GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

Flailing lefties (and: March on Google, Aug 19)

by

First, a sidebar: I’m changing my web browsers to use DuckDuckGo as default search engine. Just sayin’. It seems good. Doesn’t track your searches. And when you want to copy/paste a link address, it lets you have the real link right on the search-results page (unlike annoying Google).

DuckDuckGo - Because Google is so 1984

Anyway….A new entry in Breitbart’s “Rebels of Google” series: Google makes a big thing about tolerating its high-autism employee, then fires him when he questions ideology about gender not being either-or.

“There used to be a Googler very high on the autism spectrum. At our TGIFs (weekly propaganda sessions) he would always take up time during the question period with long, strange, frustrating questions.”

“This went on for months, and was always tolerated until one fateful LGBT-themed TGIF when he expressed skepticism about the gender “spectrum.” He was fired very shortly afterward.”

Before publishing, we checked with [another interviewee] to see if he recalled the incident and could corroborate. He did.

Meanwhile, Google’s CEO has doubled down:

Google CEO Sundar Pichai defended the dismissal of former Google employee James Damore in a blog post on Tuesday, where he called Damore’s manifesto “harmful.”

“First, let me say that we strongly support the right of Googlers to express themselves, and much of what was in that memo is fair to debate, regardless of whether a vast majority of Googlers disagree with it,” Pichai opined in the blog post. “However, portions of the memo violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.”

The contradiction is lost on Pichai. If you “strongly” support free expression and debate, you can’t fire employees for taking the other side in free expression and debate. Period. But especially given that Damore’s actual memo did not stereotype anyone and was almost milquetoast, as V noted.

“To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK,” says Pichai, which makes no sense because Damore’s memo did not remotely suggest that. RTFM, Mr. Pichai!

March on Google, August 19, 2017

Click on the image above, for updates and a map of locations.

For dessert, we have the Jennifer Lawrence train wreck. She tells President Trump “F— you!” (complete with dramatic middle finger), then tells an interviewer “We can’t continue this divide and anger.” Again, the contradiction is lost, on her.

This is trippy

by

At the link, Caitlyn Jenner defends President Trump and expresses a belief in limited government and making the U.S. a better place to do business.

Of course I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I’m glad to see Jenner saying sensible political things to a left-leaning audience. On the other hand, I know that Jenner has willingly served as either a source, or at least a mascot, for some of the rather foolish Transgender Fever that has swept America in the last year or two.

As to transgenders in general: I’m glad when they stand up for their legitimate rights as any human should – for example, practicing self-defense skills with Pink Pistols – and, I’m not glad when adult biological men think they have a right to impose their brand of political correctness on others, take over girls’ bathrooms, etc.

Overall, file this one under “People Are Complex”.

Amongst the natives

by

Mark Zuckerberg has been visiting Middle America. You know, to better understand us deplorables.

Here he is with oil workers in the Dakotas. His coveralls are backward. Nobody told him:

Mark Zuckerberg with oil workers and his coveralls backward

UPDATE: All poking-fun aside 🙂 it’s fair to say that we can’t be sure anything is wrong. The inference from the visual is that the standard coveralls there have parallel stripes in front that become crossed stripes in back. Zuckerberg’s could be different. Or for that matter, the guy with the crossed stripes could be different? TheQuietMan notes, “The pocket and collar look correct.”

Shia LeBeouf: A metaphor for the Left

by

The famous Social Justice Warrior drunkenly rants at the cops who had to arrest him for when he bothered them with his drunken ranting:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOw7xqUehBs[/youtube]

Cornered, he plays the “I’m an American” card and as well, he plays his Rich White Male Privilege cards several times. Or tries to. So enlightened!

After seeing that, you may want something more uplifting.

Van Jones, shuckin’ and jivin’

by

Yesterday I noted Project Veritas’ video of Van Jones calling Trumprussia a nothingburger. Commentor CrayCrayPatriot kindly pointed us to Jones’ response. It’s the kind of response I’ve seen from lefties many times, over the years. I thought I’d analyze it.

