GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

Powered by Genesis

This Perfect World

August 26, 2017 by Jeff (ILoveCapitalism)

“So blue, I can’t begin to say”.

  • USC suspended a male student for an incident that likely never happened.

    He and girlfriend were shrieking in an alley, one night. They say it was horseplay. Sleeping “witnesses” weren’t sure, and talked about it. One of the sleepy-witnesses’ roommate’s fathers (!) reported it as a serious incident. Based on that distant hearsay report, the male student was suspended. A camera did record whatever happened, and USC refuses to release the recording. While student and girlfriend want it released, saying it exonerates him. When the girlfriend tweeted about that, USC threatened her, “Don’t ever tweet anything like that again”. As Ashe Schow puts it:

    The school believed that she was a battered girlfriend, too afraid of her boyfriend to admit what he had done. Why, then, did they retaliate and threaten her? The school was so sure she was a victim, it treated her like garbage…

  • Germany shuts down a left-wing web site, Germany’s version of Antifa.

    My feelings are mixed. To the extent that the site incited violence (and it probably did), the action is probably justified. But it shows how the State’s power can be used against anyone, Left or Right, at the State’s whim.

  • Google has stepped up its crackdown on “extremist” YouTube videos.

    Problem: The restrictions on viewing, search and sharing are themselves extreme – and are almost certain to be applied unjustly to reasonable Trump supporters, libertarians and/or conservatives. Because Google has already been doing some restrictions and even the wonderful Diamond and Silk were hit by those.

Filed Under: Civil Discourse, Conservative Movement, Free Speech, Hysteria on the Left, Liberalism Run Amok, Political Correctness, Social Issues Tagged With: antifa, civil discourse, Conservative Movement, Free Speech, Hysteria on the Left, Liberalism Run Amok, Political Correctness, Social Issues, unhinged feminists rape culture

Unsurprising?

July 24, 2017 by Jeff (ILoveCapitalism)

A black New York Times reporter has accused white women of racism because, he says, they don’t “walk courteously” – that is, they walk with shoulder pads forward-broadly like he doesn’t exist, forcing him to move for them:

Greg Howard, a writer for the Sunday Metropolitan Section…added that there are times when he’s had to step off the sidewalk and into the road, making him ‘feel small’.

‘In seven years of living and walking here, I’ve found that most people walk courteously – but that white women, at least when I’m in their path, do not,’ Howard wrote.

‘Why only and specifically white women? Do they refuse to acknowledge me because they’ve been taught that they should fear black men, and that any acknowledgment of black men can invite danger?’

His original here. Several thoughts leap to mind.

  • The fun of blue-on-blue accusations. A leftie man is on the street, arguably playing games of “chicken” using his Male Privilege Card. When some women don’t honor it, he calls them racist.
  • The parochialism of New Yorkers. Most likely, it is -New York City- white women who won’t narrow their shoulders for Howard or notice his presence: precisely because New York City votes 82% for Hillary and the women are a little more likely to be aggressive, Hillary-style feminists. But Howard equates that to the world, blaming white women everywhere.
  • The racism of lefties. Let’s say that Howard’s explanation has an element of truth. Then of course he would find it in New York City – again, because it’s such a left-leaning place. I have long noted how, in American history, it was the Democrat party who fought in favor of slavery and Jim Crow and the KKK and Japanese internment (during WW2), and how Margaret Sanger’s goal in founding Planned Parenthood was to abort black babies specifically, and how lefties see racism everywhere probably because many of them will start spewing racism if you get a few drinks in them.

Filed Under: Liberal Hypocrisy, Racism (Real / Reverse / or Faux), Social Issues Tagged With: Liberal Hypocrisy, Racism (Real / Reverse / or Faux), Social Issues

Opioid epidemic

July 3, 2017 by Jeff (ILoveCapitalism)

Ever notice how phrases “pop” at you in public discourse? It can be hard to tell if it’s just you, or if the phrase came into fashion recently.

In 2017 (about since President Trump was sworn in), I’ve been seeing more about human trafficking, and more about opioid epidemic. Both are horrible things. Were we collectively talking about them before? I don’t think so. Why weren’t we? Was there some sort of political-media embargo? Or did we just not want to? Were we being distracted?

Trump has been making more of a fight against human trafficking than President Obama did. Which is good. I may post on that soon. This post will be on the opioid epidemic.

In 2014, I noted how U.S. involvement in Afghanistan strangely coincided with a 30-fold increase in opium cultivation in that nation. (Also in 2009, Bruce (the GayPatriot) acknowledged it indirectly.) Afghan heroin could certainly be contributing to the U.S. opioid epidemic.

