Conservatives welcome. Libs & RINOs go away. It's all of you destroying the society and conservatives must no longer appease you!
A fish rots from the head. So does Disney.
If you want to understand why Disney and its properties, from ESPN to Marvel, obsessively push left-wing politics while alienating their own customers, there are worse places to start than with Disney’s Darth Vader, CEO Bob Iger.
via CanadaFreePress.Com
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/11sy9G3
As part of their next software update for their devices, Apple is going to add emojis for a Muslim women in a hijab, and “gender neutral” persons.
Does this make sense?
From a business standpoint, it would make sense to have a Muslim woman, since there are a billion Muslims in the world, and they represent a market that Apple could make greater inroads into.
Emojis appeasing the transgender LGBT lobby makes less sense. There are very few people in the general population who identify as some kind of “non-binary” gender, and many parts of the world are hostile to these designations. Apple’s attempt to mollify LGBT advocates appears to be motivated more by a social justice agenda from the company rather than a business decision responding to market demands.
Apple plans to add them to the iOS 11.1 update, which will roll out to Apple products this month.
via TheBlaze.com – Stories
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.theblaze.com
On Thursday, CNN continued the mainstream media’s long tradition of demonstrating a complete misunderstanding of guns when it displayed a graphic of an AR-15, and tried to explain how a bump stock worked.
While CNN congressional correspondent, Phil Mattingly, talked with The Situation Room host Wolf Blitzer about what possible actions Congress could take to regulate bump stocks, a graphic displayed at the top of the screen showed an AR-15 with a suppressor – which is a heavily regulated National Firearms Act (NFA) item – along with a grenade launcher – civilians cannot purchase grenades.
The graphic did not, however, include a bump stock on the gun, which was the entire point of the graphic and the segment. Instead, the graphic showed the gun sliding back-and-forth into the butt stock.
WATCH:
CNN continued to use the completely inaccurate graphic across their network in multiple segments.
Take a look:
via Daily Wire
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/1TJbF1r
The Washington Free Beacon watched so the rest of us didn’t have to. Ace reporter Conor Beck got the goods, and headlined them thusly: “Late-Night Comedy Shows Ignore Harvey Weinstein Sexual Harassment Allegations
Hosts pounced on similar allegations against Bill O’Reilly, Roger Ailes.”
Beck pointed out:
Late-night comedy hosts on Thursday steered clear of the newly revealed bombshell allegations that Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein sexually harassed several women over decades.
The New York Times report, which claimed that Weinstein has been accused of sexual harassing at least eight women, including actresses Ashley Judd and Rose McGowan, over the span of nearly 30 years, broke at around 2 p.m. EST on Thursday, only a few hours before late-night shows typically tape. But those same shows regularly provide same-day jokes on news regarding President Donald Trump that has broken well after then, the Daily Beast reported.
Late-night comedians Jimmy Kimmel, Jimmy Fallon, Seth Meyers, James Corden, and Stephen Colbert all avoided any mention of the allegations against Weinstein, both in their monologues and interviews with movie-star guests. The Daily Beast noted that Corden and Fallon have appeared in Weinstein films.
The only late-night comedian to make a joke about Weinstein was “The Daily Show” host Trevor Noah, who briefly mentioned the Hollywood producer in passing.
Here at NewsBusters Scott Whitlock was on the case as well, headlining: “Not Speaking Truth to Power: ‘Brave’ Late Night Hosts Skip Weinstein Sex Scandal.”
Interesting.
Move on to something former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer caught when reading The Washington Post. He tweeted out the following:
Spicer posted a photo of The Post’s front page and, lo and behold, not a word about Weinstein.
Okay, full stop. What we are seeing with the late night crew — and one suspects that now caught-out they will eventually get around to Weinstein — is exactly the liberal mind-set at work.
Scott Whitlock has it exactly right. These would-be speakers-of-truth-to-power whether on late-night TV or at The Washington Post suddenly find their tongue tied when the man at the center of a sexual harassment scandal is a powerful Hollywood liberal.
