It’s Monday, June 15th, 2015…but before we begin, a few brief observations on Friday’s slap to the face of The Great Divider we hope stings like hell for the rest of his miserable, misleading Marxist life.
There’s no question the entire leadership of the GOP did a lousy job selling their strategery, assuming they actually had a plan in the first place! Paul Ryan deserves special dishonorable mention for actually suggesting with a straight face we needed to pass the bill in order to learn what was in it…which should eliminate him from consideration for any higher office, and possibly even reelection. And sure, Nancy the Red most definitely stabbed The Dear Misleader squarely in the back.
But as Jason Riley so eloquently observes, the fault for Barry’s latest embarrassment…
…lies solely and squarely on the shoulders of…
If…
…neither does one, even a President, make up for six years of uninterrupted insults, lies, deceptions and utter disregard by bringing beer…
…to the congressional baseball game. The Dims abandoned him because their union sugar daddies abhor free trade; but it was the atmosphere of total distrust this prevaricating Progressive he himself spawned which really led to the TPA’s defeat.
But despite all that, the dumb, blind and tone-deaf trio leading The Gang Who Still Can’t Shoot Straight…
…are bound and determined to give it another try this week; stay tuned.
Now, here’s The Gouge!
Leading off the Monday edition, in a reprise of her earlier entry in the WSJ, Heather Mac Donald describes how Progressives continue their efforts at…
“I recently observed in these pages that violent crime is rising sharply in many cities. Having spoken with police officers and commanders, I hypothesized that the growing reluctance of cops to engage in proactive policing may help explain the spike in violent crime. The past nine months have seen unprecedented antipolice agitation dedicated to the proposition that bias infects policing in predominantly black communities, a message echoed at the highest reaches of government and the media. Officers in urban areas are encountering high levels of resistance and hostility when they try to make an arrest.
Faced with the prospect of ending up in a widely distributed video if an arrest goes awry, and possibly being indicted, officers tell me that they are increasingly reluctant to investigate suspicious behavior.St. Louis police chief Sam Dotson last fall called the relationship between decreased enforcement and increased crime the “Ferguson effect.”I noted that if it continues the primary victims will be the millions of law-abiding residents of inner-city neighborhoods who rely on police to keep order.
A sharply critical response from some quarters greeted the article.(Yeah…the Left Bank!)It belonged to a “long line of conservative efforts to undermine racial equality,” wrote Columbia University law professor Bernard Harcourt in the Guardian, decrying the article as “crime fiction” intended to undermine “the country’s newest civil rights movement.” Charles Blow of the New York Times called me a “fear-mongering iron fist-er” who was using “racial pathology arguments” and “smearing the blood running in the street onto the hands holding the placards.” The article was part of a “growing backlash against police reform,” an attempt to “shame people who dare to speak up about police abuse,” wrote journalist Radley Balko in the Washington Post.
The police came in for criticism as well. Officers who are not doing what Mr. Blow calls “normal police work” simply because of protests against police brutality are acting unprofessionally, it was said—Mr. Balko called it being “too afraid or spiteful to do their jobs.”
Other writers challenged the focus on the multicity crime rise. Not every city was seeing a crime increase, some critics said—or at least not an increase in every category of crime. And whatever the increases, crime is still much lower than it was 20 years ago. In any case, critics argued, it was premature to draw conclusions about the significance or the possible causes of the crime rises; crime is predominantly a local phenomenon and naturally fluctuates over short periods.
These criticisms speak volumes about how activists, members of the media and many academics understand crime and policing…”
“Misunderstand” would be more precise; and that goes for crime, policing or anyother aspect of life’s realities, let alone the causative factors behind them; case in point, brought to us by Hollywood’s The Wrap:
It’s not a new problem, but it’s one that by most accounts is getting worse. A growing number of TV news reporters say over the past year, there has been an increase in the level of sexually explicit taunts they face while covering stories on public streets. The disturbing trend involves hecklers running up and yelling, “F–k her right in the pu–y” into microphones as reporters stand in front of the camera.
“The acronym ‘F her in the P’ is constant,” NBC4 Southern California reporter Beverly White told The Wrap. “Total strangers, typically young men, shout that profanity like they have a right, and I beg to differ. It is deeply offensive and it’s infuriating.” The obscene interruptions started to gain notoriety in May 2014. The first known incident was initially thought to have been said by a heckler during a live broadcast in Cincinnati, Ohio. The footage went viral, but the stunt turned out to be a hoax. Still, the copycat incidents are all too real.
