Brown University Segregates For Reconciliation!

                Brown University, that estimable fount of higher education, has decided to promote “racial reconciliation” by offering segregated events to its black and female Muslim students. The school came up with this brilliant idea after the violent clashes between opposing protesters in Charlottesville this past August.

                Reconciliation by segregation?

                Reconciliation: “A change from a state of enmity and fragmentation to one of harmony and fellowship.”

                Segregation: “The action or state of setting someone or something apart from other people or things or being set apart.”

                Attention, Brown: this is like screwing for abstinence, going crazy for mental health, or espousing genocide to achieve a tolerant, non-violent world. It’s akin to eating deep-fried cheese curds to promote healthy diets, or voting for Maxine Waters to bring dignity and reason back to our body politic.  

                This move by Brown is entirely in keeping with today’s outright celebration of insanity and perversion. The left’s strategy is to knowingly- and brazenly- accuse non-leftists of what they themselves are all about. This shouldn’t be news to anyone, but, tragically, is only known by a relative few who actually pay attention to history. This is straight out of the communist playbook, and Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals.”

                There is a word for the removal of ambiguity, for attempting to make something clear: disambiguation. I myself try to be a disambiguationist. So do Dennis Prager, Ben Shapiro, Rush Limbaugh, Jordan Peterson and Mark Steyn, among others.

                Leftists strive to do the opposite, as if they could turn disambiguation into the world’s first one-word oxymoron. They claim to want to clarify things, while doing everything in their considerable power to muddy things up. This is why they engage in euphemism fests and accuse their opponents of engaging in exactly the same behavior that they so enjoy. In their perfect world, disambiguation does exactly the opposite of what its intended to do, much like many members of the Republican Party. 

Abortion As Comedy

                “Ctrl Alt Del” is a new, scripted “comedy” series available on Facebook. Is the plot of this web series related to computing? Why, of course not. Perish the thought! It is about abortion (speaking of “perishing”). Delete? You know, just the routine, clinical erasing of life. Just hit the “backspace” button and the error is voided.

                The series’ creators, Roni Geva and Margaret Katch, say they are seeking to “normalize” abortion through jokes. The seven-part narrative takes place at a Midwestern abortion clinic, utilizing real women’s stories. Geva and Katch actually labeled the web series “an abortion comedy.”

                The show’s Facebook page tells their tale, stating: “When we had our abortions, we looked to the media for stories to relate to and found a whole lot of nothing. So we decided to change the narrative.” The idea for the “show” stemmed from Geva reflecting on how “judgey” she once was toward a woman who had had many abortions. “Ctrl Alt Del” currently has an 8.1 rating (out of a maximum possible 10) on The Internet Movie Data Base (IMDB), yet more proof that the left revels in depravity while savaging those who dare to hold traditional values.

                Do the insanely hypocritical animals (yes, animals, mainstream media!) that think abortion is just another valid form of birth-control (for the lazy, careless and promiscuous), typically find mass school shootings humorous, as well? And, really, what are school shootings but very late-term abortions?

                Perhaps we are missing the proverbial boat here. Maybe there are more opportunities to create jocular television and web programming. Let’s all think seriously now. Can there be anything more hilarious than abortion? How about plague? Widespread famine? Nuclear war? Genocide?

                Apparently, sickeningly, there are people out there saying, “A comedy series about abortion sounds too good to be true! What’s the Katch, Margaret?”  But no one can “change the narrative” on mass-murder. No one can “normalize” infanticide.

                Perhaps we were a bit too “judgey” toward Hitler and the Holocaust?

                This past week we have seen many in the mainstream media and the Democratic Party side with terrorists who chant “Death to America,” a mass-murdering dictator, and a Satanically vicious gang, MS-13, against the president of the United States and everyday Americans.

                The politically-correct Progressive crowd believes that stating “All Lives Matter” is a worse offense than depriving someone of life. They believe that calling those who rape, maim and kill for fun “animals” is a greater crime than the raping, maiming or killing.

President Trump seems willing to stand up to the swamp-dwellers, the terrorists, the murdering animals. The rest of us? Not so much.

                The “Spark of Divinity” grows dim in us all.   

Legalize Prostitution

             Many activities that used to be illegal- or at least frowned upon- are being legalized and codified lately: gay marriage, smoking pot, and assisted suicide among them. (And the reverse is also true: many that used to be legal and admired, such as telling the truth, are now frowned upon or illegal). So, perhaps it’s time we legalized prostitution, as well. I mean, it is the oldest profession, right? What could be the harm? Besides, it’s only a matter of a few short years before everyone will own a sex-bot and the whole issue will be moot.