<<< Please support MRC’s NewsBusters team with a tax-deductible contribution today. >>>
It’s okay to go after Roger Ailes and Bill O’Reilly when accusations of sexual harassment surface — but one of the most powerful men in Hollywood? A liberal? Not a prayer that the funny guys would subject somebody to repeated sharp ridicule and lectures when that somebody has the power put one of them in a movie or could affect which movie stars show up to sit and chat on their couches. To borrow from Jimmy Kimmel, Harvey Weinstein has the balls of late night liberal comedians in a money clip.
In the case of The Post? They have number of online articles, but the physical paper’s omission is significant. Here was a headline for one of their stories: “The rise and fall of Harvey Weinstein, the Hollywood mogul accused of serial sexual harassment.”
Question? What is the name of the city in The Post’s formal title? That’s right. It’s The Washington Post. You know — Washington as in Washington, DC, the nation’s capital. The city where there are more politicians per square foot than actors in Hollywood and that’s saying something. And in that entire Washington Post story on Harvey Weinstein what is not mentioned?
That would be the abundantly obvious and easily documentable fact that Harvey Weinstein wasn’t just a powerful liberal in Hollywood — he was one powerful and very rich donor to Democrats. Not a word in that Post story, not a one — in a paper that spends oodles of money on printer and cyber ink covering politicians — that liberal Democrats were repeated recipients of Weinstein’s financial generosity. From Hillary Clinton to Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Elizabeth Warren, Chuck Schumer and more. Many, many more.
Then, literally minutes after Rush Limbaugh was off the air on Friday, freshly blasting Democrats for being complicit in Weinstein’s antics by ignoring what clearly a lot of people in Hollywood well knew, The Post comes back to report a new story: “Schumer and at least six other Democrats to send Weinstein donations to women’s charities.”
And The Post, in this belated story that now focused on the mad rush to give back Weinstein money included this sentence at the end of the piece: “The megaproducer’s pattern of allegedly inappropriate behavior has been described as an open secret in the film industry.”
Got that? Weinstein’s rampant behavior was an “open secret” in the film industry. Yet somehow Weinstein was a repeated visitor in both the Clinton and Obama White House. Without a peep from either then-First Ladies Hillary Clinton or Michelle Obama. Imagine that.
What we have here in this silence from the late-night liberals and the belated coverage of Weinstein and his donor relationship from The Post is merely the tip of the liberal media iceberg that lurks underneath every liberal media outlet. Indeed, it is some sort of curious miracle that the Weinstein story was investigated by The New York Times in the first place.
The hard fact is that if you were Roger Ailes or Bill O’Reilly or Fox News or any conservative talk radio host — much less President Trump — there is one standard. If you are Harvey Weinstein or Bill and Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama or any other liberal accused of sexual harassment or documented as taking money from an allegedly primo harasser or entertaining same in the White House then well, just one big no big deal.
The silence of the late night liberals and the Johnny-come-lately approach of The Post’s coverage says everything one needs to know about how the liberal media works no matter the topic.
Shocker? No.
via NewsBusters – Exposing Liberal Media Bias
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/2v7eUfC
Good news everyone! Matt Taibbi, author and political columnist for Rolling Stone, is back at it this week with a blisteringly ignorant take on our nation’s gun laws. You may remember Mr. Taibbi from his 2005 essay, “The 52 Funniest Things About The Upcoming Death of the Pope,” which he claimed was written “in the waning hours of a Vicodin haze.” Or perhaps you’re more familiar with one of his other repugnant works, like “Andrew Breitbart: Death of a Douche,” which he wrote in the immediate aftermath of Breitbart’s tragic passing (and which I refuse to link to here). Or maybe you’re unfamiliar with his writings but recall his violent outburst in 2010, when he accosted journalist James Verini, throwing hot coffee on him after Verini insulted his writing.
In the end it doesn’t really matter what you remember him for. What’s clear is that this isn’t someone we should look to for moral guidance.
