedaling at SoulCycle. President Obama has shopped for Jonathan Franzen novels with his daughters at local independent bookstores. Obama administration staff members, their barhopping chronicled in the gossip pages, have hit the 14th Street hot spots hard.

Mr. Trump seems unlikely to drop in at Oyamel, the Mexican restaurant and Obama favorite owned by José Andrés, a star chef and devoted Trump critic. For that matter, it is even unclear whether Mr. Trump, who has used his new Trump International Hotel as an outpost here, will spend weekends in the White House or in New York. And he is unlikely to feel a debt of gratitude to a city where Hillary Clinton won 93 percent of the vote.

“D.C. is going to take a really hard hit, culturally, socially, everything. We were really finding our footing; we weren’t second to New York,” said Jazmine Johnson, a graphic designer who said she now planned to move to New York.

The affluence of DC has been financed … Hunger Games Style … by sucking in the wealth of the fifty-states to finance an out-of-touch ruling elite. Washington DC produces nothing but regulation and arrogance; there is no innovative tech industry, no manufacturing, no real art, no wealth of any kind produced in the nation’s capital. (These are the people who spent $2Billion to build a website.) Their trendy expensive lifestyles are financed entirely by what they suck out from the rest of the country. If Trump is able to cut off some of the flow, it might make it harder for a hipster environmental lobbyist to find a chic wine bar in which to sip fair trade Merlot … but it would be much better for the rest of America.

Could these things be connected?

Item 1: Over 2 Million Hillary Supporters Sign Petition To Overturn Election Results. This is spectacular hypocrisy and as well, unawareness of American civic practices (or how American democracy is supposed to work).

Item 2: In October, John Podesta (Hillary campaign chair) had a lot of his emails exposed. In one, his associate oddly mentions how they all “conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry”.

Seeming to refer to the decades-long dumbing-down of America, Podesta’s associate said:

And as I’ve mentioned, we’ve all been quite content to demean government, drop civics and in general conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry. The unawareness remains strong but compliance is obviously fading rapidly.

(Emphasis added) Could these 2 developments be connected?

Masculinity Is Good

Contrary to what the feminist left teaches, masculinity is worthy of respect and emulation.

I’ll never forget when I was in high school in the eighties, and I studied abroad in Germany. Not to knock the German men, but I noticed how scrawny and frail most of the guys were. Even as a 17-year-old girl, I found something inherently unattractive about it.

At the end of the summer, when I gathered with other American students before heading home, I was struck by the muscular stature of the young men, and something about them made me feel a sense of relief, as if I were truly coming home where I was safe. I could finally breathe.

I was reminded of this recently when I went to visit my daughter at UNC Chapel Hill. I couldn’t help but notice how the men had changed since I attended college there years ago. So many looked skinny and soft.

“Where are all the real men? Where are the muscles?” I asked my daughter. Surprisingly, she knew exactly what I was commenting on. “They’re all athletes or they’re basic bros in the gym.”

Don’t get me wrong. I know there have always been scrawny guys among us. Nothing against them. But there is something more to this younger generation that was absent even among the less-developed men of days past. They’re not just smaller (because small guys can still be masculine). They’re girly, more feminized. They exude fragility. They remind me of some of the German guys I met back in the eighties.


Read the rest of it
.

Men are less masculine because society no longer respects masculinity as a virtue.

Progressive Authoritarianism

Hillary has often said her idol was Eleanor Roosevelt.  Here is Eleanor Roosevelt’s progressive vision for the United States, in her own words.

The only way I can see to get the maximum service out of our citizens, is to draft us all and to tell us all where we can be most useful and where our work is needed. … complying with the wishes and doing the things which those in authority thought should be done.

Hillary “Norwegian Blue” Clinton expresses the same idea, even more ambitiously: The Progressive Left will no less than “redefine what it means to be human.”

“Let us be willing to remold society by redefining what it means to be a human being in the 20th century, moving into a new millennium.”
The ultimate dream of the progressive left is a society in which “those in authority” (by which they mean, progressive leftists like themselves) get to tell everyone else what to do. They will “redefine what it means to be human” without ever explaining what was wrong with the previous definition. And those not in authority cheerfully comply.

It baffles them that we “deplorables” reject their progressive design, and resent their efforts to impose it.

 

Brexit: Marine Le Pen vs. the Clueless Elites

Two contrasting items today, in the Establishment press.

In Foreign Policy magazine, James Traub says “It’s Time for the Elites to Rise Up Against the Ignorant Masses”. Yes, that is the title of his article.

