Saturday, June 15, 2019

Recent News Stories

*The U.S. women’s national soccer team headed to France earlier this month in search of its fourth FIFA World Cup trophy. The side stopped off in The Big Apple for some media exposure recently, where Fox Sports gave the team a unique new foosball table. (Did the men’s team get its own table? No? Must be sexism). Each mini-molded player controlled by the chrome bars was said to be a spot-on replica of one of the squad members…in their respective jerseys. I want to know just how realistic the figures are, however. Can they tear off their jerseys and wildly celebrate after they score a goal? Can they kneel during the national anthem?

*House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) recently appeared on CNN where “Situation Room” anchor Wolf Blitzer asked him if he now thought impeaching President Trump might be “worthwhile.” Hoyer replied, “Wolf, I know you and other reporters keep asking and they want us to say we’re for impeachment,” adding, “What we are for is continuing our investigations, making sure that the administration gives us the information we are constitutionally authorized to receive.” Think about that: a top Democrat acknowledging that it is the supposedly objective and unbiased media — the all-important free press—that is driving the push for impeaching a duly-elected president. Sadly, Trump is right when he calls them “the enemy of the people.”

* Reporting on Louisiana’s new abortion law recently, the New York Times managed to simultaneously achieve an all-time “journalistic” low and euphemistic apex when reporter Alan Binder wrote: “The measure would require an ultrasound test for any woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy, and forbid abortion if the test detects embryonic pulsing— which can occur before many women know they are pregnant.” Seriously? “Embryonic pulsing?!” I guess we can’t use “baby’s heartbeat” now, or even “fetal heartbeat.” Even the Devil has to be laughing at the preposterous attempts by leftists to mask evil. “Embryonic pulsing?” So, we have: “Pro-choice,” “terminating a pregnancy,” “Non-viable tissue-mass,” and now, “Embryonic pulsing.” What will the “red-fluid-leaking body-pumps” (bleeding hearts) come up with next?

Friday, June 14, 2019

Trump Administration Denies Embassy Requests To Fly LGBT Flags

                Some are in a tizzy that the Trump administration rejected requests from U.S. embassies around the world to fly the “rainbow pride” flag on their flagpoles during LGBT Pride month this June, a reversal of the blanket approval the Obama administration had granted the embassies. Long-standing State Department policy dictates that embassies ask Washington for official permission to fly flags other than the American Flag.
                NBC News reported that embassies in Brazil, Germany, Israel and Latvia were among those denied permission to raise the LGBT banner, though it said the flag can—and is—being flown both inside embassies and on exterior walls. Those accusing the president of rank bigotry and intolerance need only look to his recent campaign to decriminalize homosexuality worldwide. And to his tweet in recognition of Pride month: “As we celebrate LGBT Pride Month and recognize the outstanding contributions LGBT people have made to our great Nation, let us also stand in solidarity with the many LGBT people who live in dozens of countries worldwide that punish, imprison, or even execute individuals on the basis of their sexual orientation.”
                ABC News reported that, since Secretary of State Mike Pompeo didn’t approve an official cable that is often returned with guidance on specifically how to mark LGBT Pride month and International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia (IDAHT), embassies and consulates were free to mark both events however they wished, though they were still required to seek approval for the LGBT flags to be raised on their outside flag poles.
                This should be a non-story, a “nothing-burger” in today’s parlance. No flag other than the Star-Spangled Banner should be allowed to wave from flagpoles of the nation’s embassies. If the Pride flag goes up, why not a sequin-spangled banner representing only feminine gay males? Or the Pansexual Pride flag? Or the Two-Spirited flag? Or the Frotteurism Flag? Or a flag celebrating Armenian-American bisexual, mulatto transvestites who were born on Thursdays? Or a flag for Republicans of Polish descent who have erectile disfunction? Or…get the point?
                A country’s embassies are supposed to officially and soberly represent that nation as a whole to foreign lands, not serve as ad hoc billboards for special-interest groups and sexual adventurers.
                It is time America quit balkanizing itself. And advertising it. There are only two flags that should be allowed to fly on the flagpoles of our embassies: 1) the Flag of the United States of America and 2) The Gadsden flag with the clear message, “Don’t Tread On Me.”

Thursday, June 13, 2019

Millennials Say The Future Has Passed

            Reports indicate that many American Millennials aren’t saving for the future…because they don’t believe there will be their lifetimes. A 2018 study by the American Psychological Association revealed that an astounding 72% of Millennials said their emotional well-being is affected by the inevitability of climate change, the highest of any age group. Why then isn’t the emotional well-being of 100% of Millennials affected by the inevitability of death? And another question for Millennials: can you name another time when the planet’s climate changed significantly? I can. Before there was one……until there was one. Planet or climate. Take your pick.