His latest entry, “The Gun Lobby Is Down To Its Last, Unconvincing Excuses,” is exactly what you would expect from someone so morally deficient and detached from the American public. Throughout his article, he misrepresents mass shooting data, asserts that Republican politicians don’t really believe in the Second Amendment (they just want to stuff their pockets with blood money), openly bashes the NRA and its members, accuses Antonin Scalia of racism, makes the same tired “it’s only for a militia” argument, and naively suggests that an armed populace provides no deterrent against government tyranny.
Most of his dusty arguments have already been addressed and soundly defeated, so it’s his last point, that the threat of tyranny isn’t a reason to maintain an armed citizenry, that I focus on here.
In his assessment of those he disparagingly describes as “heroic tyrannophobes,” Taibbi suggests that hypocrisy undercuts the argument to bear arms. While George W. Bush was increasing surveillance after 9/11 (the irony in omitting that Obama increased surveillance even further is overwhelming), he claims protesting gun enthusiasts were nowhere to be found. Taibbi, with his misguided understanding, seems surprised that we gun-toting, bitter-clingers didn’t rise up and try to overthrow the government while liberties were being stripped.
And this shows the critical error in his understanding of our argument and the general purpose of the Second Amendment: Taibbi seems to think that Americans want AR-15s so that we can someday take on the U.S. Military in glorious battle, but that’s just not the case. We Americans don’t want to keep our guns so we can overthrow the government; we want to keep our guns so we never have to.
In the United States, we have just under 1.3 million full-time military personnel. We have another 800,000 in the reserves. Nationwide, our police forces have approximately 1.1 million members. Knowing that, ask yourself, what government, in its right mind, would attempt imposition of complete tyranny or authoritarianism on a population of 320 million people, bearing 300 million firearms, with only 3.2 million armed personnel? I’d hazard a guess that if it did ever come to blows, most uniformed citizens would stand with the public anyway. Government leaders understand this. They fear their populations, and they should.
Is it troubling that Bush and Obama supported legislation that permits the NSA to collect data on American citizens? Yes, absolutely, but we have democratic powers as citizens that enable us to elect legislators. The public is, by proxy, capable of reigning in government surveillance if that’s what we the people choose to do. But are law-abiding gun-owners prepared to overthrow a government, whose founding principles they believe in, over the NSA? Not a chance; theoretical tyranny is not the same as actual tyranny. Disarmed populations may not immediately experience governmental oppression in all cases, but the vulnerability of the citizenry is unquestionably amplified.
As long as Americans are armed en masse, there will never be an Adolph Hitler here. Nor will there ever be a Mao Zedong or a Joseph Stalin. But take 300 million guns (in itself, an impossible task) out of the hands of law-abiding Americans, and the government may one day no longer serve at the pleasure of the people. Matt Taibbi, who I doubt has ever shot a gun, can give his rights up if he’d like, but he cannot force me to do the same.
via Daily Wire
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/1TJbF1r
The ongoing SJW battles over transgenderism took another sharp turn this week when Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a memo on the subject dealing with anti-discrimination lawsuits. During the Obama administration, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act was expanded by executive fiat to blur the word “sex” (as in male or female) into the more recent, trendy, but wholly unscientific idea of “gender” as meaning something different. This led to questions of whether or not workplace discrimination protections apply to so-called transgender individuals.
Now, with a new memo having been issued, the federal government’s position in any pending or future lawsuits has changed. Sex and gender will once again refer to a person’s actual, biological gender, not how they feel about it. This will likely impact some pending cases which the DoJ had previously taken on, siding with plaintiffs who claimed discrimination on that basis. Unfortunately, what this really hammers home is precisely how inefficient it is to try to specifically define the rights of American citizens broken down into various pigeonholes of classification. (NY Times)
Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Thursday ordered the Justice Department to take the position in court cases that transgender people are not protected by a civil rights law that bans workplace discrimination based on sex. The move was the Trump administration’s latest contraction of the Obama-era approach to civil rights enforcement.
The dispute centers on how to interpret employment protections based on “sex” in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In December 2014, the attorney general at the time, Eric H. Holder Jr., ordered the Justice Department to view “sex” as encompassing gender identity, extending protections to transgender people.
