ThinkProgress editor tries to take a cheap shot at Marco Rubio’s “wife.” Ends up insulting the wife of a political prisoner. This kind of thing happens a lot, because the left is ignorant and mean.
“I think shutting down and forcing the cancellation of a white supremacist like Milo Yiannopoulos was a stunning achievement….”
“It isn’t a question of free speech,” said Felarca. “This is about our right to be free of intimidation.” [Emphasis added.]
The person who said that is a public school teacher in the Berkeley Unified School District.
For every violent thug in a black mask at the Berkeley Riot, there were 5 “non-violent” protesters proving him cover; ten people who know who they are but won’t tell the police; and ten or a hundred thousand liberals nodding and saying, “I don’t totally agree with their tactics, but I like the result.”
Say what you will about how “Antifa” is a violent minority; but it only takes 1 dog to move a thousand sheep.
It is notable that Milo Yiannopoulos — a gay, Jewish immigrant with a penchant for interracial coupling — is the object of the left’s Two-Minutes Hate. They hate him with such passion because he proves that two of the most dearly held beliefs of the American left are false. 1. That the right-wing hates gays and immigrants and would never accept one as their own. 2. That the left is open-minded, thoughtful, and tolerant.
As long as Somali refugees and other Third World migrants are seeded into small cities in the Midwest, the lefty-loos of San Francisco are all for it. But don’t go sticking those dirty brown foreigners* in their neighborhoods.
City meetings have become heated, divisive and prone to rhetoric where we openly discuss exactly which kinds of people we want to keep out of our city.
This is an ethically incoherent position. If we in San Francisco so strongly believe that national immigration is a human right, then it seems strange to block migration into our own neighborhoods.
Consider the San Francisco Board of Supervisors’ decision to challenge the environmental review of a proposed housing project at 1515 Van Ness Ave. Despite the project’s plan to rent 25 percent of its units at a below-market rate, many members of the neighborhood preservation group, Calle 24, expressed anger that the project might bring tech workers into the Latino Cultural District.
Or that members of the Forest Hill homeowners association opposed a project that would build affordable housing for seniors and the formerly homeless on a site now occupied by a church. One of the grievances aired was that it might bring mentally unstable or drug-addicted people into the neighborhood.
“Tech Workers” appears to be a liberal dog-whistle for “dirty brown foreigners.” (The distaste the San Francisco left has for immigrants is so profound, it extends even to those in the country legally and contributing to the economy.)
Even more pointedly, more than a third of Silicon Valley tech workers are immigrants themselves. For many people in China, India and Eastern Europe, working in technology is one of the few ways out of their countries and into ours.
* Note, my use of “dirty brown foreigners” is intended as irony and sarcasm. I shouldn’t have to point that out, but many leftists are humorless and stupid.
Strong independent woman finds herself emotionally crippled and unable to form a relationship… because Trump was elected.
I’ve lost the desire to attempt the courtship phase. The future is uncertain. I am not the optimistic person I was on the morning of Nov. 8, wearing a T-shirt with “Nasty Woman” written inside a red heart. It makes me want to cry thinking of that. Of seeing my oldest in the shirt I bought her in Washington, D.C., that says “Future President.”
There is no room for dating in this place of grief. Dating means hope. I’ve lost that hope in seeing the words “President-elect Trump.”
This is not the Onion.
Many of the comments agree, this woman is a wreck and any man she isn’t dating should feel relieved.
Another conspicuous display of emotional extortion in the Left’s ongoing theatrical production of “You Did This To Me.”
The campaign staffs of Donald Trump and Hillary Rodham Clinton got together for a forum at Harvard. It got ugly, very quickly, with the bitter, angry Hillary staffers (represented by campaign managers Jennifer Palmieri and Robby Mook, and pollster-strategist Joel Benenson) repeatedly calling the Trimp campaign “white supremacist” and accusing the Trump campaign of being “run on hate and bigotry.” At one point, Palmieri declared, “I would rather lose than win the way you guys did.”
Some of this is simple bitterness…. their candidate lost, and they don’t get to spend the next 4-8 years riding around on Air Force 1 and telling people how to live their lives backed up by immense state power. That’s a hell of a thing to lose. But they can’t accept their loss as being a matter of one campaign making its case better than the other.
I take Palmieri’s “I would rather lose than win the way you guys did” to mean she would rather lose by calling half of the country racist “deplorables” than win by speaking to the legitimate economic concerns of middle America. I don’t think she thinks this is how she meant it, but it is, actually, how she meant it.