It’s a trashy piece, packed with elitist cliches and the occasional jaw-dropper (for example, when he refers to Washington’s infamous “K Street” lobbyists with approval). Yet it’s a tortured attempt to begin to face reality:

The issue, at bottom, is globalization. Brexit, Trump, the National Front, and so on show that political elites have misjudged the depth of the anger at global forces…

Actually no, Mr. Traub. Globalization, in itself, is not the problem. -Dictatorial- globalization wherein the political elites wrongly seek to enslave people, is the problem. But kudos to you, for beginning to tell the said elites that maybe there could be some sort of systemic problem.

A good contrast: In The New York Times, Marine Le Pen says “After Brexit, the People’s Spring Is Inevitable”.

British voters understood that… only one question, at once simple and fundamental, was being asked: Do we want an undemocratic authority ruling our lives, or would we rather regain control over our destiny?
[...]
More and more, the destiny of the European Union resembles the destiny of the Soviet Union, which died from its own contradictions.

There’s much more. As the saying goes, “Read the whole thing.”

UPDATE: Over at The Guardian, it’s even worse than the James Traub piece above. David Van Reybrouck’s article is titled “Why Elections Are Bad For Democracy” (yes, for real).

Starting from a blind premise that Brexit is obviously awful, he says “Voting is the problem” and suggests, in all seriousness, that citizen referenda should be replaced by focus groups (called “sortition” to make it sound nice and historical) which will be guided by the elite’s approved experts. (Via ZH.)

This Is Pretty Horrible If It’s True

David French wonders if the left’s transgender zeal is victimizing the mentally ill.

I ran across this heartbreaking interview of a University of Michigan-Flint social work professor whose 19 year-old daughter is “transitioning.” She’s autistic, and she’s been influenced by everything from pop culture to support group meetings to believe that she’s really a man. The story is tragic:

She started attending a local PFLAG meeting, where she met many trans people, including a number of FtoM trans teenagers who were raving about a certain “gender therapist.” Although the APA recommends a minimum of one year of “gender counseling” before surgery, this gender therapist (whom I consented to, before really understanding what I was doing) gave my daughter the go-ahead to have a bilateral mastectomy after only two sessions. This gender specialist never reviewed any of the Special Ed records or spoke to my daughter’s previous therapist, who had known her for a decade. And, crucially, she never asked my daughter, “Might you be a lesbian?”

It gets worse. As you might expect, her daughter wasn’t mentally equipped to understand the true consequences of her decision:

To give you some sense of my daughter’s level of understanding of what it means to transition, she told me recently that she believes that the testosterone “will grow her a penis.” I had to break the news to her that, although this is the mythology in the PFLAG meetings (where a number of the other young trans people are also autistic), this is not the case.

She has been taken advantage of. Healthy organs were amputated. This is insurance fraud, poor clinical practice, a violation of APA standards, unethical and unjust. It is a crime not just against women, but particularly against disabled women. So many of these young women who are “transitioning” are also autistic.

Despite stories like this, many states and professional associations are doing their dead-level best to render it not just unethical but also illegal to counsel teens away from such life-altering mutilations.

It is impossible to have an honest debate about the link between mental illness and transgenderism because to even suggest that a person who feels trapped in the wrong sex body would benefit from psychotherapy will result in accusations of bigotry and “transphobia.”

Obviously, the only “compassionate” thing to do to such people are to chemically and surgically mutilate them.

“New York Values”

On display at New York City’s Guggenheim Museum, a functional, 14-Karat gold toilet titled “America.”

“Its participatory nature, in which viewers are invited to make use of the fixture individually and privately, allows for an experience of unprecedented intimacy with an artwork. Cattelan’s toilet offers a wink to the excesses of the art market, but also evokes the American dream of opportunity for all, its utility ultimately reminding us of the inescapable physical realities of our shared humanity.”

“America” as a gold-plated toilet; Ooh, that’s so very clever, so very, very clever. I am sure that will show all those in-bred hicks from flyover country how very, very clever is the artistic palate of the New Tork sophisticate.

Taking Their Marbles and Going Home

Posted by V the K at 8:12 am - March 9, 2016.
Filed under: Arrogance of the Liberal Elites

Remember all of those times Conservative Republicans have been told to vote for moderate Republicans “because a Republican who agrees with you on 50% of your issues is better than a Democrat who disagrees with you on 100% of your issues.”

Yeah, about that.

Fox News Channel anchor Bret Baier said it’s possible that some Republicans will vote for Hillary Clinton just to stop Donald Trump from taking over the party.

