California Issues Ban On Travel To Iowa

            Xavier Becerra, California’s Democratic Attorney General, recently banned state-funded travel to the state of Iowa in response to a new Iowa law that prohibits Medicaid from covering gender transition surgeries.

The website of the California Office of the Attorney General states that with bill AB 1887, enacted in 2016, the California Legislature determined that “California must take action to avoid supporting or financing discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people.” It also decrees: “To that end, AB 1887 prohibits a state agency, department, board, or commission from requiring any state employees, officers, or members to travel to a state that, after June 26, 2015, has enacted a law that (1) has the effect of voiding or repealing existing state or local protections against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. In addition, the law prohibits California from approving a request for state-funded or state-sponsored travel to such a state.” (Italics mine).

Incredibly, Iowa is just one of at least 11 states to which California bans state-sanctioned travel. It is one thing to refuse to discriminate on the basis of gender identity, of which there are two. Neither men nor women should be the victim or beneficiary of discriminatory laws or labor practices. Gender “expression,” however, is in no way a biological or immutable fact. In fact, it is the obverse of race or sex, in that it is totally fungible. A man can claim to be a woman, but that doesn’t make it so-- just as a “honkey” can claim to be an African-American, albeit with no basis in reality. I can claim to be a gerbil or a giraffe, but that simply does not make it so. If a woman with ovaries and a vagina says she is a he, that claim has no more veracity than if Oprah Winfrey attempted to identify as Abraham Lincoln.

When states, nations or societies begin to take these preposterous claims seriously—and sanctimoniously sanctify and sanction them—they are saying that nothing matters, truth is only in the eye of the beholder, there are no absolutes, no constants, nothing real. They are denying physical reality as well as logic and reasoning. They are stripping words—and life—of meaning.

Moreover, if every state acted as California has, the concept and practice of republicanism would be irreparably harmed. I could see Alabama banning state-sponsored travel to California because it is hostile to rednecks. Who could then blame Georgia if it prohibited travel to New York because it is insufficiently welcoming of evangelical Christians? Decent, God-fearing, pro-life states should long ago have put the kibosh on travel to those that have permissive abortion laws. And why should Montana, Wyoming, Texas or even Kentucky put up with the discriminatory—and probably unconstitutional—gun restrictions in place in Washington, D.C., Chicago, and other hotbeds of violent crime? Those states should ban government-sponsored travel to any other state or municipality that infringes on the rights of its citizens in that manner.

The Constitution and the Bill of Rights guarantee Americans freedom of speech and the right to self-defense. They do not guarantee the “right” to pick your own gender.

And the right to life is granted by the same Creator who determines one’s sex. 

California's Attorney General can ban his state's public employees from state-funded travel to other states. Ironically, if California doesn't soon dramatically change course, no one from the other 49 states will want to travel to California. 

Ms. Monopoly

                “Monopoly” is arguably the most iconic board game of all time. But, combine a game about—gasp!-- making money with the supposed income gap between men and women and you knew something had to give to appease the politically correct mob. And it has: introducing “Ms. Monopoly.” Hasbro says the new game focuses on “female empowerment,” adding that the company is changing the rules of the game so that “this time women get an advantage at the start.” (Get it)?

                In this version, the banker gives $1,900 to each female player but only $1,500 to each male participant. Females get $240 every time they pass “go,” whilst males only collect the standard $200. And, instead of stuffy old real estate, players invest in “inventions and innovations made by women, including chocolate chip cookies, bulletproof vests, solar heating, and ladies’ modern shapewear.” There are new tokens, too, including a white hat, a watch, a barbell, a glass and a jet plane. Hasbro states the white hat symbolizes Mr. Monopoly passing his top hat to his niece, whereas the watch represents the fact that it is “about time for some changes.” I’m guessing the barbell indicates that women are strong, the glass represents women’s love for wine, and the plane represents their desire to get away from the patriarchy that has so oppressed them since well-nigh the beginning of time. There are other updates, as well. For instance, rideshares replace railroads and Wi-Fi supplants water works.