In the article. Palmieri says the infamous “Deplorables” speech was her proudest moment in the entire campaign. Ponder that. Her proudest moment was when her candidate called half of the country racist, bigoted, and deplorable.
Why would that make someone feel proud, unless it served to validate how she herself felt about the half of the country that disagreed with her on political issues. And if elected, don’t you think she would have been more inclined to punish those deplorables, rather than compromise with them?
Hate isn’t something the left feels, hate is what the left is. The vast majority of leftists defines themself by who they hate: “racists” who won’t buy into the false narratives promoted by Black Lives Matter, “xenophobes” who don’t support mass third world immigration, “bigots” who don’t celebrate gayness, “wingnuts” who think the Constitution ought to be the law of the land, “greedy” businessmen and working people who don’t want to give up more of their money to support bureaucrats and welfare ticks, “misogynists and sexists” who don’t believe that consensual sex becomes rape if a woman changes her mind three weeks later. Hate is a big part of a leftist’s identity. Changing an opinion is simple, changing a feeling can be hard, changing an identity is extremely hard.
In conclusion, no, I don’t think the left is ever going to get beyond hate. They are all DailyKos now. (Speaking of which, here’s some first-rate angry derangement.) They are never going to agree to disagree with us, they are always going to hate us.
So, what are we going to do about that?
Let’s review how the American Democrat Left regards political disagreement:
- If someone votes the wrong way, it’s OK to destroy their business.
- If someone holds the wrong view on gay marriage, it’s okay to use the power of the state to destroy their business.
- If someone holds the wrong view on gay marriage, it’s okay to destroy their career.
- If a professor mocks a social justice wanker, they will try and destroy his career.*
It’s like Obama whining yesterday that the reason Hillary lost is because people were able to watch FoxNews in bars and restaurants. (Which shows how little time he spends in bars and restaurants outside the bubble.) Owning 99% of the media isn’t enough, apparently; the left must have all of it or it can’t succeed. Is the Democrat Left’s political philosophy so fragile that not even one voice of dissent can be permitted to question it?
So, how does the left react when the other side plays a similar game and creates a website that simply calls out radical far left professors for bias, promoting leftist politics in the classroom, and discriminating against conservative students? How do professors who profess that their goal is for their students to “become conceptually unhinged, to leave my classes discontented and maladjusted” respond when their agenda is exposed to the world?
How do cockroaches react when you turn on the bathroom light.** The New York Times, Slate, and other elements of the Democrat-Media Complex are attacking the site, and the academic left is having full-on the vapors.
Robert Jensen, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin, also expressed his feelings on being included on the list for teaching students that “we won’t end men’s violence against women if we do not address the toxic notions about masculinity in patriarchy … rooted in control, conquest, aggression.”
“It would be easier to dismiss this rather silly project if the United States had not just elected a president who shouts over attempts at rational discourse and reactionary majorities in both houses of Congress,” writes Jensen. “I’m a tenured full professor (and white, male, and a U.S. citizen by birth) and am not worried. But, even though the group behind the watchlist has no formal power over me or my university, the attempt at bullying professors — no matter how weakly supported — may well inhibit professors without my security and privilege.”
“Robert Jensen” was a name I thought I had heard before. He’s a journalism professor capable of writing a 3,800 word polemic that is almost unreadable and tells you nothing except that he hates the world. In addition to his fashionable hatred of the The Patriarchy and “toxic masculinity,” He is a self-avowed radical socialist who says that Thanksgiving is a celebration of White Supremacy.
Why is he so afraid of having his radical left views outed? Perhaps he is afraid that someone, somewhere, somehow might destroy his career and livelihood for holding the wrong political beliefs.
And my nephew’s wife (who’s an African-American female because that matters, apparently, posts this):
There is no tolerance for dissent on the left. If you agree with the Democrats on gay marriage, you must also agree with them on tax policy, on mass immigration, on regulation of the economy, on gun control, on using Climate Change to massively expand Government power, on president’s with unlimited executive authority, on using institutions of Government and Academia for indoctrination of a radical social justice agenda, on letting Democrats get away with breaking laws because the Party above all else.
To dissent on one issue is to be a traitor to all. And there is zero tolerance on the left for traitors.