Why is this group so glum? Climate change, of course. Fully 88% of Millennials believe in man-caused global warming. 69% believe it will significantly impact them The number of young people reporting symptoms of serious depression increased by 52% from 2005 to 2017, according to a study published in the March issue of the Journal of Abnormal Psychology. Various other mental health issues also are afflicting youth at much higher rates than in the past. Some experts attribute this to the increased use of digital media, while others note the rise in “eco-anxiety.” I would cite the mass media, professors and the “higher educational” system in general for the recent breakdown in sanity. And, for-personal-profit-and-power scaremongers like the ditzy Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the repulsive Michael Moore.
The author of the afore-mentioned study said of young people: “There is a certain fatalism in this population relative to more recent generations. Psychologically, this population has had more shocks to expectations about their futures than past generations. From a perception point of view, I hear a lot of cynicism about the ability to build retirement savings or whether they will be able to retire at all.”
Say what?!
Yes, past generations had it easy, contending only with throwing off tyranny, the Civil War, World War I, the Stock Market Crash of 1929, the ensuing Great Depression, World War II, Viet Nam, potential nuclear annihilation, and Jimmy Carter. Whereas Millennials had to deal with the dot-com bubble bursting, the ensuing housing crisis, and the lack of universally available “all-gender” bathrooms.
Young folks are being fed a steady diet of fake news, science and weather. A 2016 study from something called NextGen Climate, a progressive organization dedicated to environmental advocacy, purported to show that a college graduate belonging to the class of 2015 will lose more than $126,000 in lifetime income directly due to climate-change-induced costs.
Millennials are living in the wealthiest time in history. Nearly all of them have smart phones, computers and (more than) enough to eat. Capitalism has lifted much of the world out of abject poverty and into relative ease, despite the Earth’s growing population and the past predictions of “experts” who forecast massive starvation, dire energy shortages, and global cooling, among other catastrophes that never came to pass. Yet many have soured on capitalism, the very goose that laid the golden egg. Many believe capitalism is in its final stages. 68% of Millennials viewed capitalism positively in 2010, yet only 45% did in 2017, seven years later. Many say “the system doesn’t work.”
Ironically, in today’s world, unlike in days of yore, the most educated people are often the least informed. Ancient humans witnessed eclipses, meteors and other celestial (and weather-related) phenomena and believed them to be omens or warnings from the gods. Modern progressives witness a hurricane, tornado or fluctuating temperatures and essentially scream that the sky is falling and we are all going to die. And they blame people. Maybe not themselves, but others.
Look around you Millennials. Then take a good, hard look at what’s happening in Venezuela. Maybe travel to Cuba or North Korea. Put down your phone and start reading 1984, A Brave New World, Animal Farm, Atlas Shrugged or The Gulag Archipelago.
There have been alternating ice ages and periods of great warmth since time immemorial. Floods, biblical and otherwise, have been occurring for as long as droughts have been around. Storms rage and calm returns. To everything there is a season. “Change” is the easiest thing to predict.
The next easiest thing to predict is what would happen to the United States under socialist government. Millennials—and everyone else-- would be guaranteed a future of economic, political, personal…and, yes, environmental…degradation and despair.

Wednesday, June 12, 2019

Jewelry Store Snubs Deputy

                A North Carolina sheriff’s deputy was recently informed by Kay Jewelers in Statesville that the engagement ring he had purchased there had been sized and was ready for pickup. The deputy was buoyed by the news. He could now propose to his beloved! Unfortunately, when he showed up at the retail outlet while on lunch break, the store manager met him at the door and told him he couldn’t enter the premises while carrying his service firearm.
                The Iredell County Sheriff’s Office later revealed on Facebook that: “The deputy informed the manager he was in uniform and his marked patrol car was in the parking lot, and it would be a violation of policy for him to remove his service weapon while in uniform.” The post explained that the policy requiring deputies to be and remain armed “is in place for not only the safety of the deputy, but the general public as well.” One would think that would be obvious, but apparently it is not.
                The store’s manager informed the deputy that he “could return to the store at a different time, when he was not armed.” That was certainly gracious. The deputy dutifully left without the ring…and without telling the store’s manager, “I hope you never get robbed, but good luck if you do.” The sheriff’s office added, “The reaction our deputy encountered is very difficult for us to comprehend, and we earnestly hope situations such as these are few and are diminishing.” Don’t count on it. The opposite is true.
                Though Sheriff Darren Campbell attempted to contact Kay Jewelers’ corporate office on numerous occasions, he never has been graced with a reply. Kay Jewelers did, however, respond to a request for comment from WSOC-TV: “Kay Jewelers is reaching out to the customer and the Iredell County Sheriff’s Office to sincerely apologize for the mishandling of this matter. We have tremendous respect for law enforcement, and we thank the Office for bringing this to our attention. We will be sure to reinforce store training regarding our firearm policy with specific regard to uniformed law enforcement.”
                In the meantime, I propose a new motto for the jeweler: “Every Diss Begins with Kay.”  

                You have to admit, it has a certain ring to it.

Tuesday, June 11, 2019

Boston Boasts Porn Literacy Program

                Boston’s WBZ-TV recently aired a segment touting the Boston Public Health Commission’s “Porn Literacy” program that aims to teach teens how to interpret X-rated internet content. The program’s goal is-- ostensibly—to instruct the kids as to what is real and what is unrealistic when it comes to adult relationships.
                According to The Blaze, WBZ noted that studies show the vast majority of kids see pornographic material before they turn eighteen, and hailed parent-approved classes that could teach adolescents “how to decipher such role-plays with a realistic lens.” The Porn Literacy course is taught through BPHC’s Start Strong program and is the brainchild of a Boston University professor. (Imagine that).
“Start Strong” seems to me a bit of an ironic label for a program teaching a course on pornography to our kids. Just sayin’.
But, apparently, I shouldn’t be concerned, as The Blaze reports “the curriculum has now been pared down to be ‘palatable for our younger audience.’” Yay! Pare the porn down! For the younger audiences! The younger, the better!
The Blaze also noted that the New York Times Magazine recently reported on the course and “teens’ thoughts on pornographic footage with great detail,” noting that “Student participants shared their anxiety over measuring up to the adult performances played out on a screen.” That’s great. It is comforting to know that any given 15-year old boy may be told that he doesn’t have to “measure up” to “Long Dong Silver,” “Johnny the Wad Holmes” or “Dirk Diggler.”
And this exceptionally beneficent program isn’t only limited to porn studies. It also teaches students about “healthy relationships, dating violence, and LGBT issues, often through group discussions, role-playing and other exercises.” Role-playing? “Other exercises?” I’m not sure I want to know.
When a society eschews historical literacy, economic literacy, governmental literacy, Biblical literacy, and English/language literacy in favor of Porn Literacy…it looks a lot like this one.