…“It’s honestly really similar to online trolling, except that it’s not happening online, it’s happening in public,” Elisa Lees Munoz, executive director of The International Women’s Media Foundation said.“It’s really indicative of the misogyny and extreme sexism that’s out there in our society… It’s infuriating that there are people out there using gender-based acts to stop women from performing their professional activity.”…”
Yeah…except the person screaming the profanity at the woman reporter in the top left corner of the photo below…
…appears to be a young female. And the French reporter in the bottom left portion, at least given our current though admittedly limited understanding of The Left’s ever-changing gender guidelines, as a “male”, cannot, by definition, be the subject of extreme sexism or misogyny.
Here’s the juice: from Jerry Seinfeld to Juan Williams, the reporters mentioned above to an increasing number of college professors across the country, Liberals are finally reaping the whirlwind they’ve sown…for generations. Political Correctness has been running amok across Conservative America for decades; now it’s turning on its own.
In a related item, writing at PJ Media‘s Tattler, Debra Heine offers Yet Another Sign The Progressive-Perpetrated Apocalypse Is Upon Us:
Totalitarianism on Campus: UC Professors Instructed Not to Say ‘ America is the Land of Opportunity’
If I didn’t know any better, I would say that this article at The College Fix is clever satire, but what is going on under University of California President Janet Napolitano is all too real and part of a growing trend of totalitarianism on campus.
Standard conservative ideas have become verboten at some universities where offering a right-of-center opinion about American life is considered a “microaggression.” (Interesting: Spell-check doesn’t consider “microaggression” a real word. How’s that for a microaggression?) “America is the land of opportunity,” “There is only one race, the human race” and “I believe the most qualified person should get the job” are among a long list of alleged microaggressions faculty leaders of the University of California system have been instructed not to say.
These so-called microaggressions – considered examples of subconscious racism – were presented at faculty leader training sessions held throughout the 2014-15 school year at nine of the 10 UC campuses. The sessions, an initiative of UC President Janet Napolitano, aim to teach how to avoid offending students and peers, as well as how to hire a more diverse faculty.
At the gatherings, deans and department chairs across the UC system have been instructed to be careful using (read: instructed not to use) phrases such as “America is the land of opportunity” or even use forms that provide only “male” and “female” check boxes, among a long litany of supposed microaggressions listed in a document underlying the “Faculty Leadership Seminars.”
The document has drawn little scrutiny until now, when a professor in the UC system pointed it out toThe College Fix. The professor chose not to attend the seminars, but myriad materials on the UC Office of the President (UCOP) website give indication as to what sort of lessons were taught there.
Other sayings deemed unacceptable include:
● “Everyone can succeed in this society, if they work hard enough.”
● “Where are you from or where were you born?”
● “Affirmative action is racist.”
● “When I look at you, I don’t see color.”
Martin Luther King’s dream of a “colorblind society.” where people are judged on the content of their character and not the color of their skin, was once embraced by Americans of all political stripes. Now progressives consider that ideal to be a form of racism.
When even the ideals put forward by Martin Luther King are considered racist, we’ve gone round the bend. Nothing chills speech more than accusations of racism. *Freedom of thought, opinion, and expression is the basis of a fair society — and we’re quickly losing that freedom in order to appease the Gods of political correctness.
* Except, of course, if the accuser be a Dimocrat…and the accused be we; in which case, it warms the very cockles of our Conservative heart!
Which brings us to today’s installment of Tales From the Darkside, and sh*t you truly can’t make up:
“Controversy erupted around a local NAACP leader in Washington state Thursday after family members told a local newspaper that she had misrepresented herself as black. Rachel Dolezal is the head of the NAACP’s chapter in Spokane and is also a part-time professor in the Africana Studies Program at Eastern Washington University. The Spokane Spokesman-Review says that Dolezal described her ethnicity as white, black, and American Indian in an application to be the volunteer chairwoman of the city’s Police Ombudsman Commission, a position to which she was duly appointed.
But Dolezal’s mother, Ruthanne, told the paper that the family’s actual ancestry is Czech, Swedish, and German, along with some “faint traces” of Native American heritage.
“It’s very sad that Rachel has not just been herself,” Ruthanne Dolezal said. “Her effectiveness in the causes of the African-American community would have been so much more viable, and she would have been more effective if she had just been honest with everybody.” Ruthanne Dolezal said that her daughter began to “disguise herself” in the mid-2000s, after the family had adopted four African-American children.
Rachel Dolezal did not immediately respond to her mother’s claim when contacted by the Spokesman-Review, first saying “I feel like I owe [the NAACP] executive committee conversation” about what she called a “multi-layered issue.”
After being contacted again, Dolezal said, “That question is not as easy as it seems. There’s a lot of complexities … and I don’t know that everyone would understand that.”Later, she said, “We’re all from the African continent,” an apparent reference to scientific studies tracing the origin of human life to east Africa…”
No, we understand; youlied…repeatedly…for personal gain, power and promotion.