At a Donald Trump rally in Cincinnati on October 13, Wall Street Journal video reporter and senior producer Jason Bellini interviewed a gay couple who are both supporters of the GOP candidate. Although Bellini initially did not name them, a gay activist later “outed” the duo as 31-year-old Dewey Lainhart and his 22-year-old fiance, Cody Moore. When asked if they were comfortable being affectionate at the rally, Lainhart replied, “Yeah. Ain’t nobody saying nuthin’ about us” and “I have a lot of gay friends who support Trump.”
Lainhart said he works in the steel industry, and is “tired of the bullsh*t government. Time for a change. Trump’s the man for it.” Moore added he believes Trump “would bring more jobs to the country.”
That was essentially the entire substance of the interview, which has provoked an astonishing backlash. Hundreds of thousands of online views have led to thousands of comments, most of them furious with Lainhart and Moore, who have been ridiculed as “hillbilly morons” and “rednecks.”
In a followup report, the couple told Bellini they “have received death threats from gay people warning them not to leave their house or go to any gay clubs. One message to them, they say, told them to drink bleach.”
Hat Tip: Peter H.
Oh, and trolls who are going to simper… “But, but… the alt-right,” just don’t even bother.
Homonationalists are largely white gay people blinded by privilege and actively working against the well-being of the most vulnerable members of our community. These individuals have received their portion of the proverbial pie through recent LGBT victories ― access to rights and capital ― and don’t feel the need to fight against the ideologies of racism, sexism, ableism, classism, xenophobia, transphobia or Islamophobia that are institutionally ingrained into the fabric of America.
Homonationalists believe embodying their freedom means working to violate or deactivate the rights of others. Homonationalists are pawns of their own erasure.
Donald Trump offers a perfect platform for these complacent homonationalists
Or, alternately, the left has to desperately and hysterically “otherize” anyone who is not part of the Democrat Progressive plantation to enforce social and political conformity.
Speaking of the left’s intolerance for dissent, a student at the University of Houston is being sent to Tolerance Camp for the outrageous hate crime of saying “All Lives Matter” on Social Media.
Student body vice president Rohini Sethi has been suspended by the SGA and is temporarily barred from participating in group activities. She is also due to attend a “diversity” workshop per the ruling.
She must also attend three cultural events per month, write a reflection letter, and make a public presentation to a senate meeting on Sept. 28, according to KTRK-TV.
About a block from the garage entrance, we turned down the street and found a line of protesters standing in our way. To get back to our car, we’d have to go through them. My friend and I were wearing “Make America Great Again” Trump hats. We were targets, and I was terrified. I could feel it coming — they would look at me and start walking up to me.
Before we could make it into the garage, four or five men surrounded me, and another four surrounded my friend. They just started swinging. We swung back as best as we could. My main thing was I didn’t want to fall; I didn’t want to be knocked down. I’m not a big guy, but I can defend myself as best I can if it’s one on one — but not when they have so much anger against us.
One of the blows caught my nose, and blood just started pouring out. That kind of stunned them, and they backed off a quick second. My adrenaline kicked in; I felt punches on my head, and I felt the punch that hit my nose, but I was in survival mode by then, and I didn’t realize until later how much it hurt. I called my friend, “Okay, let’s go!”
We ran into the parking garage, and we thought we were safe, but there were another few dozen protesters there, too. We got in our car and headed toward the exit. Some protesters jumped on the cars in front of us, but we eventually made it out. My friend drove me to the emergency room because my nose was pouring blood. I had a broken nose, and because I was covered with scratches, I had to get a tetanus shot, too. It took a lot out of me, much more than I realized at first; my headaches and soreness didn’t start to go away until a week later.
The whole thing made me angry. Here in Northern California, I feel like I’m a unicorn: I’m a gay Hispanic who’s a Republican. It was much harder to come out as a Trump supporter than it was to come out as gay — the minute you say you’re for Trump, everyone comes at you — but this has pushed me out of the closet about it completely.
I should be able to vote for whom I want, and I shouldn’t have to deal with violence to go hear my candidate speak.
In a Facebook post, Libertarian Presidential candidate Gary Johnson explains why the State should be allowed to force bakers and florists to participate in gay weddings even if such participation goes against their religious beliefs.
In a nationally-televised debate among three of the Libertarian candidates for President (A debate that should, by the way, have been more inclusive of all the candidates.), a highly unlikely hypothetical question was raised about whether a Jewish baker has the right to refuse to serve a Nazi sympathizer asking for a “Nazi cake”. I responded to that question in the legal context of whether a public business has the right to refuse to serve a member of the public, as distasteful as it might be.