And it is in its final days.

Monday, June 10, 2019

This Bud's For You...And You...And You...And You...

                Budweiser UK recently came out with a series of nine different pint glasses, each depicting a different “Pride” flag, to kick off Pride Month. The giant brewer’s “Fly The Flag” campaign is in partnership with London Pride, and includes profiles of each glass explaining what each color on the respective flags means. On the morning of May 31st, Bud first tweeted: “Excited to reveal we are now proud sponsors of Pride in London! We are working closely with them and our charity partners to celebrate the diversity within the LGBT+ community and Fly the Flag for Everyone at the #PrideJubilee. A taste of what’s to come.” (Get it)? Below that was a picture of a tri-colored glass and the informational “Bi-Pride” message: “Magenta is for same gender attraction, blue is for attraction to genders other than your own, and lavender (a mix of the two) represents attraction to your own and other genders, though some interpret it differently.”
                But virtue-signaling in the Age of Intersectionality can be complicated and difficult, and it appears Budweiser kept adding posts—and glasses-- in an effort to avoid omitting—and therefore offending-- any fringe group whatsoever. Another tweet, eight minutes later, sported a glass with four colors and noted: “Black is for asexuals who don’t feel sexual attraction to anyone. Grey is for grey-asexuals, who sometimes feel sexual attraction, and demi-sexuals who only feel it if they know someone well. White nods to non-asexual allies, and purple represents the whole community.” There you have it.
                Seventeen minutes later Bud was back with two more tweet ads. One, touting “Intersex-Pride,” showed a glass featuring a purple circle on a yellow background and explained: “The circle symbolises wholeness and completeness, while purple and yellow were chosen as they don’t have male or female associations.” The other, a tribute to “Pan Pride,” had another tri-colored glass and stated: “Blue symbolises male attraction, pink female attraction, and yellow attraction to other genders.” Good to know.
                One minute after that, it was time for “Lesbian Pride.” This one averred: “While this flag is commonly used, it isn’t the only one. If you look around, you might see a version with a kiss in the corner, representing lipstick lesbians, or a purple flag with a double headed axe for labrys lesbian feminist pride.” Well then.

                60 seconds later, “Inclusive Pride” got its moment in the sun, with still another glass and the message: “In 2017 the city of Philadelphia added a black and brown stripe to the classic rainbow design, to better represent people of colour within the community. It has since been flown at Prides around the world.”
                Incredibly, Budweiser stepped it up a notch to finish with a three-tweet flurry. At 11:28 am, “Transgender-Pride” was saluted via a glass designed by Monica Helms and the statement: “Blue represents male, pink female, and white is for those transitioning or who consider themselves to have a neutral or undefined gender.”
                And then: “Yellow is for those whose gender exists outside of the gender binary. White is for people with many genders. Purple is for those who feel a mix of female and male, and black is for those who feel they are without gender entirely.” (Talk about being disenfranchised)! You got it, “Non-Binary Pride!”
                Last, but by no means least, gender-fluidity was toasted with a five-toned receptacle and the encomium: “Pink is for femininity, blue for masculinity, while purple represents a mix of the two. Black represents lack of gender, and white stands for all genders.”
                That’s one hell of a lot of glasses and colors to represent far less than 10% of the population. One might think, “When you say Budweiser, you’ve virtue-signaled them all!” But one would be mistaken. The “King of Queers” missed a few groups. They might have paid tribute to the LGBTQIIA Community, but they missed (those represented by) the “+” at the end.
                What about agalmatophiles? Those aroused by statues are deservedly PROUD! as well. How about we put a silver band on the glass to represent them? And batrachophiliacs are a marginalized population, too. It’s time those lusting after frogs were given their due, and brought into the broader LGBTQIIA+ Community, to PROUDLY! March for inclusion and tolerance. Give them an ochre colored band! And chasmophiles should be recognized, as well. Those, PROUDLY!, sexually aroused by cracks and crevices—and aren’t we all—should be celebrated and denoted by a gray band on a drinking vessel.
                The glory of dendrophilia certainly should be ever-so-PROUDLY! acknowledged in its own right. Dendrophiliacs aren’t just tree-huggers, if you know what I mean. They really love trees. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge. Say no more! Nothing sappy here. We should all branch out and try new things, right? A burnt-umber colored band for these folks, please. Let’s not short-change those in the Coprophiliac Community, either. Those who get excited by being covered in feces have every right to be just as damn PROUD! as they are. They deserve a tan colored ring on any chalice. Hybristophiliacs long to love serial killers in prison, and who can blame them? Instead, we should be (PROUDLY!) celebrating this group by adding a fuchsia colored ring around the beer cup.
                I bet you haven’t heard much about the Autoplushophiliacs in our midst, have you? These people are—PROUDLY!-- aroused by the image of their own selves in the forms of a plush-toy or anthropomorphized animal. And well they should be. A magenta band in honor of them is the least we can do. Prost!
                The Zoophiliac Community is already established in parts of Europe and is growing by leaps and bounds here in the U.S. They get a very PROUD! canary colored band on the old tumbler. Finally, necrophiliacs would be PROUDLY! served by a mauve colored band around most any goblet.
                Budweiser: ”The King of Queers.”
                “Prideful perverts, this Bud’s for you!”