But the purposes behind Dolezal’s deliberate deception…
…went beyond personal profit; as Matt Vespa notes at Townhall.com, she also used her phony pigmentation for the baseless besmirching of those she opposed politically:
“…That time Dolezal said she would be “nervous” at a Tea Party rally after taking notice to the all-white crowds. She has watched the rise of the Tea Party with “trepidation” (via NYT c. 2010):
Rachel Dolezal, curator of the Human Rights Education Institute in Coeur d’Alene, has also watched the Tea Party movement with trepidation. Though raised in a conservative family, Ms. Dolezal, who is multiracial, said she could not imagine showing her face at a Tea Party event.To her, what stands out are the all-white crowds, the crude depictions of Mr. Obama as an African witch doctor and the signs labeling him a terrorist. “It would make me nervous to be there unless I went with a big group,” she said.
Then again, it worked for…
…Fauxcahontas!
Since we’re on the subject of lying Liberals, Best of the Web‘s James Taranto gives us a flashback to our game show days as he details…
This Joker Is Wild
“Hillary Clinton is playing presidential poker,” writes the Hill’s Brent Budowsky, who goes all in on the metaphor:
She’s holding four aces that will give her a tremendous advantage in a general election against any Republican nominated to run against her in November 2016. . . .
In poker the phrase “ace in the hole” refers to a winning card that is turned face down until the winner turns it face up and the losers realize they are done for. Clinton now has four aces in the hole for 2016, which most commentators miss because of their limited focus on news cycle mania.
Here are the four “aces”: (1) She’s female. (2) Republicans have a “pope problem,” which is to say that Francis espouses leftish views on economics and “climate change.” (3) Mrs. Clinton opposes Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and similar free-speech decisions. (4) She has “the magic of Bill Clinton and the vast experience of Hillary Clinton.”
This may be the worst unmixed metaphor we’ve ever encountered. To begin with, card (1) would seem to be more like a queen than an ace; card (2) more like a king; and card (4) a king, or perhaps a king and a queen.So at best she’s got two pair—not a great hand in a game of eight-card stud, which is the smallest-hand variant with more than three hole cards.Even in eight- or nine-card stud, a player wouldn’t have four hole cards this early in a game. Generally in seven- or more-card stud two hole cards are dealt first, followed by four up cards, then one or more additional hole cards. (In straight or draw poker, the entire hand is concealed until betting ends, but the term “hole card” would be a redundancy and isn’t used.)
Anyway, all of Mrs. Clinton’s supposed “hole cards” are already visible to anyone watching the game. It’s more like a game of blackjack in a house that deals all cards face-up—and in that case, under the most common rules, four aces would likely be configured as two soft 12s. Mrs. Clinton would lose double her initial wager unless the dealer went bust.
Getting back to poker, Budowsky closes with this: “Hillary Clinton can certainly lose with her four aces, but if you believe any of those Republican candidates are holding a royal flush, let’s play some poker.”
A royal flush is an ace-high straight flush. Absent wild cards, if Mrs. Clinton holds all four aces, it is therefore impossible for another player to have a royal flush. It seems Budowsky is unaware that any straight flush beats four of a kind. Or maybe he just isn’t playing with a full deck.
We’d say her candidacy is a joke, but then, The Obamao was elected not once, but twice. Okay, elected once, reelected once. Regardless, the world knows the height of regard in which the person who knows her best holds Hillary:
Speaking of jokes, and an incredibly bad joke at that, just when you thought The Obamao’s Navy couldn’t sink any lower…
“Giffords was chosen as the vessel’s namesake because of the characteristics she exemplified after the attack, officials said. “Courage comes in many, many forms — physical, mental, spiritual and political. Gabby has truly modeled courage and resilience,” said Vice Admiral Philip Cullom, deputy chief of Naval operations for fleet readiness and logistics…”
“Courage”? WHAT “courage”?!? She recovered…from gunshot wounds she neither expected nor to which willingly exposed herself.
So in today’s Navy, a civilian’s recovery from gunshot wounds constitutes “courage” deserving of an honor not bestowed on tens of thousands of Navy and Marine Corps personnel who willingly gave their lives in the service of their country?!?
Other than her marriage to Mark Kelly, a man Giffords held in such high esteem she declined to even take his name, Gabby has NO CONNECTION WHATSOEVER to the United States Navy.
This is not only an indefensible breach of established protocol, but a gross miscarriage of justice; which makes it only the latest in long list of examples of a Military dedicated to political correctness rather than protecting the country.
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.