                “Ms. Monopoly” went on sale late last month for the bargain price of $19.99 and can be found on the shelves of retailers across the fruited plain. It can also be ordered at Walmart.com.

                If Hasbro was really serious about its social justice warring, it would have changed its company name for the new release to Hassis. It won’t be long until many more “woke” versions of the old classic are introduced to the brave new world. “Monopoly for Socialists” is sure to arrive soon, though I think a more accurate name would be “Monopoly for Morons.” It’s only a matter of time until “LGBTQ Monopoly” arrives on the scene. Gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders will be handed far more money to start than will be given to either cis males or cis females, who will not be allowed to pass “go” until all members of the LGBTQ Community have safely gone past.

                “Ms. Monopoly” will surely trigger the release of a vast array of classic board games updated for modernity. “Ms. Scrabble” will award double letter and word points to females. “Trivial Pursuit” will allow women to only answer “entertainment” questions in the interest of fairness. (Easy, ladies, that was only a joke). “Ms. Operation” will allow girls to touch the sides of the patient while removing various organs without losing their turn.  The new “Ms. Battleship” rules will stipulate that a female only has to sink two ships to win the game if she is competing against a male. “Ms. Yahtzee” will allow girls to roll 7 dice when playing against boys, who will be required to roll just 4. Other new games aimed at females will be: “No Risk,” “No Clue,” “Candy (Ass) Land” and “Twister, the #MeToo Version.”

                I would like to see Mattel introduce an updated version of “Pictionary” requiring opposing teams to draw and guess events recently depicted in the mainstream news. This spin-off game would be called “Fictionary.” I’m also hoping Hasbro introduces a brand-new game in honor of the BDSM/Kink Community, a game perfectly suited to this progressive era. Who wouldn’t want to play “Poop Chutes and Bladders?”

Gender The New Race In Canada

            Whoa, Canada!

The Ontario Provincial Police force recently announced that it will no longer release the gender of either perpetrators or victims of crimes, so as to “be progressive in the change of times.” The OPP says it will no longer need driver’s licenses or other documentation to specify a person’s gender, as it will not be assuming gender at all. Everyone will be referred to in a gender-neutral manner. The force will use more generic terms such as “the individual,” “the accused,” or “a person of interest” to comply with its self-imposed wokeness.

A review of legislation found that the Police Services Act does not require information regarding a person’s gender to be made public. The police will retain the option to release a suspect’s gender, but even in that case the information will subsequently be expunged from news releases.

I can’t wait for news releases stating: “An individual has been accused of raping a person outside of a building in Manhattan a New York borough.”

The disease of Political-Correctness has made it harder and harder to convey accurate information. We have allowed this mania to make us pretend, obfuscate and obscure. And then pretend this is a good thing. Reality must be hidden. The truth be damned. We can’t use race to describe a criminal. Now we are dispensing with gender, as well. How can we get even vaguer and less useful? We must prohibit the release of a perpetrator’s or victim’s age, height, weight, attire and other identifying characteristics! Perhaps we can ban the assumption of species, too. But remember to use their correct pronouns!

“The being of interest in the recent rape of a highly-developed mammal outside of a building in a New York borough has pleaded not guilty by reason of ‘an unjust society made me do it.’ Xir is requesting that xir be compensated in the amount of $100 million—American-- for the ‘mental anguish a deeply unjust society has inflicted upon Xirself.’”

Rep. Rashida Tlaib Approves Of Coup, Kidnapping

At a recent town hall meeting with constituents in Michigan, Democratic Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib ran with a suggestion from an attendee that Democrats “hunt down” and forcibly remove Trump administration officials from office if they don’t comply with their wishes. Tlaib quickly stated that her fellow Democrats have already been involved in discussions pertaining to who could arrest administration officials, Trump presumably included, if they refuse to leave power in a timely manner.