Sunday, June 9, 2019

Colorado Lawmakers Kinda Think There Was Another Drug They Wanted To Legalize, But Can't Remember What It Was Now

Colorado Lawmakers Kinda Think There Was Another Drug They Wanted To Legalize, But Can’t Remember What It Was Now

                Legislators in Colorado legalized recreational marijuana use in 2014, and, more recently, did the same with “magic mushrooms.” Now they say they have been thinking about legalizing another hallucinogenic drug for some time but can’t remember which one it might have been. A couple of the state’s Democratic Representatives suggested the substance in question may be crack cocaine, while a Republican Representative told me, on the condition of anonymity, that he is of the opinion that it could have been heroine, or maybe ecstasy. But another Republican Representative disagreed with his fellow party member, saying that he was “probably 60 percent certain” the drug they’d strongly considered legalizing was LSD. Yet this didn’t jibe with what the Centennial State’s two senators thought, one of whom expressed a favorable opinion about legalizing amphetamines, while the other is stoutly pro-hashish.
                A special legislative session was held recently, in an effort to find some common ground. Fritos, Cheetos, peanuts, Pringles, Lunchables, Twinkies and other munchies were provided (at tax-payer expense) to the governing body to satisfy their munchies and grease the skids for a potentially historic bill to be put forward. Sadly, that never happened. An argument broke out over which snack was the best, with Democrats demanding that Lunchables be proclaimed the most inclusive and fulfilling snack, and Republicans arguing that the traditional peanut clearly has more merit.
                Suffice it to say, members of each party have since been clashing over just which narcotic to legalize next. A potential agreement now seems a long way off, tragically putting the hopes of countless junkies and weekend partiers alike in jeopardy.
   All the state’s lawmakers did agree, however, that the legal age to purchase cigarettes should be raised to 27, if the manufacture and sale of the despicable tobacco product cannot be banned altogether.

Saturday, June 8, 2019

New York Times Characterizes Baby's Heartbeat As "Embryonic Pulsing"

                 The New York Times (“The Truth Is Worth It”) recently reported on Louisiana’s new law restricting abortion. The Gray Lady’s Atlanta Bureau correspondent, Alan Blinder, wrote: “The measure would require an ultrasound test for any woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy, and forbid abortion if the test detects embryonic pulsing—which can occur before many women know they are pregnant.”
                Embryonic pulsing?! Even the Devil must be laughing at these preposterous attempts to mask the truth…and aid and abet evil.
                If a baby’s heartbeat can be described as an undeveloped pulsing, it is possible to obscure the reality of virtually any word or phrase. Rape? Perish the thought. We say, “coerced comingling” or “persuasive physicality,” which can occur before many men know they are engaged in the activity. And why not use “unauthorized redistribution” in place of burglary? Bestiality? “Interspecies romance” is less offensive to those in that community. Necrophilia naturally becomes “corporeal coupling.”
                Euphemism? “Underplayed characterization.”

                New York Times reporting? No. “Moronic expounding.”

Friday, June 7, 2019

Berkeley Students Demand Sanctuary Dormitory

                Students and other radicals are hoping to establish the world’s first “sanctuary dormitory” for illegal aliens on the University of California-Berkeley campus.
                This is odd, given that Berkeley itself is a sanctuary city. The nation’s very first, in fact. It is doubly redundant given the fact that the school also already refuses to enforce immigration laws and acts as a “sanctuary campus.” What’s more, the entire University of California educational system released a statement in 2017 proclaiming “vigorous support for all our undocumented students and staff” and pledged to provide them with counseling, financial aid, housing assistance, mental health resources, and research funding.
                A somewhat baffled Dan Mogulof, UC-Berkeley spokesman, told Campus Reform that he wasn’t sure what the activists wanted in the dorm, given that Berkeley has repeatedly and consistently made clear its intent to create a safe space for illegal immigrant students and that campus police are already instructed not to cooperate with ICE or other federal agencies in the enforcement of federal immigration laws.
                Yet, on April 10th, members of the Berkeley chapter of the Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration and Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) called on the school’s student government to convert Eshelman Hall to a sanctuary for illegal alien students and community members, thereby sending “a political message to Donald trump,” according to Campus Reform. The Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration and Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality By Any Means Necessary is, apparently, known as BAMN, not CDAAIIRFEBAMN, for reasons unstated.

   I guess “by any means necessary” is the most important part of any progressive manifesto.

   A sanctuary dorm inside of a sanctuary campus inside of a sanctuary city. No other group in the nation—or anywhere else—has this kind of layered protection. Certainly not conservatives. Or straight white Christian males. They are demonized and chased off campus.
  By why stop there? What’s next? I’d like to see a “sanctuary floor” in the “sanctuary dorm.” Perhaps even a “sanctuary bathroom” within a “Sanctuary dorm room” within a “sanctuary wing” of a “sanctuary floor” of a “sanctuary dorm” on a “sanctuary campus” in a “sanctuary city.” Would that be an adequately protected safe space for our illegal aliens?
  Apparently, Democrats believe that no legal citizen—let alone one with traditional values—should ever be allowed to interact with the undocumented heroes without express, written consent from the undocumented heroes themselves, BAMN, the University of California-Berkeley, and the Democratic National Committee. 