But in a two-page memo to all United States attorneys and other top officials, Mr. Sessions revoked Mr. Holder’s directive. The word “sex” in the statute, Mr. Sessions said, means only “biologically male or female,” so the Civil Rights Act does not ban “discrimination based on gender identity per se, including transgender status.”
This decision is going to impact the relatively dry, legal issues swirling around this controversy and questions of discrimination, but hopefully will also further open a desperately needed discussion of the underlying problem with this particular SJW battle.
On the legal front, cases such as the one where Eric Holder took the side of a transgender employee claiming discrimination will see the Justice Department doing a 180 degree turn. That’s going to cause plenty of confusion, but as I alluded to above, it also highlights the inherent problems with the way the Civil Rights Act has been interpreted and applied over the years. A more basic, fair, and constitutionally sustainable approach to discrimination lawsuits would be to say that no employer can discriminate against any employee. Hiring and firing decisions should be made on a basis of the performance of the worker and the business needs of the company. Bias toward workers based on other, reductive factors has no place in the company.
Unfortunately, by trying to define which Americans are protected and which are not, we’ve created lists of politically preferred groups. The obvious outcome is that some people will inevitably be left off the list, and now you’re in for a fight. Think of it as a parallel case of Black Jobs Matter versus All Jobs Matter.
Going beyond the legal realm, we are seeing other instances of people and institutions pushing back against the underlying, unscientific idea that gender is something one can simply change on a whim or define in exotic fashions beyond the boring old XX vs. XY chromosomal structure. The Pope even got in on the action recently, declaring that, “this ‘‘utopia of the neutral’’ jeopardizes the creation of new life.”
Google was called out on social media this week for branding a video from Prager University as being “dangerous” because it deals with questions of gender in a frank and scientific fashion. If you haven’t seen that video, I highly recommend you click through and watch it. (It’s under five minutes.) PragerU offers some much needed perspective, but they also highlight the story of transgender fighter Fallon Fox, a man who has been allowed to fight in MMA matches as a woman.
This is one of those stories you probably didn’t see much on CNN or in the Washington Post because it blows up the gender confusion narrative. For some time now I’ve been asking questions about what happens if men claiming to be women are allowed to compete in sports such as track and field, cycling or tennis. (You’ll be hearing more about the tennis question here at Hot Air later today, by the way.) But once we get into the MMA octagon, the debate is cranked up to a massively more dangerous level.
Fallon Fox was allowed to enter the arena and fight Tamikka Brents, an actual woman and accomplished fighter. Fox quickly “won a TKO,” in the process fracturing the woman’s skull and sending her to the ER where she had seven staples put in her head. Brents initially objected to the horrific beating she took at the hands of a man but was quickly silenced by the PC police and recanted her objections. As the narrator for Prager University put it, in the old days, if a man beat a woman badly enough to put her in the hospital he’d have gone to jail. Now he can be paid for it.
This battle in the “social justice” field is far from over and the outcome is uncertain. But with the DoJ jumping into the action, perhaps there’s hope after all.
The post New DoJ transgender discrimination memo highlights how messy the Civil Rights Act is appeared first on Hot Air.
via Hot Air
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://hotair.com
Attorney General Jeff Sessions has issued a 25 page memo giving all federal agencies guidelines to an executive order President Donald Trump signed in May, promoting efforts to promote religious liberty.
The legal guidelines dramatically broaden the scope of what the government will define as “religious freedom” to include health care, civil rights, and even disaster relief.
The new Justice Department guidance takes a muscular view of religious freedom rights, but officials said that the document is a neutral description of existing law and not an effort to weigh in on particular policy issues.
“Religious liberty is not merely a right to personal religious beliefs or even to worship in a sacred place,” Sessions wrote. “Except in the narrowest of circumstances, no one should be forced to choose between living out his or her faith and complying with the law. Therefore, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, religious observance should be reasonably accommodated in all government activity, including employment, contracting and programming.”
The legal analysis was unveiled as the Trump administration is considering or pursuing a series of moves that could broaden the rights of the religious, including allowing churches more latitude to enter political campaigns without jeopardizing their tax exemptions and permitting religious institutions to receive more types of disaster relief funds.