 Pimps and brothels could then be properly regulated, and put under EEOC guidelines. They wouldn’t be able to discriminate on the basis of looks, disability or age. How great would that be?! They’d have to have a certain percentage of ugly employees and a certain percentage of octogenarians. They’d have a set quota of paraplegics, as well as male and female employees. And transgenders, too. Can you imagine the advertisements they’d need to employ, as now legal businesses, to be competitive in today’s rapidly changing society? “Come on down to ‘Denny’s Den O’ Diversity,’ where we’ve got all your tastes covered. Denny’s, because sometimes you feel like nuts, sometimes you don’t. And remember, Armand and Joy got nuts, Lars don’t!”

White Noise And The Bluebird...Of Unhappiness

“The bluebird didn't realize what she was getting herself into when she chose her new home, about 75 yards from a natural gas compressor. It was only as the days and weeks wore on that the low whine of machinery started to take a toll. It was harder to hear the sounds of approaching predators, or even the normal noises of the surrounding world, so she had to maintain constant vigilance. Her stress hormone levels became skewed; her health deteriorated. She couldn't resettle elsewhere, because she had a nest full of hatchlings to tend. Yet her chicks suffered too, growing up small and scantily feathered — if they survived at all.”

So began the “science” article in The Washington Post. Really.

The piece went on to quote Rob Guralnick, associate curator of biodiversity informatics (!) at the Florida Museum of Natural History: “Noise is causing birds to be in a situation where they're chronically stressed. . . and that has really huge health consequences for birds and their offspring.” The article did admit it would be a “stretch” to say noise damages birds’ “mental health,” since “the animals have not been evaluated by an avian psychologist.” Thanks for clearing that up.

In a paper recently published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (get 52 issues plus a special year-end ‘bonus’ issue for just $99.95 if you call their subscription hotline now—ask for Jorgé!), Guralnick and his accomplices colleagues say there is a clear connection between noise pollution and birds’ stress levels. Guralnick termed this finding “acoustic degradation of the environment,” and added, “We think it is a real conservation concern.” There you have it, the science is settled!

The research examined 240 nesting sites surrounding natural gas treatment facilities at the Bureau of Land Management’s Rattlesnake Canyon Habitat Management Area, which, though uninhabited, is “dotted with natural gas wells and compression stations that emit a constant, low-frequency hum in roughly the same range as many birds’ songs,” according to The Post.

It was there, upon this vast tract of open land in northern New Mexico, that the scientists purported to find that the lady bluebird so tenderly described in the article’s opening paragraph… suffered from the very same physiological symptoms as a human experiencing post-traumatic stress disorder.

Newsflash: birds are nervous, they flit around and can’t sit still, they poop all over and don’t live particularly long. There’s a good reason for that. It’s not because of PTSD, it’s because they’re effing birds, you morons!

Noise is causing birds to be stressed? Have the scientists ever been near a flock of geese or around a murder of crows? And what of the “constant, low-frequency hum in roughly the same range as many birds’ songs?” Unlike the shrill, deafening cacophony of geese and crow flocks, why would a low-frequency hum in the same range as birds own songs drive them nuts? Does their own singing cause them undue stress?

As for the assertion that noise is causing birds “really huge” health consequences, do real scientists use terms like “really huge?” Isn’t “huge” alone more than enough to make a clinical, unbiased point? Why risk sounding like a sophomore on a chat line?

And don’t try to tell me that “The bluebird didn't realize what she was getting herself into when she chose her new home, about 75 yards from a natural gas compressor.” There’s a reason that she…chose her new home, about 75 yards from a natural gas compressor, dumb asses. Or, did evil 

Republicans conspire to turn off the compressors until Ladybird selected her nesting site, luring the poor marginalized creature into the realm of Hades?

                                                     ****************************

                (Don’t get me wrong, I love wildlife. I love birds. Honestly. I actually served as an amateur ornithologist and bird guide at a nature center near my home for parts of two years as a youth. I just don’t like coercion, lying, bullying and bullshit, i.e. the left’s habit of reading us bedtime stories as if they were settled science).  