Thursday, June 6, 2019

Drag Queen Story Time Strikes Again

                It was cold outside the Lansdale Public Library in Pennsylvania recently. But it was hot inside, honey! Miss Annie, drag queen extraordinaire, was reading books about tolerance and diversity to young children while dressed in “her” full regalia. It was Drag Queen Story Time, baby. Now that’s what I’m talkin’ ‘bout!
                When performing for adults, Miss Annie goes by “Annie Christ.” Get it? Like Anti-Christ? How adorable! (Wonder if she ever goes by “Mo Hammad” or “Ho’ Hammad?” Probably not). And Annie was pissed at a couple of people that were protesting her appearance in front of the kids. But she shouldn’t have felt bad, as more people were protesting the protesters. The counter-protesters held up signs that read, “Love is Love is Love” and “God Thinks Drag Queens Are Fabulous.” I’m not sure why the former was deemed appropriate or applicable in this instance. And I’m not sure I want to know. As for the latter, well, that is yet to be determined, as they say. Some folks chanted “Love thy neighbor!” for some reason. (Unless, of course, your neighbor voted for Donald Trump and/or wears a “MAGA” hat. Tolerance can only go so far). Two children chanted, “Stop your hate! Drag is great!” to those opposed to the Annie Christ. That these youngsters felt compelled to spout inane, politically-correct banalities in support of a much older man in provocative women’s clothing reading to their peers in a public space is proof positive that our education system is doing its job admirably. Dilly, Dilly!
                One counter-protester sported a sign saying, “God loves Annie Christ.” Stupefying.
                The library doesn’t host Bible story times or readings. Hell, it’s a public place. It can’t be pushing any kind of an agenda. And, it has to maintain its dignity, right? Sshh!

Wednesday, June 5, 2019

Trump Balloon Deflated In London

                Protesters in London, England, sent up a 20-foot-tall inflatable balloon in the image of President Donald Trump as a baby…during the president’s visit to The Big Smoke. The deliberately offensive blimp, replete with diaper and safety-pin, was the brainchild of the Trump Baby Group and was guided and “guarded” by the “babysitters,” protesters who volunteered for the job.
                Apparently, the “babysitters” weren’t up to the task at hand, as a woman stabbed the blimp with a sharp object behind the House of Commons. The woman, a fan of the president, was promptly arrested for being in the possession of a pointed or bladed article. Reports say the woman stated her support for Trump immediately after puncturing the balloon and then chided the protesters, saying “Shame on you.” She added: “I think Donald Trump’s balloon is not very well. I think it’s going down rapidly for a reason.”
                A “spokesman” for the Trump Baby Group verified that a woman punctured the Trump baby replica balloon “with a sharp object,” before stating: “It’s not surprising that the far right would want to meet freedom of expression with violence,” a remark so preposterous and steeped in hypocrisy one doesn’t know whether to laugh or cry. Those on the “far” left brand anyone to the starboard side of Karl Marx as being on the “far right.” And it is they who prevent conservatives from speaking on campuses, shout down those with whom they disagree, routinely snatch “MAGA” hats from their owners, and generally act like entitled thugs. Progressives demand the “right” to kill real babies, but are upset at balloon “violence?” It is illustrative that yet another conservative or Trump supporter was hit with a milkshake as he interacted with anti-Trump protesters during the protest. This form of assault on conservative politicians and/or Trump backers has become common, a “thing” as the youth say.
                In a rare pushback to student punks and leftist agitators, this woman was literally there when the balloon went up…ready to deflate it, and the mood of the maddening crowd of demented demonstrators. So be it.
                I don’t mean to burst their bubble, but what kind of a society tolerates abortion on demand, but arrests people for possession of a “pointed or bladed” article? Does this include a pencil? A box-fan?
                How about a pointed remark? Is that okay? From the left, probably. From the right, not so much.

Tuesday, June 4, 2019

Students Schooled On Socialism

                Campus Reform, a website dedicated to college idiocy, went to Florida International University to find out if students with higher GPAs would be okay if they were forced to “spread the wealth” and give some of their GPA points to students with lower GPAs. As the site’s report read, “despite the overwhelming number of students who initially said they’d support socialist policies, few agreed to go along with such a plan.”
                One student said, “I’m all for helping, but I wouldn’t give some of my points…I’ve lost a lot of sleep so I don’t know if that would be fair.” It wouldn’t be fair to that student to have to share? What about the students in need of a better GPA? Is that attitude fair to them? Another student remarked, “I like, study all day for my grades.” And the people who pay taxes, like, work all day for their money, moron.
                Let’s make everything socialist and see how society functions. Or doesn’t. Oh wait, I guess we can see that now in Venezuela. And throughout all of recorded history. But maybe all of recorded history is just a fluke. Surely AOC and company know how to make Marxism magic, make socialism soar! I’m betting the 183rd time is the charm.
                So, let’s Make Socialism Fun Again! Let’s flood the country with MSFA hats! We can use the red stock left over from unmade MAGA hats (due to decreased demand from those who are afraid to wear them in public, lest they be beaten to a bloody, red pulp). No waste!
   How about socialist Bingo? Wouldn’t it be awesome to see someone who is close to winning themselves give a B-4 or an O-69 to someone else in need? Isn’t it time for a really hot guy or gal to hand off one of their dates to a plain Jane or a nerdy Ned? Could there be a better feeling than when your favorite football team is driving down the field for a go-ahead touchdown, and it deliberately turns the ball over to the other squad to spare its players from feeling unworthy?
               In reality, socialism and its close cousins Marxism-Leninism and Communism, are the biggest disincentives to work, wealth, innovation and excellence in human history. Therefore, as Margaret Thatcher said, “Eventually you run out of other people’s money.”
               But, what the hell, the next time you roll a 7 or 11 at the craps table in Vegas, look around for the biggest loser you can find and turn your winnings over to him or her.
               If the likes of Alexandria Occasional-Cortex have their way, it won’t be long until we all crap out, anyway.