The administration also announced Friday that businesses of all sizes with religious or moral objections to providing contraception coverage or other preventative services under Obamacare will be allowed to opt out of that requirement.
Officials have also debated whether to revoke or alter a policy banning federal contractors from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. Trump opted against such a move in May, but LGBT rights advocates remain on guard against such a step.
White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders defended the administration’s announcements Friday as clearly in line with Supreme Court precedent.
“The president believes that the freedom to practice one’s faith is a fundamental right in this country — and I think all of us do — and that’s all that today was about. Our federal government should always protect that right, and as long as Donald Trump is president he will,” Sanders said. “The Supreme Court’s already made clear what their position is, and it supports what this administration has done.”
It should be noted that most of these exemptions involve only a small number of people and organizations. But the numbers don’t matter – something the Obama administration never understood.
On the contaceptive exemption, for example, the Obama administration tried twice to draw up guidelines that they believed would give religious organizations a “work around” for their consciences by allowing them to have insurance companies pay for contraception coverage – as if someone can “work around” their most cherished religious beliefs.
The DoJ guidelines stop that nonsense and do what should have been done at the outset of Obamacare; allow a religious exemption for the contraception mandate.
The religious exemption for those individuals and companies that don’t want to have anything to do with gay marriage is more complicated.
A Justice Department official who briefed reporters on the new legal guidance insisted that it does not amount to a license to discriminate.
“It doesn’t legalize discrimination at all,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
However, the legal memo suggests that the government’s legal authority to forbid racial discrimination may not be as strong as its authority to target other forms of discrimination, such as bias against women or LGBT individuals.
“The government may be able to meet that [legal] standard with respect to race discrimination … but may not be able to with respect to other forms of discrimination,” Sessions’ memo says.
Critics said the guidance could result in LGBT individuals, women or others facing discrimination in federal programs.
As an example, a baker may not be able to discriminate against gays who patronize his establishment, but could invoke a religious exemption if he is asked to bake a cake for a gay wedding. Much remains to be worked out, but any expansion of the concept of religious liberty after decades of this precious right being under attack, is welcome.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions has issued a 25 page memo giving all federal agencies guidelines to an executive order President Donald Trump signed in May, promoting efforts to promote religious liberty.
The legal guidelines dramatically broaden the scope of what the government will define as “religious freedom” to include health care, civil rights, and even disaster relief.
The new Justice Department guidance takes a muscular view of religious freedom rights, but officials said that the document is a neutral description of existing law and not an effort to weigh in on particular policy issues.
“Religious liberty is not merely a right to personal religious beliefs or even to worship in a sacred place,” Sessions wrote. “Except in the narrowest of circumstances, no one should be forced to choose between living out his or her faith and complying with the law. Therefore, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, religious observance should be reasonably accommodated in all government activity, including employment, contracting and programming.”
The legal analysis was unveiled as the Trump administration is considering or pursuing a series of moves that could broaden the rights of the religious, including allowing churches more latitude to enter political campaigns without jeopardizing their tax exemptions and permitting religious institutions to receive more types of disaster relief funds.
The administration also announced Friday that businesses of all sizes with religious or moral objections to providing contraception coverage or other preventative services under Obamacare will be allowed to opt out of that requirement.
Officials have also debated whether to revoke or alter a policy banning federal contractors from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. Trump opted against such a move in May, but LGBT rights advocates remain on guard against such a step.
White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders defended the administration’s announcements Friday as clearly in line with Supreme Court precedent.
“The president believes that the freedom to practice one’s faith is a fundamental right in this country — and I think all of us do — and that’s all that today was about. Our federal government should always protect that right, and as long as Donald Trump is president he will,” Sanders said. “The Supreme Court’s already made clear what their position is, and it supports what this administration has done.”
It should be noted that most of these exemptions involve only a small number of people and organizations. But the numbers don’t matter – something the Obama administration never understood.