Today I want to show you this chart seen on Zero Hedge.

The U.S. has the highest rate of drug deaths in the world. 4x of Asia; 6x of the world average; 9x of Western Europe; 16x of Africa.

I’m not sure what it means. Perhaps several things.

  • Does Africa not have a drug problem? (Looks that way.)
  • Is the U.S. weak on drug rehabilitation? (Probably.)
  • Are drugs in the U.S. a big business? (all that Afghanistan heroin comes here? plus Latin American cocaine, etc.?)
  • If yes, then surely certain U.S. political-financial forces would be out to protect the U.S. drug business? Surely those forces would hide in plain sight, as respectable authorities, or politicians of the 2 major parties?
  • Are we suddenly talking about the opioid epidemic in 2017 because, say, some of those forces lost some power in a recent election – making it OK to notice? Or just because the term hit a critical mass?

One thing is for sure: the “War on Drugs” of the last 3+ decades has been a miserable failure. A city council member in Ohio proposes to handle it Darwin’s way: Deny 911 assistance to repeat drug overdosers.

His reasons have to do with saving his city’s finances. But one side effect would be to have drug overdosers face an increased (that is, a natural) death rate. That’s an unusual idea.

UPDATE: Commenters are noting the role of Medicaid and Obamacare in giving people more access to prescription opioids. Also here is a chart from the CDC (via Wiki):

It looks like a trend since 2000 in deaths from all opioids (heroin, synthetic and prescribed) that has accelerated in the last 5 – 7 years. Wiki says:

Fentanyl, a newer synthetic opioid painkiller, is 50 to 100 times more potent than morphine and 30 to 50 times more potent than heroin…strong enough that police and first responders helping overdose victims have themselves overdosed by simply touching or inhaling a small amount…Fentanyl has surpassed heroin as a killer in several locales.

Yikes.

Filed Under: Afghanistan, Conservative Ideas, Donald Trump, Drug trafficking, Human Trafficking (slavery / pedophilia), National Politics, Social Issues Tagged With: afghanistan, cocaine, Conservative Ideas, Donald Trump, Drug trafficking, heroin, Human Trafficking (ugh), National Politics, ohio, opioid epidemic, Social Issues, war on drugs

Manphobia hits new lows

June 22, 2017 by Jeff (ILoveCapitalism)

In left-wing Berlin, Germany, we now have a crackdown on advertising that would dare to depict women as “nurturing, happy to do housework, beautiful, addicted to shopping” or men as “rational, aggressive, technologically gifted”.

Get it? Ads must feature unpleasant, unattractive, angry feminists disposing of pathetically weak and foolish men.

Boys must not be shown as “liking sports, the colour blue, and playing with technology”. According to these German feminists(!), girls are so stupid and deficient by nature that when they “see images of heterosexual housewives, the consequence is that they cannot imagine themselves outside this framework.”

Meanwhile in Madrid, they banned ‘manspreading’. Because God Forfend that a man on a bus should sit a bit comfortably. Crowder explains it to women and gets some to admit to the existence of female privilege.

Filed Under: Arrogance of the Liberal Elites, Free (or Private) Enterprise, Hysteria on the Left, Ideas & Trends, Leftist Nutjobs, Liberalism Run Amok, Political Correctness, Politics abroad, Sex Difference, Social Issues, Unhinged Liberals Tagged With: advertising, Arrogance of the Liberal Elites, berlin, feminism, Free (or Private) Enterprise, Hysteria on the Left, Ideas & Trends, Leftist Nutjobs, Liberalism Run Amok, madrid, manphobia, manspreading, Political Correctness, Politics abroad, Sex Difference, Social Issues, Unhinged Liberals

Does Camille Paglia’s example prove or disprove a notion that women shouldn’t vote?

June 16, 2017 by Jeff (ILoveCapitalism)

A commenter pointed us to this Weekly Standard interview with Camille Paglia. As in most of her work, she says true and fascinating things – on the way to wrong conclusions. As a sample, here she is on the election:

Hillary, with her supercilious, Marie Antoinette-style entitlement, was a disastrously wrong candidate for 2016 and that she secured the nomination only through overt chicanery by the Democratic National Committee, assisted by a corrupt national media who, for over a year, imposed a virtual blackout on potential primary rivals…

After Trump’s victory (for which there were abundant signs in the preceding months), both the Democratic party and the big-city media urgently needed to do a scathingly honest self-analysis, because the election results plainly demonstrated that Trump was speaking to vital concerns (jobs, immigration, and terrorism among them) for which the Democrats had few concrete solutions…

She has much more to say; RTWT. For example, she slams the transgender movement of today as dupes of Big Pharma:

…the pharmaceutical industry, having lost income when routine estrogen therapy for menopausal women was abandoned because of its health risks, has been promoting the relatively new idea of transgenderism in order to create a permanent class of customers…I condemn the escalating prescription of puberty blockers (whose long-term effects are unknown) for children. I regard this practice as a criminal violation of human rights.