“Listen, there are Republicans in Washington who are privately saying that already,” Baier told TheWrap on Monday. “Maybe some don’t publicly say it, but I think there are some who are that adamant about it who would.”

Let’s be clear, Donald Trump is no Conservative by any of the fourteen or fifteen current definitions. And if he is the candidate, I can see myself voting for Gary Johnson. (I live in Ohio, now. My vote almost kinda-sorta matters.) But this seems massively hypocritical on the part of the Republican Establishment; no less so since most of Trump’s historical social positions on abortion, gay marriage, and so on put him in the “moderate northeastern liberal” category. And the GOP Establishment has lectured for decades that these are the types of positions candidates should have in order for the Republican Party to win.

Here’s What REALLY Matters About Hillary’s Emails:

So today’s the big day.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will be before Rep. Trey Gowdy’s Select Committee on Benghazi, a forum through which she’ll be allowed once again to grandstand in support of her bid for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination. Pundits and talking heads are spinning themselves to distraction, while what perplexes me about the entire situation remains: I can’t understand why her popularity has ebbed and flowed as new ‘revelations’ as to the contents of her personal email server have come to light.

As a member of the military, and the possessor of a high-level security clearance, I am of course aghast at the cavalier attitude she and her underlings at State demonstrated with regard to classified information and its handling. Sure, yes, she and those charged with advising her on such matters should be held responsible and (not that I was on the verge of endorsing her anyway) this carelessness and risk should certainly demonstrate her lack of qualification for president. Bla bla, yadda yadda.

BUT…

All that aside, the most damning part of her ‘secret’ ‘home-brewed’ server is that it exists in the first place!

How is it possible that the contempt shown for the American public’s right to know, even if only for the sake of posterity, the goings-on at State not returned in kind by a Nation founded on the principles of representative government answerable to The People?

I get it; it’s an election year. There’s plenty of gamesmanship, posturing and feigned outrage.

But seriously: No less a mouthpiece for Hillary Clinton than longtime confidant and hit-man James Carville himself has acknowledged brazenly and blatantly that her purpose for having a private server in the first place was, “I suspect she didn’t want Louis Gohmert rifling through her e-mails, which seems to me to be a kind of reasonable position for someone to take.” In Mr. Carville’s opinion, does that reasonableness stem from the fact that Gohmert sits on the House Judiciary Committee, which is responsible, among other things, for handling impeachment proceedings against federal officials? More generally speaking, it surely would seem “reasonable” if your intention was to, as a public official, avoid any sort of accountability to the people of America or their representatives in Congress (whose job is oversight of you and your organization) by way of completely controlling and keeping from exposure the entire catalog of your communications in your official role. Those communications belong to us, not her.

How is the party ostensibly ‘of the little-guy’ about to coronate a politician so contemptuous of Americans to be their nominee for president? How on earth does it even tolerate her in its ranks at all?

Forget (if you can) the national security risks and exposure her choice represents. Forget the “drip, drip, drip” of supposedly damaging information being squeezed out of a recalcitrant Kerry State Department. Forget inevitable-for-anbody-else-besides-the-well-connected indictments and FBI criminal investigations. Forget all that.

If we aren’t a Nation wherein someone who shows this brash level of (sorry to keep using this word, but it’s really the only one I can think of) contempt for Americans’ right to self-governance (which requires openness of government, which in turn requires Freedom Of Information, if that rings a bell) isn’t drummed out of our national dialog, but rather is actually the nominee for president of one of our major political parties, then perhaps we’re around the bend already.

In fairness, some on the Left really do seem to have conviction about responsible and representative government. Here is an excellent Q&A that boils down the importance of this issue far beyond the bombast of presidential politics and cuts to the core of the issue at hand. Jason Leopold:

The most important aspect of her emails that anyone should be paying attention to is the fact that we don’t have answers as to why she was using a private email account, and avoiding the Federal Records Act—which is a law—and why the State Department failed to respond to legitimate requests from journalists under the Freedom of Information Act for her emails years before this scandal was ever revealed.

If the fact that the person who holds the office of the #1 individual within the administration after the VP to succeed the president having a ‘home-brewed’ server for (obviously) the purpose of avoiding accountability isn’t news enough in and of itself, what sort of representative nation are we?

-Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from HQ)

The gender pay gap: a myth?

Like others, I don’t care much about the Oscars. But I understand that Patricia Arquette made a stir on Sunday night, with her speech about “All women deserve equal pay”.