On the contaceptive exemption, for example, the Obama administration tried twice to draw up guidelines that they believed would give religious organizations a “work around” for their consciences by allowing them to have insurance companies pay for contraception coverage – as if someone can “work around” their most cherished religious beliefs.
The DoJ guidelines stop that nonsense and do what should have been done at the outset of Obamacare; allow a religious exemption for the contraception mandate.
The religious exemption for those individuals and companies that don’t want to have anything to do with gay marriage is more complicated.
A Justice Department official who briefed reporters on the new legal guidance insisted that it does not amount to a license to discriminate.
“It doesn’t legalize discrimination at all,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
However, the legal memo suggests that the government’s legal authority to forbid racial discrimination may not be as strong as its authority to target other forms of discrimination, such as bias against women or LGBT individuals.
“The government may be able to meet that [legal] standard with respect to race discrimination … but may not be able to with respect to other forms of discrimination,” Sessions’ memo says.
Critics said the guidance could result in LGBT individuals, women or others facing discrimination in federal programs.
As an example, a baker may not be able to discriminate against gays who patronize his establishment, but could invoke a religious exemption if he is asked to bake a cake for a gay wedding. Much remains to be worked out, but any expansion of the concept of religious liberty after decades of this precious right being under attack, is welcome.
via American Thinker Blog
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/1c2jbfc
Radical anarchists are planning a nationwide campaign on Monday to deface and vandalize statues of Christopher Columbus.
Antifa is planning a coordinated campaign to attack symbols of “white supremacy” and have targeted Columbus statues as a prime example.
The NYC-based antifa group Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement (RAM) made the announcement on Thursday, September 21, calling on antifa groups nationwide to “decorate” their neighborhoods.
According to Far Left Watch, RAM is “an extremely militant group that advocates for the violent redistribution of property” and for “the abolition of gender.”
The militant group recently hosted an “Our Enemies in Blue” anti-police workshop at its branch in Brooklyn, NY.
RAM posted a video called “Against Columbus Day” on the antifa website It’s Going Down, showcasing destroyed monuments across the country and black-clad thugs strutting around menacingly to psycho synth music.
“The battles lines have been drawn and white supremacists are on notice,” the anarchists wrote in a statement on the website. “White nationalist statues are crumbling all over the US as our collective revolutionary power is growing.”
A recent poll showed that the vast majority of Americans support a holiday honoring Christopher Columbus, but RAM called Columbus Day, October 9, “one of the most vile ‘holidays’ of the year.” The group called on supporters “to take action against this day and in support of indigenous people in the US and abroad who have been victims of colonialism and genocide.”
We are calling for groups to “decorate” their neighborhoods as they see fit: put up murals, wheatpaste posters, drop a banner, etc. On October 9th put a picture of your action on social media and use the hashtags below. With these actions multiplied around the country, we will make it unequivocally clear that revolutionaries will always stand with the indigenous!
The anarchists encouraged fellow law-breakers to record and broadcast their crimes by using the hashtags #F*ckColumbusDay and #DestroyColonialism.
As antifa has already announced its illegal intentions well ahead of time, elected officials and police departments across the country should not be blindsided by the rash of vandalism that is sure to come in the next few days.
Call to Action! Deface Columbus Day
Hashtags: #FuckColumbusDay #DestryColonialism
10/9/17https://t.co/JYYZRSvCQ9 http://pic.twitter.com/5Yy98gIci4— RevAbolitionMov (@RevAbolitionist) September 21, 2017
While I’m sure the thugs are serious, I question whether Antifa has the organizational chops to pull something like this off on a nationwide basis. The group has no recognizable hierarchy or formal lines of communication. Many groups who call themselves “Antifa” do not share the same ideology or agree on tactics.
Still, it wouldn’t surprise me if other independent, self-identified Antifa groups came up with the same idea on their own, which would lead to a spate of attempts to deface the statues.
I hope that those communities that have erected statues in honor of Columbus would take this threat seriously. Even if there is no Antifa group in the area, other far left troublemakers may target the statues for similar reasons. The sad fact is, our heritage and culture are under attack as never before and those who seek to erase that history because of a simple minded understanding of our past must be stopped.