The ‘Squad’ member, who called for Trump’s impeachment (“we’re gonna go in there and we’re gonna impeach the motherf**ker”) immediately after she was elected in 2018, told her audience: "This is the last caucus conversation we've had. Did you know this is really unprecedented? This is the first time we've ever had a situation like this. They're trying to figure out, no joke, is it the DC police that goes and gets them? Where do we hold them? Like, I'm not in those kinds of conversations, but I'm asking, what happens?" She added, “I will tell them they can hold all those people right here in Detroit.”

Maybe they will “hold all those people” they’ve captured at Ford Field. Sounds like there will be a lot of them. Whoever “goes and gets them” will have to figure out where to detain their hostages. Presumption of innocence? Rule of law? Due process? Trial? Don’t be quaint. Look what they did to Brett Kavanaugh, Roger Stone, Michael Cohen and Paul Manafort, for example. Today’s Democrats are fond of wee-hour raids and drive-by lynchings, aided and abetted by their accomplices in the mainstream media.

Tlaib was right about one thing: this ‘situation’ is unprecedented in America. Never before have we had one party so set on impeaching an opposition party’s president because they don’t like his personality or his policies… high crimes and misdemeanors be damned. No democratic republic can survive such treachery and treason.

Make no mistake, what Tlaib and her collaborationists are attempting isn’t an “impeachment,” it is a coup d’ état, worthy of Burkina Faso, Burundi, Sudan, Thailand, Argentina and Panama, et. al.  Can you say banana republic?

Oh well, who doesn’t like a good junta now and then?

Students: Impeach Trump...For Some Reason

                Today’s college students are not noted for their awareness of-- and intellectual competency as regards-- current events, a fact continuously made clear whenever they are interviewed regarding same. To wit, Campus Reform’s Editor-in-Chief Cabot Phillips recently visited the campus of Marymount University in Arlington, Virginia, asking students if they thought President Trump should be impeached, and, if they did, why. Turns out, every single student he interviewed did believe trump should be impeached. Also turns out, not a single one of them could cogently explain why.

                Here is a smattering of the “answers” he received:

*”Um, I’m sure there’s reasons that I don’t know of.” (Dude, I’m like sooo high).

*”Um, I don’t know if I can say any specific type of event or specific action.” (Dude, I’m like sooo high).

*”Um, well, I’m not that into politics. I don’t really pay that much attention to it.” (I play video games 13-hours a day).

*”Um, honestly, well, I think it’s a lot of, um, just how unpopular he is.” (Great point, Einstein)!

Here are additional reasons for impeaching Trump Phillips would have heard had he interviewed even more young scholars:

*”Um, he hates women and minorities…and clean air and water and, well, the Earth.”

*”Well, when the Moon is in the Seventh House and Jupiter aligns with Mars, then peace will guide the planets and love will steer the stars! So, I say…impeach the motherf**ker!!”

*”I mean, we have to, like, impeach him for his ‘thigh crimes and pissy demeanor,’ right?”

*”I don’t like his policies.”

*”I don’t like him.”

*”I don’t like his hair.”

*”A Democrat probably won’t win the upcoming election unless we impeach him. So, right or wrong, to save the democracy we have to do it.”

Female Walrus Sinks Russian Naval Vessel

                The Altai, a tugboat attached to the Russian navy’s Northern Fleet, recently transported researchers from the Russian Geographical Society into waters near Franz Josef Land in the Arctic Sea. The Altai sent out a smaller inflatable landing craft to bring the researchers to the shores of Wilczek Island. However, before the boat could reach the beach, it was attacked-- and sunk-- by a female walrus. A Russian Geographical Society press release claimed that the walrus was likely “fearing for her cubs,” though the cow may just not be a fan of the Russian navy.

                The press release noted: “The boat sank, but a tragedy was avoided thanks to the prompt action by the squad leader. All landing participants safely reached the shore.” The Russian navy confirmed the “attack,” though it predictably omitted the part about the boat sinking. The Red (faced) Navy’s Northern Fleet wrote: “During the landing at Cape Heller, a group of researchers had to flee from a female walrus who attacked an expedition boat when protecting her cub. Serious troubles were avoided thanks to the clear and well-coordinated actions of the Northern Fleet servicemen, who were able to take the boat away from the animals without harming them.”