And she covers President Trump’s recent “infrastructure” speech, which indeed was awesome.

But then, whom did Paglia support? (Disclosure: I supported no one; a registered Independent, I came close on Gary Johnson but even he wasn’t good enough for me.) As Paglia explains:

I am a registered Democrat who voted for Bernie Sanders in the 2016 primary and for Jill Stein in the general election. Since last Fall, I’ve had my eye on Kamala Harris, the new senator from California, and I hope to vote for her in the next presidential primary.

Which is downright silly.

In travelling the “alt” opinion world, one occasionally comes across a strange theory that women shouldn’t vote. Here is an example from the vlogger Black Pigeon Speaks (who is center-Left on many issues, but right-ish on immigration, culture and terrorism). For the record: I disagree with the theory (that is, I think women should vote). But I’m going to describe it.

The essence of the theory (which again, I think is a broken theory) is that biology has wired men to take stands on issues and to initiate projects in the world; while it has wired women instead to be concerned with immediate safety and securing benefits from the group (and/or some patron). Because of that, says the theory, women voters over time will drag a country toward both appeasement (of its enemies) and socialism. Which is not good.

Is Camille Paglia evidence for that theory? Here we have a woman with a talent for grasping and expressing truth, yet she still can’t see through the people-destroying ruse of socialism.

Filed Under: 2016 Presidential Election, Decent Democrats, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Ideas & Trends, Social Issues, Socialism in America, Strong Women, Transgender Issues Tagged With: 2016 Presidential Election, Camille Paglia, Decent Democrats, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Ideas & Trends, Social Issues, Socialism in America, Strong Women

It takes awhile

June 13, 2017 by Jeff (ILoveCapitalism)

…but sometimes there’s justice.

Remember that UVa “campus rape culture” hoax that bubbled up in 2014? Recent news is that Rolling Stone will pay settlement damages to the fraternity they accused.

A source involved at the national level with the fraternity, Phi Kappa Psi, tells TheDC that Rolling Stone will pay $1.65 million to settle the defamation suit…

In the piece, “A Rape on Campus,” Erdely relayed the story of Jackie Coakley, a Virginia woman who claimed she was brutally raped by a group of Phi Kappa Psi fraternity members during a party in Sept. 2012.

Separately, a UVa dean also got damages:

The magazine’s decision follows a settlement in April with Nicole Eramo, a University of Virginia associate dean who was also smeared in the article, which was written by Sabrina Rubin Erdely…

Erdely portrayed Eramo as dismissive of Coakley’s case. But it was later revealed that Coakley not only fabricated the attack by the fraternity members but that Eramo took her allegations seriously at the time she made them.

A jury in Virginia awarded Eramo $3 million in damages — $2 million from Erdely and $1 million from Rolling Stone.

I don’t know what has happened to the original accuser, Jackie Coakley?

While I’m at it:

  • More college men are standing up to rape accusations, creating a cost for women who accuse falsely and colleges who take a “guilty until proven innocent” approach.
  • This gets farther afield, but at Wichita State University, “open carry” will be allowed this summer and a couple professors are resigning over it.

    I would expect that to be a good thing. Not having checked, I’d guess that the resigning professors are extreme leftists who lack common sense. Gun-free zones are dangerous (being the zones that mass-murderers gravitate to). Carry zones are a bit safer. People who can’t figure that out, probably shouldn’t be teaching.

Filed Under: Academia, Gun Control, Hysteria on the Left, Liberalism Run Amok, Political Correctness, Social Issues, Virginia Politics Tagged With: Academia, bias hoax, Gun Control, Hysteria on the Left, jackie coakley, Liberalism Run Amok, Political Correctness, rolling stone, Sabrina Rubin Erdely, Social Issues, unhinged feminists rape culture, University of Virginia, Virginia politics

Joss, Joss: Sorry but you’re a moron

May 18, 2017 by Jeff (ILoveCapitalism)

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.