Radical anarchists are planning a nationwide campaign on Monday to deface and vandalize statues of Christopher Columbus.
Antifa is planning a coordinated campaign to attack symbols of “white supremacy” and have targeted Columbus statues as a prime example.
The NYC-based antifa group Revolutionary Abolitionist Movement (RAM) made the announcement on Thursday, September 21, calling on antifa groups nationwide to “decorate” their neighborhoods.
According to Far Left Watch, RAM is “an extremely militant group that advocates for the violent redistribution of property” and for “the abolition of gender.”
The militant group recently hosted an “Our Enemies in Blue” anti-police workshop at its branch in Brooklyn, NY.
RAM posted a video called “Against Columbus Day” on the antifa website It’s Going Down, showcasing destroyed monuments across the country and black-clad thugs strutting around menacingly to psycho synth music.
“The battles lines have been drawn and white supremacists are on notice,” the anarchists wrote in a statement on the website. “White nationalist statues are crumbling all over the US as our collective revolutionary power is growing.”
A recent poll showed that the vast majority of Americans support a holiday honoring Christopher Columbus, but RAM called Columbus Day, October 9, “one of the most vile ‘holidays’ of the year.” The group called on supporters “to take action against this day and in support of indigenous people in the US and abroad who have been victims of colonialism and genocide.”
We are calling for groups to “decorate” their neighborhoods as they see fit: put up murals, wheatpaste posters, drop a banner, etc. On October 9th put a picture of your action on social media and use the hashtags below. With these actions multiplied around the country, we will make it unequivocally clear that revolutionaries will always stand with the indigenous!
The anarchists encouraged fellow law-breakers to record and broadcast their crimes by using the hashtags #F*ckColumbusDay and #DestroyColonialism.
As antifa has already announced its illegal intentions well ahead of time, elected officials and police departments across the country should not be blindsided by the rash of vandalism that is sure to come in the next few days.
Call to Action! Deface Columbus Day
Hashtags: #FuckColumbusDay #DestryColonialism
10/9/17https://t.co/JYYZRSvCQ9 http://pic.twitter.com/5Yy98gIci4— RevAbolitionMov (@RevAbolitionist) September 21, 2017
While I’m sure the thugs are serious, I question whether Antifa has the organizational chops to pull something like this off on a nationwide basis. The group has no recognizable hierarchy or formal lines of communication. Many groups who call themselves “Antifa” do not share the same ideology or agree on tactics.
Still, it wouldn’t surprise me if other independent, self-identified Antifa groups came up with the same idea on their own, which would lead to a spate of attempts to deface the statues.
I hope that those communities that have erected statues in honor of Columbus would take this threat seriously. Even if there is no Antifa group in the area, other far left troublemakers may target the statues for similar reasons. The sad fact is, our heritage and culture are under attack as never before and those who seek to erase that history because of a simple minded understanding of our past must be stopped.
via American Thinker Blog
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/1c2jbfc
Hugh Hefner, the founder of Playboy magazine who died last month at age 91, furthered the noble cause of live and let live. In 1953, when Playboy first launched, ours was a society that not only used the power of the state to outlaw certain behaviors and beliefs, but was one with countless societal scarlet letters, countless stigmas that banished certain kinds of misfits, mostly sexual deviants, from society.
Simply put, I want to live in a country where a flaming homosexual who demands I bake his wedding cake is allowed to serve in Congress alongside a flaming Muslim who believes sodomy should be added to the long list of unhealthy behaviors prohibited by the government. Until a crime is committed, until violence is used or excused, no one in America should face banishment over their beliefs or for living life on their own terms.
Hefner’s example of living on his own terms was that of an American success story, and even if his destiny was one of godless hedonism, as my colleague Joel Pollak wrote last month, he was still the author of that destiny, a man who transformed himself from a maladroit copywriter into a maladroit publisher, and who then spent more than a half-century posing — rather awkwardly — as Ian Flemings’ idea of a pipe-smoking swinger.