Minnesota Vikings To Hold LGBTQ Summit

                The Minnesota Vikings recently announced that they will become the first National Football League team to host a summit on LGBTQ inclusion in sports, according to the Twin Cities’ KSTP-TV. The conference will be held at the team’s sparkling new headquarters in Eagan on June 21^st. A reception will be held after the meeting, to raise money for local and national LGBTQ organizations. The team says it wants to utilize this gay gala to create opportunities for people in the LGBTQ Community. Kevin Warren, the Vikings chief operating officer, remarked: “We hope that this really jump-starts the conversation.”

                Is that a “conversation” that needs to be “jump-started?” You can’t pick up a newspaper without reading about transgender rights, can’t turn on a television without your eyeballs being awash in gayness, can’t watch a current Hollywood movie without vicariously engaging in lesbianism. And urban papers, plays, “interpretive dance performances” (and other forms of “art”) are utterly suffused with homosexual, bisexual and various non-binary and questioning characters and behavior. Gay “Pride!” parades are ubiquitous. Drag queens are reading to our kids…in elementary school. Moreover, “Dick and Jane” have been cashiered in favor of “Heather Has Two Mommies.” On the boob-tube, “Father Knows Best” has been replaced by “Will & Grace,” a show that is certainly inclusive of willys, but one totally devoid of grace. If “Leave it to Beaver” were made today, it would have an entirely different plot-line, though it might still air in prime-time.

                I Googled, “gay characters on television” and these are a few of the actual results: “53 Queer TV Shows To Stream On Netflix,” “57 Netflix Shows With Awesome Gay Characters,” and “Best Gay, Homosexual Couples on Teen Television Shows, TV Series.” (Emphasis mine). Parallel searches revealed no listings for “Awesome Heterosexual Characters,” or even “Somewhat Okay Straight Characters.”

                So, the Vikings (of Minnesota) will now be associated with a different kind of pillaging and plundering: “Oooh, Hagar, you savage, come and get me!” “Ragnar, your Gjallarhorn is to die for!” Perhaps they’ll dress up their mostly purple uniforms with a touch of orange or a splash of pink. If the team is truly committed to touting the LGBTQ Community it could place a rainbow flag patch on the shoulders—or crotches—of all its players.

Political correctness is a tragic farce, albeit it a malignantly militant one. It won’t be long until NFL teams start renaming—or “rebranding”-- themselves. Even the Heartland of the U.S. isn’t immune to this illness, as the Minnesota Vikings have just illustrated. How long until the NFL includes teams named, the “Chicago Bares,” “Dallas Urban Cowboys” and Green Bay “FudgePackers?”

“Stroll, Vikings, let’s not be tame. Stroll, Vikings, you could be dames. Go, Vikings, we all wanna score. You’ll hear us all yell for more! Oooh!”

100 Years Of Communism

                The Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation recently released a report revealing that American’s attitudes towards Communism are changing, and quickly at that. The Foundation wrote, “It seems that the majority of America’s largest generation [Millennials] would prefer to live in a socialist or communist society than in a free enterprise system that respects the rule of law, private property, and limited government.” The foundation added that this “is even more disconcerting” when coupled with the fact that they don’t know what those terms mean.

                In any case, I’d be remiss if I failed to recognize the 100^th anniversary of the establishment of the first Communist state. Commies, I didn’t get you all a (red) cake, but, my gift is my song…and, channeling my inner Elton, this one’s for you!

It’s ’17 for a moment

Got dead monarchists aplenty

And we’re just scheming

Counting the bodies near and far

It’s ’22 for a moment

Red looks better than ever

And we’re on fire

Making our way back from Tsars

Stalin there’s still time for you

Time to lie and to accuse

Marxists, there’s never a wish better than this

When you’ve only got a hundred years to kill

It’s ’63 for a moment

Khrushchev’s the man in this nuclear age

Crisis on the way

Calamity on his mind

It’s ’49 for a moment

The PRC has arrived

Putting Taiwan into a crisis

Two-and-a-half million more have died

Chairman Mao there’s still time for you

Time to lie and to kill all those

With whom you disagree

Xinping will be coming soon

Chairman, there’s never a wish better than this

When you’ve only got a hundred years to kill

The time goes by

And we realize

That in the blink of an eye

Ronald Reagan is gone

And they’re all getting high

As moveon.org carries on

We’re ninety-nine for a moment

Dying for just another bloodbath

As we are scheming

Counting the ways to where you are

Mugabe there’s still time for you

Mao Zedong we need you too

Pol Pot, Castro, you too “Che”

Killing Fields don’t go away

Kim Jong-un there’s still time for you 

Time to bribe, missiles to let loose

Communists, there’s never a wish better than this

When you’ve got one hundred million souls to kill

 You’re welcome, Bolsheviks.