Filed Under: Abortion, aborting gays, Annoying Celebrities, Arrogance of the Liberal Elites, Big Hollywood, Hysteria on the Left, Mean-spirited leftists, Political Correctness, Republican-hatred, Social Issues, Trump-hatred, Unhinged Liberals Tagged With: aborting gays, abortion, Annoying Celebrities, Arrogance of the Liberal Elites, Big Hollywood, Hysteria on the Left, joss whedon, man rompers, Mean-spirited leftists, planned parenthood, Political Correctness, Republican-hatred, RompHim, Social Issues, Trump-hatred, Unhinged Liberals

Against ethnic identitarianism

April 30, 2017 by Jeff (ILoveCapitalism)

First, let’s catch up on some lingo. Nathan Damigo, the guy who punched Moldylocks, founded something called “Identity Evropa” (meaning European). I visited the website and I did not find any statements that call for white supremacy; only for white/European identity.

Think of it this way. We have accepted identities such as African-American, Latino-American, Asian-American, Jewish-American, etc. In general, those identities don’t intend full-on Black or Latino or Asian or Jewish supremacy. They may sometimes achieve special privileges (for example, quotas or differing standards for the alleged races). But the majority of people holding to those identities don’t intend anything like a hard apartheid (or internment camps, etc.) for the other identities. In that sense, they usually aren’t “Black supremacists” or “Latino supremacists” or “Asian supremacists”, etc.

Damigo and company seem to be saying, we can get along with those identities but let’s have one for whites, too. They reject the term “white supremacists”. In the Rebel Media interview linked above, Damigo describes himself as a “white identitarian” and says that hysterical claims about his being a Nazi, a racist, etc. are just “anti-white hate speech” to shut down conversation.

It may sound almost reasonable until you remember that all identity politics are harmful. These guys are going in the exact wrong direction. They are doing a “Me, too” on racial identity politics. Like the others, they offer a cheap identity – “join the fraternity”, says their website. A San Diego Union-Tribune article says:

[As a Marine in Iraq, Damigo] saw firsthand the conflicts between the country’s ethnic and religious groups. “I said, ‘This is dumb. Why don’t … each one of them have their own country and they can all express themselves and … they’re not, you know, fighting with each other,” he told the Los Angeles Times in December.

In other words: Damigo might not want to harm or subjugate the other identities; but he thinks that both the Middle East and America should be even more ethnically-divided than they already are. Not good.

I believe in a melting-pot, American identity based on America’s founding principles of Human Freedom under Limited Government and the Rule of Law. Yes, the Left has pulled us all away from it with cheap, divisive identity politics. So let’s restore it.

When I come across identity-politics material of any kind (white, black or otherwise), the word “stupid” keeps popping into my head. I’ve been thinking about why that is. First, here is how I define the term. Interactions between 2 parties will have one of four outcomes.

  • I win, you win: That’s smart.
  • I win, you lose: That might be justice; if it’s not, then it’s predatory on my part, masochistic on your part.
  • I lose, you win: That might be justice; if it’s not, then it’s masochistic on my part, predatory on your part.
  • I lose, you lose: That’s just stupid.

With identity politics, everyone loses. Even the hucksters who gain financially from it are still losers – because they’re hucksters. If it’s stupid when Blacks or Asians or Latinos do it – and I’m afraid that it is – then it is equally stupid when whites do it.

All identitarians oversimplify their group’s history, and Identity Evropa is no exception. Their materials highlight Western civilization with majestic Greco-Roman-appearing figures next to slogans like “Let’s become great again”, “Serve your people”, “Discover who you are”, “Protect your heritage”. Fine. I like greatness and heroic art. But these guys seem unaware that Jesus was a Mediterranean Jew, and that the Greco-Roman civilizations (I dare not say “races”) were highly mixed, with a good deal of Mediterranean, Semitic (Phoenician), African and European heritage together.

They seem to forget that *culture is culture*. It isn’t about ethnicity, or tribe, or race, or genes, or color. It’s ideas; principles; the arts; laws and legal practices; philosophy; sciences; means of production and trade; food; ethics; things that can be adopted by anyone, of any ethnicity, at any time.

I am a Western supremacist. That is: I think that the Judeo-Christian-Greco-Roman-Lockean/Enlightenment civilization, while not perfect, is better than the others; it has the most elements from which an ideal civilization could be built. And I want to spread those good elements, by example and persuasion, to all ethnic groups (in America and the world).

It’s about the ideas/principles, and the individuals everywhere who may hold them. I couldn’t care less about the survival of *any* ethnicity as such. Ethnic identity is a sideshow, a rabbit hole where everyone loses, if we keep going down it.

And sorry Mr. Damigo, but if it does turn out that you’re one of those people who dwells on racial categories and uses them to pre-judge your fellow human beings: then yes, at that point you would be a racist. If you don’t want to wear that shoe, kindly make sure it never fits.