Let’s be clear: Women and men absolutely deserve equal pay, when we’re talking about equal work. That is: work of the same category and experience level, that either a woman or man could do, done with equally good results, under equally good (or bad) conditions.

The point of contention is: Are left-wing feminists really talking about that? Are they correct to claim a large gender gap exists? And are left-wing politicians correct, when they claim to be the answer?

Powerline reminds us of research from 2011 about the gender gap being a myth. And also how, on the surface at least, Hillary and Obama are hypocrites – for example, Hillary has paid her women 72 cents on the dollar (compared to her men). While left-wing hypocrisy is a delightfully inexhaustible subject, the first piece is most interesting for the points it makes.

Basically, research supports the idea that men *on average* tend to choose more dangerous (or less popular) careers; more stressful specializations within the same career; and more uncomfortable and undesirable work locations. And tend (on average) to work longer hours including more nights and weekends, and to take fewer lengthy mid-career breaks. When adjusted for such factors, the gender pay gap disappears – or even turns slightly in favor of women.

If you disagree, please feel free to post your facts/logic in the comments.

UPDATE: Peter Schiff makes a good point, that if he *could* pay a woman less for the same work, women would have a competitive advantage. He “would be an idiot to hire a man” – and would gladly hire nothing but women. He doesn’t, because it just isn’t so. (At least in financial services. Maybe, over in show business, George Clooney’s career will indeed age better than Patricia Arquette’s.)

UPDATE: At the same link, Schiff adds, “in adult entertainment [as opposed to Arquette/Hollywood] women are paid much more…this disparity has nothing to do with discrimination…The porn audience cares about the female stars…So pay rates reflect market forces…I wonder if at the next Adult Video News awards a male winner will demand equal pay during his acceptance speech?”

The Contempt of the Gentry Class

To Barack Obama, illegal immigrants are fruit-pickers and bedpan washers. To John McCain, they’re lettuce-pickers. To Hillary Clinton, illegal immigrants are busboys and dishwashers. To Karl Rove, they are the people who pick tomatoes and  make up beds so his kids won’t have to.

But it’s not just illegal immigrants they see as menial laborers; beneath the high stations they have gotten for themselves. Think about this; all of these people — and most of the economic and political “Elite” in the United States — would like to hand out American citizenship like library cards to anyone who crossed the border. It means nothing to them. They don’t hold American citizenship in much esteem because they don’t hold American citizens in much esteem, as the remarks of Mr. Jonathan Gruber have revealed.

They know that importing millions of unit of cheap foreign labor will negatively impact the wages of American workers. They don’t care, and they lie about it,  “If you like your middle class lifestyle, you can keep your middle class lifestyle,” they reassure us. The elite don’t care because they don’t see illegal immigrant labor affecting them or their class in any negative way. They see no difference between illegal immigrants and working class Americans — except, in the words of an aide to Senator Marco Rubio. “American workers can’t cut it.” To the Gentry, all of us who aren’t them might as well be fruit-pickers, lettuce-pickers, busboys, linen launderers — peasants to be ruled over by members of the Lucky Sperm Club.

The system the progressives most admire is the People’s Republic of China; a political elite wields absolute power, which they use to elevate friends and cronies to positions of wealth and status provided they profess unyielding loyalty to the party. And middle class is defined as having a 200 square foot apartment in a Proletarian rabbit warren.

Update: In California, Democrats are giving the Chinese model a trial run.

A civilization in decline

It seems as though more and more news items lately have a common element: After decades of steadily attacking, hollowing out or abandoning its own culture, the Western world is showing major signs of social, political and moral decay.

Personally, I am no traditionalist. I think all traditions should be examined in the light of logic and justice – and revised or replaced, where they’re found lacking. This is one reason why I have never called myself a conservative (and have tried not to become GP’s “main blogger”).

But my intention, as a non-traditionalist, is to ‘keep things real’ and build on what’s best in the Western tradition: which is what Jonah Goldberg has called the Lockean Revolution, the idea that the individual owns herself – and is not owned by the Massa, feudal Lord, Village, Community, Tribe, Race, Party, State or Ummah. The leftists who have attacked the West from within, for decades now, have been after the exact opposite idea.

A civilization/culture doesn’t survive unless its young women and men will mostly (regardless of particular individuals’ sexual orientation or practices) do the following together: (a) get along; (b) find a genuine sense of purpose and meaning in that culture/civilization; and therefore (c) actually create and raise new generations for it. We are seeing more and more signs that the West is decrepit, on all three counts.