(To the tune “100 Years,” by the Canadian rock band Five for Fighting. My heartfelt apologies to their great lyricist John Ondrasik).

The Parrot Sketch

                                                          The Parrot Sketch

                Police were called to investigate a “domestic disturbance” in the small German town of Loerrach recently, according to the Associated Press and Fox News. One of the burg’s residents called 110, an emergency phone number akin to 911 in the U.S., to report his concerns about continual loud shouting emanating from the apartment next-door.

                Officers dispatched to the scene discovered that there was, in fact, a raucous argument still going on, but it was between a 22-year-old man… and a parrot. The enraged man told the Polizei that the bird, which belonged to his girlfriend, had been annoying him, causing him to verbally lash out. The parrot, no shrinking violet—or turtle dove—responded in kind, though, since it didn’t know how to speak, resorted to vociferously barking like a dog. The man was likely yelling in German, so perhaps the parrot was replying in German Shepherd.

               Since neither man nor bird was hurt, and no fowl foul play was detected, the officers departed.

  Who ever heard of a parrot that can’t talk, yet barks like a dog? If you ask me, the entire incident was for the birds, a theater of the absurd. A “parroty” even.

  This account reads like a cross between Monty Python’s “Parrot Sketch” and “Argument Sketch,” and is an example of The Descent of Man. It’s a wonder neither party was accused of spewing “hate speech.”

Florida School Features Tiger At Prom

                Christopher Columbus High School, a private Catholic school in Miami, held a jungle-themed prom at a local hotel recently, at which a caged tiger was wheeled out onto the dance floor, according to a WSVN-TV report. The big cat wasn’t the only attraction at the soirée. It was joined by a lemur, an African fennec fox, a brace of macaws, fire dancers and loud music.

                Many students and parents were upset at the tiger’s appearance, and voiced concern about…the animal’s comfort and stress level. Marie-Christine Castellanos, whose brother attended the prom, was outraged when she learned the details of the gala: “This is an event to have fun and amusement, but is torturing an animal really considered amusement?” she remarked to the television station. She added: “You guys paid to see this happen to an innocent animal who had nowhere to run, who was completely afraid.”

  The Castellanos' mother, Maria, was also alarmed by the event. “I was appalled. We are animal advocates in this house,” she said.

  PETA, of course, roundly chastised the high school for the display, saying that animals “do not need to be in a party situation.” I beg to differ, People for the Exalting of all Things Asinine. Where do you think the expression “party animal” comes from? Duh! 

 In the face of these attacks, the school’s marketing director defended the decision to feature the animals, saying that they were brought in by professionals and were properly cared for. School officials released a statement to WSVN reading, in part, that the “animals were displayed in a very controlled situation,” and that all of them were "provided by facilities that are licensed by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.”

 CCHS officials also noted that the hotel approved of the animals’ presence, stating: “The tiger, which was displayed for a few minutes in a cage, was never harmed or in danger, was not forced to perform, was always accompanied by his handlers, and for the great majority of the time was laying down in a relaxed state facing away from the audience.”

Unlike the rest of the prom attendees.

Those officials at Christopher Columbus High, so bent on “exploiting” animals, have discovered that they aren’t welcome in today’s America.

In Florida, as in other states, preventing kids from being slaughtered is not as important as assuring that animals aren’t inconvenienced.

The Right To A Stable Climate?

A federal appeals court ruled recently in favor of 21 children and young adults who are suing the U.S. government for not doing enough to protect their “constitutional right to a stable climate.” Judges on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals refused to block the U.S. District Court in Oregon from hearing the suit, which was originally filed by the environmental group Our Children’s Trust in 2015.

Say again? The “constitutional right to a stable climate?” If the Ninth Circuit Court of Schlemiels and Our Children’s Trust had been around in the three-and-a-half-billion-year period between “primordial soup” and the onset of the Industrial Age, they would’ve been suing the crap out of planet earth and mother nature.

In 2016, a federal judge somehow ruled that the 21 youths had legal standing to sue. The Trump administration appealed the decision in June of 2017, asking judges to “end this clearly improper attempt to have the judiciary decide important questions of energy and environmental policy” (thereby upsetting the balance of powers). The Ninth Circuit refused to do so. The ruling is a victory for environmental activists seeking to use the courts to force the Trump administration to issue regulations to phase out fossil fuels…and paves the way for the case to be tried.