                I’m surprised the release didn’t read: “Dastardly surprise attack by U.S.-trained imperialist walrus was repulsed by valiant efforts of glorious Russian navy!”

    In related news, two Russian destroyers and a submarine sank to the bottom of the Barents Sea recently when remoras aggressively attached themselves to the ship’s hulls.

Time Sheds "MAGA" From Magazine Label

October 7, 2019

News Services

(New York City)-- President Trump’s 2016 campaign slogan was “Make America Great Again.” “MAGA” caps (and merchandise) have long-since been deemed controversial—or worse—by many progressives, who see them as barely-disguised dog-whistles for misogynists and white-supremacists.

                The “MAGA” acronym has become so toxic in the eyes of the particularly politically correct that certain magazines are now rebranding themselves as simply “zines,” or almanacs, compendiums, and the like. There are webzines, e-zines, and even “paper-zines,” but fewer and fewer magazines. Time was the first publication to eschew the “magazine” designation.

    A spokesperson for the publication formerly known as Time Magazine said, on the condition of anonymity, “we just felt that the time was right to jettison the first four letters of the second word of our publication’s erstwhile name. We are leaving ‘Time Magazine’ in the past—where it belongs—and introducing ‘Time Zine.’ The spokesperson added, “The first half of ‘magazine’ had become problematic at best, offensive and abusive at worst, so we decided to shit-can it. Plus, state legislators have introduced a bill mandating the removal of ‘maga’ from the covers of all magazines  zines manufactured and/or sold here. It was, simply put, Time we ‘woke’ up, so to speak.”

  Since Time’s proclamation, Newsweek, The New Yorker, Mother Jones, The Nation, Vox, The Atlantic, Wired, Vox and Foreign Affairs have all pledged to liberate themselves from the “maga” albatross around their publication’s figurative necks.

  Several candidates for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination applauded Time’s bold, progressive leadership. Elizabeth Warren, now the presumptive front-runner, told reporters: “’MAGA,’ in any form, has no place in today’s world. It speaks of the patriarchy, the Klu Klux Klan, and evangelical Christianity. It fairly reeks of misogyny, homophobia and trans hatred. I’m so glad Time showed us all the way forward.” 

"Illegal" Now Illegal In New York

                Incredibly, the term “illegal”… is now illegal in New York City, at least when it is used to refer to an “illegal alien,” a term that is also now illegal, in a less than positive light. Doing so would be considered “unlawful discrimination” according to the New York City Commission on Human Rights. (Apparently, it is also illegal to use the term “illegal discrimination”).

                Those who violate the law would be subject to fines up to $250,000. Would those who refer to the actions of those who break this law as “illegal” be subject to the same penalties and fines? Hmm? Inquiring minds want to know.

                The NYCCHR released 29 pages of new, politically-correct guidelines recently, guidelines which also include prohibitions against discriminatory behavior towards “someone because of their accent, English proficiency, or use of another language.” Or threatening to call ICE on someone. In other words, threatening to call ICE on an illegal alien undocumented immigrant would be illegal. Cough up the quarter million dollar fine, Beelzebub.

                New York’s Deputy Mayor Phil Thompson released a statement saying in part: “This new legal enforcement guidance will help ensure that no New Yorker is discriminated against based on their immigration status.” Bravo! We can’t afford to discriminate against someone just because they broke the law! Where would we as a society be if we did that?

                I don’t think this new guidance goes far enough. I think terms like “unlawful,” “criminal,” “illegitimate,” and “unauthorized” should be verboten, as well.

                Progressives like to say that “No human being is illegal.” We can choose to engage in their non-sequitur fest and say that no human being is immoral, either, but this is just wrong. While no human being can be described in their totality by an adjective, there are plenty of illegals in America. And an ever-growing number of folks who are immoral. (For proof, look no further than the Democratic Party).