If you read it through, Jones’ response consists of:

  1. Name-calling his opponents. (“crazies”, “con artists”, etc. who “trick” people)
  2. Asserting that Project Veritas undercover videos are somehow faked. (So: Don’t believe your lyin’ eyes. Don’t believe what is right on the video, for all to see.)
  3. Changing the subject to Sarah Huckabee Sanders and President Trump.
  4. Deceptively editing his own words, to create a different meaning after-the-fact.
  5. Changing the subject to Jones’ own astuteness in declaring that Russia is a nothing-burger and we should be talking about other things.

Here is the relevant exchange from the video:

Undercover journalist: What do you think is going to happen this week with the whole Russia thing?

Van Jones: The Russia thing is just a big nothing burger.

UJ: Really?

VJ: Yeah.

UJ: You don’t think that —

VJ: There’s nothing there you can do.

Note the middle bit – Jones saying YEAH, it’s REALLY a nothing-burger. Also Jones’ last sentence, re-affirming “There’s nothing there,” nothing “you can do” with it as it is destined to stall out.

In Jones’ response piece, he deceptively edits the exchange to this:

Interviewer: “What do you think is going to happen this week with the whole Russian thing?

Van Jones: “The whole Russia thing is a big nothing-burger. There is nothing you can do –“

Aside from the omitted middle section, Jones subtly changes the words (adding or deleting a couple). He makes it better for Jones. He creates an impression that, in an interview, he was only sighing and lamenting people’s powerlessness to do anything about the undeniable Trump-Russia collusion which of course he believes in because it’s so real.

Except that’s not what he said. So once more, a leftie is caught – and his response is to spin and deflect, distort and divert, knowing the yokels will give it credit.

I can see Jones’ appeal to people. He has a certain charisma that comes from being easy on the eyes and “smooth” in his deceptions as, most of the time, he believes what he’s saying. (The smoothest deceivers begin on themselves.)

And yet I’m not impressed. Jones’ spiel leaves a lot of openings. It takes only a little critical thinking, to penetrate him.

Leftie juvenilia – with a smidge of progress

by

Watching lefties digest new political happenings is often like a scene from Harrison Bergeron, the dystopian future where no one is permitted to do anything skillfully.

Lefties are handicapped by their own needs and delusions, the poor dears. They can’t handle the truth. So they ignore large parts of it, fixate on a fragment or two, distort it, then fall over like a ballet dancer wearing unnecessary weights. Still, they might learn something – on the margins.

Laura Loomer and Jack Posobiec’s Shakespeare in the Park protest was somewhat new-ish: Conservatives bringing home the Left’s disruption tactics (though still being comparatively polite about it). At this link, you can watch Seth Myers and Amy Poehler struggle to address it.

As you’d expect, Myers and Poehler ignore the real context and point of the protest, making a laughable Straw Man out of it; then laugh dutifully, complete with wide eyes and shouting. It’s fine, it’s how they operate. As you’d expect. Except for one thing.

It does dawn on them that maybe people disrupting events isn’t what we all need and the Left should try to walk that one back. They slip in these words to their audience:

Free speech isn’t about just protecting speech you like. So, if you think it’s terrible to interrupt _Julius Caesar_, you have to think it’s terrible to interrupt Ann Coulter…She gets to speak too; liberals cannot be hypocrites when it comes to free speech…so, be OK with it when Ted Nugent says “President Obama can suck my machine gun.”

I left out the crap they wrapped around it. I’m saying, we can be grateful for the small things. Two leftie celebrities had a moment of self-awareness, and smuggled it into their audience. Will it take?

Making America Great Again

by

Yesterday afternoon’s big news, of course, is President Trump withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris climate accord.

Trump cited putting the “well being” of Americans first as a motivating factor behind his decision. He said, “This includes ending the implementation of the nationally determined contribution and, very importantly, the Green Climate Fund, which is costing the United States a vast fortune.”

…Compliance with the accord could have cost the U.S. “as much as 2.7 million lost jobs by 2025 according to the National Economic Research Associates,” said Trump.

…Trump then pointed to a portion of the Paris Climate Agreement that he said allows China to increase their emissions for 13 years…adding that India made it’s participation in the Paris Accord “contingent on receiving billions and billions and billions of dollars in foreign aid from developed countries.”

The Paris Agreement also essentially blocks U.S. development of clean coal, said Trump. He then said he was going to try to make it to the opening of a new mine in two weeks and noted “Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, so many places.”

…which voted for Trump in the election. Hmm, why?