Julia Olson, Our Children’s Trust chief counsel, says the case argues that constitutional rights to life, liberty and property are being violated by the federal government’s failure to enact policies to stop catastrophic global warming. But the reality is that our constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property would be immeasurably more “violated” if we did not utilize existing fossil fuels to provide affordable energy to heat our homes in the winter and cool them in the summer, allow us to get from one place to another, properly package our consumables, and to provide the jobs and incomes we all need to survive.

According to the Daily Caller, “plaintiffs say the right to a stable climate comes from the public trust doctrine — the idea certain natural resources should be protected for enjoyment of future generations.” There wouldn’t have been any future generations if earlier ones hadn’t made good use of natural resources such as plants and animals-- otherwise known as food, clothing and shelter. And, as for energy sources, you know organizations like Our Children’s Trust don’t want our children extracting and burning fossil fuels in the future, either. They want to see legislation enacted banning the use of all energy sources save solar and wind. So, what “enjoyment” would future generations derive from oil and gas? “Well, Bob, I don’t know about you, but-- even though we can’t see them or use them—it sure makes me feel good knowing there’s oil and natural gas under our feet! Bet they’re purty, too!”

The progressive’s staggering ignorance about-- or willful misrepresentation of-- the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, especially as they relate to Natural Law, is tragic. It’s also literally an existential threat to the existence of the nation the Framers ever-so-carefully crafted.

The concept of negative rights essentially means that no one, government included, has the right to arbitrarily steal from you, imprison you or kill you. The idea behind “positive rights” is that someone, or everyone—but government in particular—is obligated to provide you with a good or service. There can be no such thing as a positive “right,” at least as granted by man.  

The Creator grants us all equal and inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These can only be effectively protected through negative rights-- limits on what our fellow human beings and the governments comprised of them—can do to us.

 We are not granted the “right to a stable climate,” just as we are not granted the “right” to own a mansion, or be free of want, acne or Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Yet, progressives would contest that remark.

                Ironically, the idea that we are not granted a positive “right” to everlasting life is one with which the vast majority of progressives would agree. But only because most don’t believe in God, Heaven or an afterlife.

                Natural Law informs us that the government can’t logically deny our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Nor can it deny us the chance at eternal life.

                Only we ourselves can do that.

Millennials Embracing Gender-Neutral Baby Names

                   Millennial parents are increasingly giving gender-neutral names to their offspring, according to BabyCenter.com. Unisex baby names are rapidly proliferating as younger parents embrace the possibility of “gender fluidity” in their children and strive to avoid any appearance of sexism.

                BabyCenter.com’s global editor-in-chief, Linda Murray, told the Associated Press, “We’re definitely seeing more conversation today around the distinction of a truly gender-neutral name.  This generation is truly interested in gender neutral names.”

                Lori Kinkler (!), a psychologist (there’s a shock) in San Antonio, Texas, stated: “We chose a gender-neutral name, Riley, for my daughter. We knew her sex, but gender is fluid and yet to be determined. Of all the difficulties faced by those who live beyond, or across, the binary, we didn’t want name-changing to be one of them. ... I like that she feels she has options and knows she’ll be accepted by us no matter what.”

     Riley is 3. And you’re implicitly telling her that you aren’t particularly attached to her the way she is. At best, that’s confusing. At worst, devastating.

               According to the Social Security Administration, which tracks baby name usage on an annual basis, among the 50 most popular androgynous names are: Charlie (which was evenly split at 50% for girls and 50% for boys!), Justice (52-48), Skyler (54-46), Finley (58-42), and Royal (42-58). Rounding out the Top 10 were Lennon, Oakley, Armani, Azariah, and Landry. Salem was popular, too.

               Is this neutral naming nonsense just a fad? Probably not. As more and more of us come to believe there is no connection between one’s sex and one’s gender, we’ll all soon be so confused about even the very basics of life, that the trend will likely accelerate. We’ll be addled, over-sexed, non-gendered droids trapped in a prison of our own making—one of utter intolerance for all that came before us.

               We won’t be just a bunch of Toms, Dicks or Harrys anymore. We won’t be Betty or Veronica, Mary Ann or Ginger, either. And we won’t be Frank with anybody, certainly not ourselves.

               We will be Moon-Units, Lemons, and LeRoyces. We will be Mazda or Tolerance, Purple or Purity, Mystery or Truth…Dumbass or Shithead.

               And we will be lost. Because a Rose by any other name…will still be a Rose.

               We just won’t recognize that.