Monday, June 3, 2019


                If progressives and Democratic-Socialists, aided and abetted by their cheerleaders/lapdogs in the Media-Academia-Entertainment Complex, eventually succeed in their obsessive two-year quest to overturn the results of the 2016 U.S. presidential election, the formerly American formerly democratic-republic will have to come up with a new way to decide national elections. One that is less likely to be hi-jacked, voided or reversed by big-government, statist ideologues from the Swampland bent on preserving their control over the dull, yet unruly rubes populating fly-over country.
                Perhaps the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates could play a winner-take-the-office game of Yahtzee. “Full House! That gives me the White House!” When voters and the Electoral College are cast aside like used diapers what difference would it make? They could throw darts, play Chutes ’N’ Ladders, Monopoly, or mud-wrestle (which is essentially what politicians do today anyway, sans the actual mud) to see who becomes Commander-in-Chief.  
                Other viable options may include a version of Monty Python’s “Blackmail” game, in which extremely embarrassing videos from each candidate’s past are posted on social media platforms. The candidate who goes the longest without demanding they be taken down becomes president of the United States, as that person would have demonstrated the ability to handle the slings and arrows of outrageous media coverage!
   Alternately, a “best lie” contest could be conducted, wherein candidates soberly attest to the veracity of obviously preposterous statements, such as former president Obama’s iconic, “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor” gem of 2009. A three-judge panel consisting of Bill and Hillary Clinton and a rotating third member would decide who told the biggest whopper best and most earnestly, and that person would be anointed the new POTUS and take office the following January. Another way of deciding who resides in “the people’s house” would be a swimsuit competition. Each prospective prez would be placed in a Speedo or bikini, as the case may be, and a three-judge panel consisting of Bill and Hillary Clinton and a rotating third member would pick the president based on their bodily aesthetics…and, of course, their answer to the question: “What does tolerance and inclusivity mean to you?”
  Still another avenue for selecting America’s leader would be a “Guess My Gender” contest. (There are at least 63 to choose from now, experts say). This method would have a Millennial of indeterminate sex/gender/origin parade before the candidates for 60 seconds, after which each candidate would have just ten seconds to correctly identify said Millennial’s chosen gender identity. The candidate who comes the closest becomes the leader of the free world.
  Finally, there is Russian Roulette. Democrats have been telling us the Russians determined the outcome of the 2016 presidential election since…the 2016 presidential election. Why not throw them a bone and let Russian Roulette decide who becomes president from here to eternity…or until a Marxist ascends the Bully Pulpit and declares one-party rule in 2025? But first, they’d have to agree to choose their own party’s nominee in the same manner. What could be more fun than watching Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, Beto O’Rourke, Elizabeth Warren, and Joe Biden pass around a Colt .45 revolver in a new version of Russian Roulette in which the chamber of the six-shooter is loaded with five bullets instead of just one. The last man or woman standing advances to take on the Republican nominee.
  Love him or hate him, if Trump is deposed, “Banana Republic” won’t just refer to an American clothing and accessories retailer. It will refer to America.


Sunday, June 2, 2019


             Marie-Claire Springham, a student from London, is receiving kudos for her efforts to allow men to overcome the despicable gender inequality of women-only breastfeeding.
 She appeared on Good Morning Britain to explain her idea for “chestfeeding.” Springham said that when a couple discovers they’re expecting, they would “sign up to basically a pre-natal course” and receive a kit containing a nine-month supply of a drug called progestin, which is meant to “stimulate the production of milk-producing glands” in the males who take it. An additional drug regimen would supposedly then result in lactation. The kit would also include a pump and compression vest.
Said kit doesn’t actually exist yet-- it’s only theoretical for now—and the student hasn’t yet tried out her ideas on any men. However, this didn’t prevent her from winning a Meaning-Centred Design Award for 2018. Julie Jenson Bennett, the award’s jury chair, stated of Springham’s soon-to-be invention: “The chestfeeding kit deserves particular attention because it challenges the fundamental meanings of male and female, father and mother, parent and child. At a time when we increasingly use hormones, medication and technology to change the life options available to us, Marie-Claire’s design concept goes right to the heart of our taboos.”  
            We certainly are intent on challenging the fundamental meaning of everything, lately. And we are clearly exploring the heart of our taboos.
I’m sure some women would like to get a man pregnant in the future, too. We are striving to have men become women and women become men. Maybe a family’s children can become the parents and vice-versa. Wouldn’t that be cool? We already have had a father “become” the mother and the mother “become” the father.
What was God thinking, anyway, making us so binary and giving us such limited life options? 
The only thing we haven’t questioned is where the road down which we are so rapidly travelling may lead us.

We’ve unquestionably led ourselves into temptation.

Perhaps we can still be delivered from evil.

But probably not from insanity.

(Also see my post of 8/14/18: "Chestfeeding")