The simple answer to that question is, whether all like it or not, U.S. law has recognized the principle of public accommodation for more than 100 years: The principle that, when a business opens its doors to the public, that business enters into an implied contract to serve ALL of the public. Further, when that business voluntarily opens its doors, the owners voluntarily agree to adhere to applicable laws and regulations — whether they like those laws or not.
To be clear, anti-discrimination laws do not, and cannot, abridge fundamental First Amendment rights. I know of no one who reasonably disagrees. In the highly unlikely event that a Nazi would demand that a Jewish baker decorate a cake with a Nazi symbol, the courts, common sense, and common decency — not to mention the First Amendment — all combine to protect that baker from having to do so. It’s not an issue, except when distorted for purposes of gotcha politics.
Does a public bakery have to sell a cake to a Nazi? Probably so. Does that bakery have to draw a swastika on it? Absolutely not. And that’s the way it should be.
Of course, we all know that this conversation is really “code” for the current, and far more real, conversation about society’s treatment of LGBT individuals. I have even heard some talk of a “right to discriminate”. And of course, we have states and municipalities today trying to create a real right to discriminate against the LGBT community on religious grounds — the same kinds of “religious” grounds that were used to defend racial segregation, forbid interracial marriages and, yes, defend discrimination against Jews by businesses. That is not a slope Libertarians want to go down.
Once again, my belief that discrimination on the basis of religion should not be allowed has been distorted by some to suggest that a legitimate church or its clergy should be “forced” to perform a same-sex marriage. That is absurd. The various ballot initiatives I supported across the country to repeal bans on same-sex marriage all had one provision in common: A specific provision making clear that no religious organization, priest or pastor could be required to perform any rite contrary to that organization’s or individual’s faith. That protection was supported almost universally by the LGBT community — even though most legal scholars agreed that such a protection already exists in the Constitution. We just wanted to leave no doubt.
I was the first major candidate in the 2012 presidential campaign to call for full marriage equality, and Libertarians have long stood for equal treatment under the law for all Americans. As your candidate for President, I will not tarnish that record.
He’s wrong, of course. Public accommodation laws arose from the necessity to protect travelers from harm way back when being denied a room in an inn or a meal at a tavern could be a matter of life-or-death. Getting one’s feelings hurt because someone doesn’t cheer one’s lifestyle does not rise to the level of harm that warrants state involvement. His assertion that the law trumps individual conscience is an odd one for someone who claims to be a libertarian; the Jim Crow laws forced merchants to discriminate even if they didn’t want to, because “It’s the law.”
If a bakery (or a florist, or a photographer) doesn’t want to participate in your wedding, there is a simple solution that doesn’t involve the State, go to another baker. Someone else will be gladly accept the business.
Forcing those who religiously object to gay marriage to participate in gay marriage ceremonies is an act of forced political speech in a way that just selling a generic cake to a gay customer is not. It’s disheartening that Mr. Johnson cannot distinguish the difference. However, since his opinion on the matter is no different than Hillary’s or Trump’s, it isn’t a deal-breaker.
New York state will not allow a college baseball team to participate for a National title because the competition is in North Carolina, which has become a pariah to leftists because of its insane policy of keeping men out of women’s bathrooms. Sorry guys, we know you’ve really worked hard for this, but politicians gotta pander to trendy left-wing causes-of-the-moment.
Also, New York City’s ethically challenged mayor (who I am told is not a Communist) has been using the power of his office to bully people not to eat at Chik-Fil-A, which is another pariah to leftists because of its founder’s insane belief that marriage is a union between one man and woman. Apparently, though, when people who aren’t rabid leftists are allowed to decide for themselves where they want to eat, they really don’t care about the bleatings of socialist juicebox wankers.
Sort of weird that lefties are still mad at Chik-Fil-A even though the SCOTUS bowed to their whims and imposed gay marriage nationwide by judicial fiat. Like, get over it, already.
Any guesses on what the trendy social justice putsch will be after the State finishes trampling all resistance to the gender appropriators?
The “Fight for 15” crowd has won a major victory. Wendy’s is installing touchscreen ordering systems in all 6,000 of its stores. So, those fast-food workers will no longer have to accept the indignity of a job that pays less than a highly trained paramedic.
As has been suspected for a long time; the social justice whipped up by the left and right are pretty much just to keep an ignorant and lazy citizenry distracted from the criminal actions of Government. The Congress is every bit as incompetent, corrupt, and cynical as many of us have said for a long time, so says a new book from an anonymous congressman.