I could talk about the West’s declining birthrates, or its anti-child and self-terminating “environmentalism”, or its ever-growing political insanity. But, just to restrict it to current events, GayPatriot’s main page presently notices such news items as:

And we can add more items:

I recommend that last link, Lee Smith’s opinion piece titled “Why the Teenage Girls of Europe are Joining ISIS”, for your attention. When a given civilization can no longer persuade its own teenage girls to sign on with it: it’s cooked.

Gay Marriage and the Secular Inquisition

From the Federalist, gay marriage as a tool for subjugation of the individual to the state.

The theory behind gay marriage, in short, was the theory behind the entire secular left: society and the state are the all-powerful forces on which the life of the individual depends, and the most important political task—indeed, the most important task in life—is getting this irresistible power on your side. Once you gain social and political power, you hold on to it by making your preferred views mandatory, a catechism everyone must affirm, while suppressing all heretical views. In this case, to gain social acceptance of homosexuality, you make the affirmation of gay marriages mandatory while officially suppressing any dissenting religious views.

Exactly so. There is no reason to force ordained ministers to perform gay weddings, no reason to force bakers to provide cakes for gay weddings, no reason to force florists and photographers to participate in gay weddings… except to enforce the idea that individual must bow to whoever wields the power of the state.

More Fascism from the Left

There is a GoFundMe page for contributions to the legal defense fund for policeman Darren Wilson, who either 1.) Shot down an innocent little black child who was just minding his own business out of sheer hate, or 2.) Shot a violent, aggressive 300 lb black man in self-defense after being assaulted, or 3.) Something in-between.

Barack Obama’s Justice Department, the Governor of Missouri, the MFM and the Left have all made up their minds that Number 1 is what happened. To the left, a trial at this point is just a formality; the mob has made their intentions clear and the mob must be satiated.

Therefore the left, since they know what is best for everyone, is demanding that GoFundMe take down the legal defense fund for Darren Wilson. Because — much like Christians who do not want to participate in gay weddings — his rights are forfeit to the will of the mob.

The President Is Very, Very Disappointed in you, Gusano

Justice Sonia Sotomayor and the Triumph of Affirmative Action

In an interview with Democrat Operative George Snuffleupagus, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor explains, in a grammatically interesting sentence, why race-based Affirmative Action is necessary to put people like her into place where their opinions have the power to shape society.

“What does qualifications mean in an academic setting?” she said. “A place like Princeton could fill their entire beginning freshman class with students who have scored perfectly on undergraduate metrics.

Seriously, what does qualifications mean in terms of academic success? I suppose we need to ask ourselves, is our minorities learning?

#bringwhateverandstuff … Is this really how we handle things now?

I don’t really know how to express how puerile and silly the whole thing with the First Lady and that hashtag thing was, so I’ve put it down in a few thousand words instead (and included a thousand empty ones for you to play along and do your own as well).

(By the way, a whole bunch more here. I haven’t read through all of them, so if I accidentally ripped someone off with one of mine, it was totally unintentional.)

Have fun

Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from The Ranch)

michelledosomething

michellesgirls

michellebringbackourgirls

michellebringsexyback

(more…)

Left-Wing Nuts Decide the Word “Homosexual” Is a Slur

As noted before, on the right, we worry about actual issues: regulation-fueled economic decline, corruption in Government, the erosion of individual liberty, the unsustainable fiscal path of the national Government.

On the left, they worry about vocabulary.

In part, this is a mark of desperation, David Brock and his merry band of Soros-paid nutjobs are desperate for anything they can fling against the one news outlet that airs opposition views to leftist hegemony. There is no real racism, sexism, or homophobia on the right. So the left, in its desperation to remain peeved and aggrieved, must constantly lower the bar and change the rules. Hence, they declare that a previously inoffensive word is now offensive, so they can have their self-righteous tantrums about it. Also, note the new phenomenon of the “micro-aggression,” defined as a behavior that would not bother a normal person, but sends a politically correct leftist into paroxysms of outrage.

It’s also like the old English Aristocracy’s custom of establishing obscure collective nouns to refer to animals (a sleuth of bears, a whoop of gorillas, a murder of crows). The primary purpose for which was to distinguish themselves from the ill-bred peasantry, who were presumed not to know these things. In the same way, the left’s obsession with PC vocabulary is also intended as a social marker; those who use PC terminology are part of the class. Those who don’t can be safely mocked and looked down upon.

The real obsession of the left isn’t inclusion, it’s exclusion.