                Then there is this definition of illegal:

                “Illegal (noun): a person present in a country without official authorization.”

                This is, apparently, a concept alien to progressives.

Angry Young Swedish Girl The New Savior?

                As the world knows all too well by now, Greta Thunberg is an angry young Swedish girl who lives to hector adults about climate change. The preternaturally annoying 16-year-old activist recently harangued the world at the United Nations Climate Action Summit, bellowing at the assembled world leaders. “How dare you!” she shouted. “You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words.” Little Miss Thunberg choked back tears as she exclaimed: “People are suffering. People are dying. Entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction, and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of economic growth.” She added, vaguely and creepily, “We will be watching you.”

                Little Miss Can’t Be Wrong is apparently unaware that economic growth, driven by greater personal freedom and capitalist, free market systems, is the very reason for the dramatic decrease in poverty around the world, and the concurrent increase in life expectancy.

                To be fair to her, the real tragedy is that leftist adults are using her like a Shake ’n Bake bag to advance their own interests while appearing oh-so-woke. When progressives aren’t trying to abort kids, they love using them to further their agendas, whether they involve climate change, cigarette smoking, illegal immigration, pollution, transgenderism, or a host of other topics. This is, literally and figuratively, child abuse-- and should be dealt with as such. Harshly.

                Unfortunately, the opposite is occurring. The Loony Left is showering praise on Greta, and those like her, while successfully—and completely—intimidating those who may disagree with them. 

                Incredibly, as the Washington Examiner reported, “The Church of Sweden declared teen star climate activist Greta Thunberg to be an appointed successor to Jesus Christ in a December 1, 2018, tweet that resurfaced in the wake of her speech before the United Nations.” A few Catholic missionaries have compared her to the Virgin Mary. Still others see her as a child prophet and praise her “moral clarity.”

All of which is proof of the moral confusion, Biblical ignorance and debased nature of the modern West.

In truth, Greta is a child of entitlement, a spoiled brat who is ironically unaware that she is being exploited for profit by those around her.

New Poll Shows Young People Believe Humans Could Be Extinct Within Ten Years

                 A new Rasmussen poll shows that half of voters under 35-years-old believe it is at least somewhat likely that humanity will cease to exist within ten years, due to climate change. This despite the fact that non-viable tissue masses like Al Gore and Michael Moore have been predicting global catastrophe/planetary immolation for well over 20 years now. What the survey really reveals is the extent of the brainwashing being conducted in our schools-- by, of, and for—angry, entitled, anti-capitalist radicals bent on the destruction of Western civilization.

                According to the same poll, 53 percent of those between the ages of 18 and 34 believe combatting climate change will require more effort and sacrifice than fighting World War II. (Of course, 53% of those 18-34 think World War II is the title of a video game released in 2014). This dovetails nicely—by design—with progressives push for socialism and socialist policies to rule the day. In fact, a staggering 28% of the young people surveyed said capitalism must be eliminated in order to prevent an environmental apocalypse.

                Climate activists-- and now mainstream Democratic politicians, as well as the mainstream media-- have increasingly suggested that it is problematic if not immoral to have children given the world-wide climate crisis. And, sure enough, 33% of those 18-34, says the survey, favor limits on the number of children a government “allows” a family to have. Nothing frightening about that, is there? It should be government’s, i.e. other people’s, decision as to how many kids you can have, right? What was that about “my body, my choice?”

                Hell, maybe the child limit should be made retroactive. You have five kids in your family, but your government now says you can have only two? No problem! Sorry Bob, Melissa and Alice, but it’s assisted suicide (after-birth abortion) for the three of you.

                There are limits on the number of fish anglers can keep, why not on the number of kids they can have? Moreover, I think there should be slot limits on babies, too. If they are between 18 and 21 inches at the time of birth you are allowed to keep them, if not, throw them back…so to speak.

                Remember, the government knows what’s best for the fish, your kids……and you.