Saturday, June 1, 2019

Buttigieg And Husband May Be Heterosexuals, Professor Says

                I honestly thought perhaps I’d seen it all. I doubted anything could be dumber, more preposterous and more inane than what has transpired lately in our crazy cultural wars. (A war that is largely being fought by one side—the left).
                I stand corrected.
                Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg and his husband Chasten were recently featured on the cover of TIME magazine. If one is of a progressive bent, one might well be expected to approve of the picture, even take…PRIDE!... in it. There could be two “first gentlemen” in the White House for the first time ever! YAY!! Right?
                Apparently not.
                Greta LaFleur, a Yale University assistant professor of Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies recently made the following comments on the Los Angeles Review of Books website, as reported by The College Fix: “At first glance, one sees the anonymity of Norman Rockwell’s mid-century America: the house-unparticular porch, the timelessness of the couple form. Take another look and the pillars supporting the unseen roof of the porch start to resemble the Ionic columns of the White House, the background becoming a gesture or a promise of possibility. You begin to see the image in the aggregate, and the couple, girded by a backdrop literally overwhelmed by the household, becomes the timelessness of the entire image. This photo also tells a profound story about whiteness, above and beyond the fact that almost everything in this photo is, itself, white. It’s such an all-consuming aesthetic, here, that it practically resists interpretation; like the generically familiar (to me, a white person) porch, the cover photo claims that there’s nothing to see, because we already know what it is. We have seen this image, we know this couple, ‘we’ should be comfortable.”
   That is one hell of an interpretative statement by someone who claims the image of which she speaks…and speaks…and speaks, “practically resists interpretation.”
   Ms. LaFleur (the flower!) then averred that “whiteness can be—and regularly is—weaponized by white people.” How? Am I “weaponizing my whiteness” by going to Olive Garden for a “Never Ending Pasta Bowl?” If so, aren’t black folks “weaponizing their blackness” by going to IHOP for All-You-Can-Eat pancakes?
                  But, happily, she still wasn’t done. She went on to say: “If certain forms of structural power such as whiteness have become detachable from white people, perhaps this is true of other forms of structural power as well. This is not to make a ‘like race’ argument (although this is of course such a problematic staple of so much theorizing in sexuality studies) so much as it is to make a ‘like power’ argument; and the argument I am making, of course, is that this photo is about a lot of things, but one of its defining features is its heterosexuality. It’s offering us the promise that our first gay first family might actually be a straight one. Queer theorists and queer communities have coined terms like homonormativity to describe this effect, but this recent Time cover left me wondering: is this homonormativity? Or just heterosexuality? If straight people can be queer — as so many of them seem so impatient to explain to me — can’t gay people also be straight?”
  Wait a minute, if whiteness is detachable from white people, is it possible for a person of color to be whiter than a white person? And she thinks one of the “defining features” of the photo of two openly gay men is its heterosexuality? “Our first gay first family might actually be a straight one?” This is all so confusing. Has it come to this: two gay men, fully clothed, standing outside a garden variety home in the Heartland aren’t sufficiently queer? A few short years ago gay marriage was universally illegal, and now its blasé? Not nearly outré enough for the times?
 Buttigieg is a name that fairly begs for some good natured pun-play, butt but I almost feel too sorry for him to engage in the exercise. At the rate things are progressing, he may not stand a chance to be elected if, say, a bisexual, mulatto pans-gendered communist joins the fray.
 (President Trump even said he’s fine with Buttigieg’s sexuality. In fact, he said: “it’s great!” If the media and Democrats reacted the same way to this as they have to everything else Trump has ever said, thought, or believed, they would now be denouncing homosexuality in over-the-top terms).

Friday, May 31, 2019

"Progressives" Traditionally, Conventionally Pushing The Radical Envelope

                The left lives to “push the envelope.” To Hollywood, the media and Big Academia, there are apparently at least five main envelopes in need of pushing. LGBTQ rights, abortion rights, disdain for the rubes in fly-over country, attacking free-market capitalism and hatred of Christianity.
                Surely there must be many more envelopes out there to be pushed. Why cling to this conservative, traditional, hum-drum, ho-hum, narrow-minded, envelope-pushing? Why get bogged down in the status quo? Why push the same envelopes all your peers are pushing? Why push the very same tired envelopes your parents did? Why not be original, cutting-edge, even outré? Dare I say courageous?
                If people truly wanted to be bold, progressive and counter-cultural they could stand up and testify that climate change is a hoax at worst and unproven at best. So what if they were deemed a “Denier” or threatened with prison time. If they wished to take a stand that matters, they could say that radical Islam is a world-wide problem. If they wanted to “stick it to the man,” they could state that men who identify as women…aren’t necessarily women. If they wanted to “keep it real” they would aver that abortion isn’t “women’s health care,” but simply infanticide aided by a slick public-relations campaign. Dilly, dilly!
                If they wished to be seen as genuine, they could admit that, though Trump has veracity and character issues, he is a saint compared to either Bill or Hillary Clinton. And many others on the left. If they wanted to appear learned and open-minded, they could declare—unequivocally—that, on balance, the Founders were the Greatest Generation…and built the world anew, setting it on a course of previously unknown prosperity and liberation. They could refute the notion that The Church of Satan and Judeo-Christianity have equal claim to the public square.
                They could admit the obvious and say that capitalism has historically been more beneficial to society than Socialism. The cheekiest among them could even say that the West has nothing to apologize for and in fact is responsible for most of the advances from which this world has benefitted.
                To which I’d add: “Hey, hey, ho, ho…Western culture doesn’t blow.” (If you’re honest, this you’d know).