Washingtonian Magazine attempts a defense of criticisms of Washington DC made by “flyover state hayseeds ” (Yes, they use that phrasing). They end up validating every criticism… Washington DC really is a place where self-centered elitists really don’t give a damn about anything but their own power and egos and have a sneering contempt for the rest of the country.
“Yes, (our) stock-in-trade is abstractions: statistics, seminars, social science. But those abstractions—that out-of-touchness, if you will—are the very things that help our technocrats rise above parochialism. They don’t worry about the effects of policies on their neighbor or on the business around the corner. Sure, our wonks have a point of view, an ideology even. But they cast their arguments in terms of the national interest, and they mean it. If Washington were allowed to make policy—without the heartland and its parochialism getting in the way—we might actually fix this place.”
So, basically “Shut Up, You stupid hicks. We know what’s best for you and we don’t give a damn about you.”
Which is exactly why people hate Washington.
This arrogance is the number one thing I don’t miss now that I no longer live there.
Funny how we are lectured to never say anything unkind about Mohammedans because “it might lead to violence.” Yet, the left encourages anti-Christian hate speech.
I get so tired of repeating this.
Update: Meanwhile, the Integration of Mosque and State proceeds apace, as the ACLU nods in approval.
This weekend in Arizona (where I used to live), some Progressive Leftwing Fascists (Hillary and Bernie Sanders supporters) tried to stop Trump supporters from exercising their Constitutional Right to Peacefully Assemble.
Makes me wish this were a real thing.
The Anti-Trump Fascists were chanting about “Racist Police” and such all. At that same Trump rally, a left-wing agitator dressed up in KKK drag and got punched out by an African-American Trump supporter. I wish our national politics had not devolved to “Idiocracy,” but… hey, that’s where the Progressive Left has brought us.
“Transgenders for Cruz is like Jews for Hitler.” – Joy Behar
If you added up all the IQs on ‘The View’ you still wouldn’t get to room temperature. But this is how leftists think, actually. They think repeating the same stupid cliches ten million other stupid leftists are repeating makes them clever.
Ted Cruz is not going to round up trannies (or gays, or anyone else) and put them into camps. Ted Cruz is not going to put trannies in gas chambers.
Your comparison is not valid.
Speaking of which, NRO’s Rich Lowry says that Donald Trump is George Wallace.
Progressive Leftist/Feminists once again demonstrated their capacity for intelligent, thoughtful discourse by throwing urine at a young Libertarian. Her heinous thoughtcrime: She has spoken out loud her belief that there are only two sexes.
“The feminist girls all were laughing at me and giving me the middle finger on the street, guys were screaming at me that ‘maybe that washed the scum off you,'” she recounted. “Despite their professed feminism, they don’t care about women if they have the wrong opinions. And despite their professed concern for ‘violence against women,’ they don’t care if women who disagree with them are physically attacked.”
You know why we on the right think you on the left are dangerous nutjobs? This is why we on the right think you on the left are dangerous nutjobs.
Hat Tip: AoSHQ
Jenner’s comments stunned LGBT activists. One of the costars of “I Am Cait,” Jennifer Boylan, lost it, yelling “That’s a lie,” brandishing a rolled-up newspaper when Jenner indicated conservatives support minorities’ rights. “You’re living in a dream world,” Boylan shouted, then took to the blogosphere in a fit of hysteria, saying Boylan struck Jenner with the newspaper and “not ironically either. I smack her like she is a basset hound that just took a dump on the carpet,” the co-star and consultant to the show wrote.
Monica Roberts of TransGriot piled on, writing, “Caitlyn, while you have every right to support whoever you wish in this 2016 presidential contest, I would suggest that you not support a presidential candidate who thinks it’s sound political strategy and policy to demonize our trans younglings for political gain.” Zack Ford, an apologist for LGBT issues at Think Progress, wrote, “Caitlyn Jenner simply cannot be taken seriously as an advocate for the most disadvantaged transgender people if she’s lauding Ted Cruz in the same breath.” What a stellar champion of diversity you are.
If you don’t live in a free society, it doesn’t matter if you’re trans, straight, green, or blue.
Rachel Kramer Bussel of Salon said “Jenner’s optimism about Cruz is baffling.” She then sunk to firing personal attacks at the reality star, asking, “Are Jenner’s musings wishful thinking? A ratings grab? Her own version of lunacy? They certainly seem to have no basis in reality, considering the platform Cruz has built and the followers he’s courting.”
One way to keep a false narrative alive is to punish, belittle and “otherize” anyone who questions the false narrative.