Filed Under: American Exceptionalism, Civil Discourse, Ideas & Trends, Identity Politics, Racism (Real / Reverse / or Faux), Social Issues, There - We Said It, We The People Tagged With: American Exceptionalism, berkeley riots, civil discourse, Ideas & Trends, identity evropa, identity politics, moldylocks, nathan damigo, Racism (Real / Reverse / or Faux), Social Issues, There - We Said It, We The People

He’s Baaa-aaaaaack

April 23, 2017 by Jeff (ILoveCapitalism)

After Milo’s trouble in February, I knew he’d be back. He has a lot to say, he needs the attention, he’s fun and the camera loves him.

Via Breitbart.com, it’s MILO’S FREE SPEECH WEEK. (I think the all-caps are part of the shtick?)

In light of recent controversies, I am planning a huge multi-day event called MILO’S FREE SPEECH WEEK in Berkeley later this year. We will hold talks and rallies and throw massive parties, all in the name of free expression and the First Amendment. All will be welcome, regardless of political affiliation.

[…]
During MILO’S FREE SPEECH WEEK, we will give out a new free speech prize — the Mario Savio Award — to the person we believe has done most to protect free expression at UC Berkeley and its surrounding area. Each day will be dedicated to a different enemy of free speech, including feminism, Black Lives Matter and Islam.

If UC Berkeley does not actively assist us in the planning and execution of this event, we will extend festivities to an entire month. We will establish a tent city on Sproul Plaza protesting the university’s total dereliction of its duty and encourage students at other universities to follow suit.
I intend to return Berkeley to its rightful place as the home of free speech — whether university administrators and violent far-left antifa thugs like it or not.
– MILO

Mario Savio was, per Wiki, “a key member in the Berkeley Free Speech Movement. He is most famous for his passionate speeches, especially the ‘put your bodies upon the gears’ address given at Sproul Hall…on December 2, 1964.”

P.S. I respect and admire Ann Coulter, but do you want to know the difference between her and Milo? A penis and $20,000. (My understanding is that she charges 20K to speak to College Republicans, while he charges them zero. If that’s incorrect, I would be happy to hear it in the comments.)

Filed Under: Breitbart Lives!, California politics, Conservative Ideas, Conservative Movement, Conservative Positivity, Constitutional Issues, Free Speech, Gay America, Gay Conservatives (Homocons), Islamic War on Gays, Social Issues Tagged With: berkeley riots, black lives matter, Breitbart Lives!, California politics, Conservative Ideas, Conservative Movement, Conservative Positivity, Constitutional Issues, feminism, Free Speech, Gay America, gay conservatives, Islam, mario savio, Milo Yiannopoulos, MILO'S FREE SPEECH WEEK, Social Issues

Thought for the day

April 18, 2017 by Jeff (ILoveCapitalism)

A sign seen at the recent Berkeley riots:

Hate speech IS Free speech

My thoughts on the above:

The Left tries to criminalize “hate speech” because, as Milo likes to point out, the Left wants to justify their own physical violence. Defining offensive speech as a crime will blur the line between speech and actions. Then lefties can claim that their many crimes of physical assault, vandalism, robbery, murder, etc., are self-defense, or justified by the victim’s beliefs/speech that are so offensive. Muslims try to pull the same trick.

I believe in keeping a strong line between speech and actions. For example, I believe that someone’s taunting (words) or alleged political-social beliefs or drawings of Mohammed can never justify your throwing the first punch at them.

The world does have some hateful people in it and genuine occurrences of “hate speech” – and I don’t like them. But that’s what my own right of free speech is for: to refute others’ dumb/wrong speech. And my right to free association, also: so that I may avoid people I don’t like, kick them out of my own house at least, and so on.

In this dim and confused world, any truthful speech will offend somebody, somewhere. The right to speak your conscience freely is the same as the right to say things that will offend others and hurt their feelings. The two are inseparable.

From the comments: A pointer to the Neal Boortz quote,

Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no protection.

UPDATE: On April 20 and as if on cue, Howard Dean said “Hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment.” Wrong, Mr. Dean. Threats and “fighting words” may not be protected, but Ann Coulter’s political speech (what you choose to call “hate speech”) is protected. And should be.

Filed Under: Free Speech, Islamic Intolerance, National Politics, Religion Of Peace, Social Issues Tagged With: Ann Coulter, berkeley riots, Free Speech, Howard Dean, Islam, Islamic Intolerance, Milo Yiannopoulos, National Politics, Social Issues

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Next Page »

Categories

Archives