Trump again pointed to China and India, saying that each country is allowed to add massive numbers of coal plants under the Paris Agreement.

“In short, the agreement doesn’t eliminate coal jobs, it just transfers those jobs out of America and the United States, and ships them to foreign countries,” he said. “This agreement is less about the climate and more about other countries gaining a financial advantage over the United States.”

I’ll be honest, I may be weak on the accord’s details. But I got the essence: It’s an orgy of left-wing, quasi-religious virtue-signalling that greatly damages the U.S. economy and sovereignty (because we entered it officially in 2016) while boosting globalist bureaucrats with U.S. money.

Reducing CO2 emissions is, of course, its stated reason for being; and not a very good reason. Even under the U.N.’s own (incorrect) climate models, the accord will do little to reduce actual CO2 emissions or future Global Warming projections. That makes it almost the definition of a bad deal: Big pain for small gain.

But it’s even worse because the U.N.’s climate models are broken and greatly overstate the danger of Global Warming. Thus, no matter how you slice it, the stated purpose (CO2) isn’t the real purpose. On the level of CO2, the accord accomplishes only a little toward solving an over-hyped, politically-constructed problem.

The real purpose is to be seen in the accord’s real effects: promoting globalism, U.N. bureaucracy, and the Left’s religions of Environmentalism and Statism, over and against human prosperity, human freedom (the ability to choose fossil fuels and/or products that rely on them, especially cars) and national sovereignty. And making the U.S. pay money for other countries.

As I survey the news this morning, I see the right people’s heads exploding and I gotta be honest: It feels good. Thank you, President Trump!

UPDATES:

  • From the comments, PMSNBC’s Chris Hayes has been tweeting “THE AGREEMENT QUITE LITERALLY IMPOSES NOTHING!!!” – to which people reply, “Then why is backing out such a big deal?”
  • Brouhaha over the withdrawal, as such. First: U.S. participation was never ratified by the Senate. And people justify that by saying “It’s an agreement, not a treaty.” Fine. Which then makes it 100% voluntary for each participating nation. Right?

    The brouhaha is in Article 28, which says basically that countries must give a 3+ year notice before their withdrawal can become effective. Thus, provided that we give a crap about Article 28, the U.S. can’t effectively withdraw until 2020.

    But remember: “It’s an agreement, not a treaty.” Thus, participation in Article 28 itself is inherently voluntary. Hopefully, Trump has canceled our participation in Article 28 – along with the rest.

  • Lots of good stuff at Breitbart.
  • Click here for Trump’s full speech.

Kathy Griffin fired, but is that enough?

by

CNN has fired Kathy Griffin from their next New Year’s Eve program. As V noted earlier, she posed for a so-called ‘artist’ with herself holding a blood-drenched, beheaded effigy of President Trump. In a single image, she managed to align herself with Islam (or ISIS imagery), Satanism (or satanic imagery), and assassination of the President of the United States.

To his minor credit, Anderson “Vanderbilt” Cooper tweeted “For the record, I am appalled by the photo shoot Kathy Griffin took part in. It is clearly disgusting and completely inappropriate.” (Minor because it’s something he should have done hours faster, and perhaps an understatement.)

It remains to be seen whether Hollywood and the Left will actually shun Griffin, or rehabilitate her once the dust settles? After all, the first reaction of a CNN panel (led by Jake Tapper) was a dismissive “We’ve got much bigger issues to focus on.”

And indeed, they do. After all, CNN is the Home of Fake News, such as:

But maybe CNN’s dismissive, first reaction didn’t focus-group very well?

The whole thing got me thinking about denunciations in general. After all, conservatives and libertarians are supposed to denounce every little thing done by every little kook – or else we somehow are that thing. Recently,

  • Jacob Schwartz was arrested for child pornography. He isn’t a nobody. He is a longtime Democrat activist and staffer. His father is a huge Democrat donor and insider, having served as an Obama delegate and a lawyer for Bernie Sanders, the SEIU and ACORN (remember them?).

    Young-ish Jacob allegedly possessed graphic images of a 6-month old baby being raped. He was a top staffer to NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio. Schwartz also appeared on Chris Cuomo’s program on CNN (them again!). Hillary’s campaign manager, Robby Mook, can be seen standing shoulder-to-shoulder with Schwartz – or at least he could, before Schwartz’s arrest triggered Democrats into disappearing the inconvenient photo.