Thursday, May 30, 2019


            There is irrational…and then there is clinically insane. And then there is bat-shit crazy. And then there is Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). AOC, who is demonstrably not A-OK, recently tweeted: “To the GOP extremists trying to invoke the unborn’ to jail people for abortion: Where are you on climate change? OH right, you want to burn fossil fuels til there’s hell on Earth. If they were truthful about their motives, they’d be consistent in their principles. They’re not.”
 She added: “What angers me about the GOP’s attempts to turn the United States into a far-right Christian theocracy is how dishonest they are about it. At least be forthright about your desire to subvert and dismantle our democracy into a creepy theological order led by a mad king.”
Still not satisfied with the preposterousness of her statements, she blathered: “The GOP doesn’t care about babies at all - especially brown, black, or poor ones. If they did, they’d: - cosponsor the Green New Deal or at LEAST have a real climate plan - guarantee healthcare so ALL can get prenatal care - not stand for the death+caging of babies on our border.”
AOC thinks it is “extreme” to protect the life of babies still in the womb? (Or maybe those outside the womb for a relatively short period of time). And she is convinced Republicans are fervently hoping to create a “hell on Earth?” Is she unaware that Republicans dwell here, too? She’s a big fan of abortion on demand but is worried about the health of babies coming across our border? Her idea of “prenatal care” is to guarantee the “right” of the mother to extinguish the life of her baby, yet she is aghast that Republicans won’t back a bill that would necessarily impoverish countless millions and condemn untold numbers of children to needless hardship? What was that about being consistent in one’s principles, Rep. Occasional-Cortex?
If the GOP is attempting to turn the U.S. into a “far-right Christian theocracy” headed by a “creepy theological order led by a mad king,” it has failed miserably. A lower percentage of Americans than ever before identify as Christians. Gay marriage is nearly universally accepted. The transgendered are winning legal battles and claiming bathroom rights around the fruited plain. Christian churches are being shuttered as Mosques are being built. Etc., etc.
AOC’s staggering ignorance and/or hypocrisy shines brightest in her remark that “The GOP doesn’t care about babies at all - especially brown, black, or poor ones.” Yes, that is clear from its attempts to keep them from being exterminated. The vast majority of babies aborted are “persons of color,” from poor parents, females, or some combination of these.
It is the Democratic Party that doesn’t care about babies at all—especially the brown, black or poor ones. If they did, they’d cosponsor anti-abortion legislation or at least have a real abortion plan.

Wednesday, May 29, 2019

Mueller Press Conference Perfidy

Special Counsel Robert Mueller held a surprise press conference Wednesday morning, May 29th, in which he deliberately and premeditatedly fanned the flames of the impeachment fire already burning in the Democrat-media-academia complex.
Mueller spoke of “multiple, systematic efforts to interfere in our election,” on the part of Russians, deserving of “the attention of every American.” He stated: “And at the same time, as the grand jury alleged in a separate indictment, a private Russian entity engaged in a social media operation where Russian citizens posed as Americans in order to interfere in the election. These indictments contain allegations.”
He added: “The indictments allege, and the other activities in our report describe, efforts to interfere in our political system. They needed to be investigated and understood. That is among the reasons why the Department of Justice established our office.”
Yet, he said of the Russians who he averred had interfered in our elections, “We are not commenting on the guilt or innocence of any specific defendant. Every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in court.” That certainly was very American of him, given that that standard has been the basis for our justice system for centuries now.
Mueller made sure to pat himself and his fellow investigators on the back, saying: “And beyond Department policy, we were guided by principles of fairness,” while noting, “The matters we investigated were of paramount importance.”
Since a sitting president cannot be charged with a federal crime, he admitted that “It would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of an actual charge.” 
Then he said, of the collusion investigation as a whole, “It was critical for us to obtain full and accurate information from every person we questioned.” (Yes, all 500 of them).
And then, in an act of staggering hypocrisy, hubris and asininity, he remarked: “As set forth in our report, after that investigation, if we had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said that. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the President did commit a crime.” What the hell happened to “presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in court.” Does Mueller think that applies to Russian hackers but not to the president of the United States? What about those “principles of fairness?” And what about it being “unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution?”
Mueller ended by refusing to take questions and stating, “That is the office's final position and we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals about the President.” After two years of desperately yet fruitlessly searching for something that would take down Trump, two years of not commenting, he delivers a baseless cheap shot that contradicts his own words and then says he will never comment on this matter again? There is a term for this type of man: jackass.
“If we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said that?” By that standard everyone in the world would be suspect. There isn’t one person alive of whom any investigators could definitively say, “We have clear and incontrovertible proof that this person has never committed a crime.” It is hard to prove a negative. Russel’s Teapot and all of that.
Mueller ended his investigation—and communication thereof—by essentially (potentially?) accusing President Trump of a crime, though he has no proof......something he said he would not do.
That is slander, itself a crime.
If there is to be anything like justice, we must investigate the investigators. 

Tuesday, May 28, 2019

Real Headline Or...?

                Perhaps you, too, have noticed the increased zaniness of current events in recent years. Maybe you have thought to yourself: “What is going on?” Well, dear readers, let’s see how attentive you’ve been and how attuned you are to the insanity that is today’s news. Below are a dozen headlines. Your mission…should you choose to accept it…is to determine which ones are real and which ones are not. So, welcome to “Real Headline or My Headline.” Answers are provided at the bottom of this post.

--“Scammers Use Facebook To Trick People Into Thinking They Accidentally Donated Money To ISIS”

--“Opinion: Kristen Waggoner: Babies Aren’t Cancer”
--“MSNBC, CNN Agree: ‘Have To Admit, Trump has helped economy’”
--“Lock ‘Em Up!: Joy Behar Thinks All Republicans Should Be In Jail”
--“Gillibrand suggests Trump’s only accomplishments are ‘hurting people,’ only motivation is ‘cruelty.’”
--"LGBTQ Spokesperson Says, ‘Now That Gay Marriage Is Legal, Transgender Rights Have Been Won, And Pride Parades Are Everywhere…We’re Just Gonna Call It A Day’”
--“Hillary Clinton now blames ‘Macedonia’ for election loss, in bizarre onstage interview”
--"Joy Behar: ‘Some of my friends are Republicans’”
--”German government backtracks on Jewish skullcap warning, urges everyone to wear it ahead of anti-Israel protest”
--“Trump Says, ‘I Am Quitting Twitter,’ Regrets Past Outbursts”
--“Obama Admits He And Hillary Were Behind Trump Russian Collusion Hoax, ‘Just Wanted To See How Far It Would Go’”

3)      Not Real
6)      Not Real
8)      Not Real
11)   Not Real (Obviously)
12)   Not Real (Obviously, even though it is likely the truth)