    My question is, has Robby Mook denounced Schwartz, in no uncertain terms? Has Hillary Clinton? Or the DNC? Or CNN? Has Chris Cuomo indicated his regret at having Schwartz as a guest? I couldn’t find any such statements.

    Each of them, who has not yet done such a statement, therefore supports pedophiles and pedophilic rape – if we apply the Left’s usual logic about these things.

  • Marina Abramović is another left-wing “artist” who promotes imagery and practices that are awfully reminiscent of Satanism, with that Spirit Cooking thing she’s into.

    John Podesta is, of course, one of THE top Clintonites, as he was Hillary’s campaign chair and her preference for Secretary of State.

    It’s known that Podesta was invited, on warmly intimate terms, to a private Spirit Cooking “dinner” that his brother Tony probably attended, and which Podesta himself may have attended.

    Has either of the Podestas denounced Satanism, or at least Abramović? Has Hillary Clinton denounced either of the Podestas? I don’t think so.

    Again, apply the Left’s typical logic of you-are-clearly-for-that-bad-thing-if-we-don’t-agree-that-you-have-denounced-it-enough, and see where it would go, here.

  • And don’t get me started about Antifa – and the failure of many lefties to denounce their violence.

So, firing Kathy Griffin from a New Year’s Eve program that was going to happen in 7 more months: is that enough? Or should we call for more? If yes, what?

UPDATE: She says “I went too far, and I was wrong.”

Umm, “too far” in what? When I go too far, it’s because I love something. I ate too much chocolate or lemon pie. I tried to power clean too much weight. So, if Kathy “went too far” in making visible her fantasy of beheading the President and soaking his head in the blood, then deep in her soul, she loves…??? Something about this is still “off”.

Joss, Joss: Sorry but you’re a moron

by

From Breitbart, Joss Whedon Film Imagines World Without ‘Beacon of Hope’ Planned Parenthood

The 3-minute film shows tears, frustration, and desperation in its imaginary world without Planned Parenthood, where scholarships are lost and projects interrupted all because the abortion giant isn’t present to erase the consequences of people’s sexual decisions…

As if people wouldn’t quickly move to a mix of adoption, privately-funded abortion, privately-funded birth control, non-vaginal sex, abstinence and/or condoms.

And I say that as a supporter of first-semester abortion rights. Even I can recognize when abortion advocates are dishonest.

“Planned Parenthood is a beacon of hope, and anyone trying to shut it down is committing an act of evil. It’s not just inhumane — it’s inhuman.

No, Joss. What’s evil, inhumane and inhuman (you can picture his face and voice cracking on that one) is:

  1. Late-term abortion.
  2. Forcing your fellow citizens to fund it.
  3. Painting murderers as heroes.
  4. Assuming that anything YOU like, has to be funded by taxpayers (rather than yourself).

But we know Joss has problems:

On Mother’s Day, he tweeted his gratitude for his mother’s death 25 years earlier so she wouldn’t have to live in a world where Donald Trump was president…

…and his other tweets gleefully picture graphic violence happening to Republicans.

UPDATE – Unrelated? I almost blogged on this yesterday: Man rompers. Hipsters in baby clothes.

seven male models in ridiculous one piece baby suits known as rompers

Joss Whedon has nothing to do with this, so I can’t imagine why my subconscious connects it to him. But it does.

Sometimes it’s fun to watch, part II

by

The unimportant Stephen Colbert makes a fact-free slam about President Trump fellating Vladimir Putin. Nothing worth mentioning, there.

He imagines that he’s being relevant or edgy or manly. Still nothing worth mentioning.

People ask what would happen if any comedian made such a slam on President Obama (who, in a most embarrassing moment in 2012, promised the Russians to be nicer than he was letting on with American voters). Example #1,234,511,998 to point out the Left’s double standards. True, but still not much to mention.

Then #FireColbert becomes a thing as people start noticing that Colbert’s slur was essentially, um, homophobic.

Taking double standards to a new low, left-wing celebrities defend Colbert’s slur. (Among them, the execrable George Takei.)

Predictably, Colbert claims the devil made him do it (Trump).

What happens next?