Also in the plus column is Hefner’s early support of the Civil Rights movement. Like Marlon Brando and Charlton Heston, Hefner climbed on board that righteous train in the early 60s, before it was cool, and helped to make it cool. And that is no small thing.
Without a doubt, Hefner’s relentless crusade against certain pieties and prejudices removed countless scarlet letters, and that is all good … but that is only 20 percent of his legacy.
The remaining 80 percent unleashed hell.
Filled with intentional lies, Alfred Kinsey’s dual (and now debunked) reports — Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953) — told normal Americans that they were abnormal; that everyone was enjoying pre-marital sex, extra-marital sex, and homosexual sex; that America’s moralistic society was an inferno of suppression and hypocrisy; that those who saved themselves for marriage, believed in marital fidelity, and chose not to engage in loveless sex, were society’s true freaks and misfits.
This was not true. Far from it. In fact, American society today is still not as permissive as Kinsey portrayed it some 70 years ago.
Nevertheless, thanks to the demonic Kinsey and his unquestioning enablers among America’s elite, every man or woman looking to be hip; anyone looking for a reason to stop controlling their own worst attributes, now had science on their side to worship self, to pursue the empty pleasures of sexual deviancy over the fulfillment and happiness that is only possible through a moral life governed by moderation.
Hefner declared himself Kinsey’s pamphleteer, and there is no question that on the pornographic pages of Playboy, that is exactly what he was.
To begin with, by taking pornography out of the backroom and mainstreaming it into urban chic, Hefner forever altered our view of women. Before Hefner, mainstream American culture idolized and idealized women, placed them on pedestals as goddesses, never went beyond presenting them as the precious objects of our dreams (see here, here, and here).
But with the turn of a page, Hefner demolished that pedestal, stripped off the goddesses’ clothes, and spread her legs wide open. Goddesses plopped to earth as flat-out sex objects, things created only to serve man’s basest desires.
No longer did we have to better ourselves, civilize ourselves, or make ourselves worthy in order to obtain the gift of femininity, because for the price of a magazine, there it was — stark naked and staring right into our eyes; stapled for our consumption and folded into three.
In an instant, that precious gift that comes with the sacramental union between one man and one woman was cheapened into an entitlement and, worst of all, done so through a goddess’s act of self-degradation.
And that was the least of it.
Aided by the Pill, a welfare state that rewarded single-motherhood, and America’s ruling class normalizing deviancy through the unholy alchemy of “sophistication,” those acts of self-degradation flew off the pages of Playboy and into a very real sexual revolution.
In defense of Hefner’s cultural impact, the great Camille Paglia told the Hollywood Reporter last week:
Hefner reimagined the American male as a connoisseur in the continental manner, a man who enjoyed all the fine pleasures of life, including sex. Hefner brilliantly put sex into a continuum of appreciative response to jazz, to art, to ideas, to fine food … and the art of seduction[.]
This is all true, but it is only true for some, very few actually, because those like Hefner who could afford “all the fine pleasures of life” could also financially afford to paper over the emotional and physical wreckage that comes with decadence.
No matter what the system looks like, America’s Beautiful People will always survive and flourish. But Hefner was the first to come along and warp the system into one where only the Beautiful People could survive and flourish.
And so, among those who could not afford “all the pleasures of life”; who could not afford the abortions, alimony, and child support; who did not look like a Playboy Bunny; and could not surround himself with Bunnies willing to not complicate his life after a loveless encounter — among us everyday folks who actually have to look into the eyes of life’s consequences, the casualties mounted…
Divorce, broken homes, bankruptcy, generations of children raised by a single parent, sexually-transmitted diseases, addiction, AIDs, early death, loneliness, despair, guilt, spiritual ruin, and 58 million innocent children butchered in the one place they should be safest, in their own mother’s womb.
That was the analog fallout.
The digital fallout is somehow worse.
These days, one ill-considered click of your browser’s setting instantly reveals the truth, that pornography is a satanic drug, something that went from just being dirty, into something that is so unspeakably degrading towards women I dare not describe it.
Like any drug, in order to produce the desired effect, the potency must be increased and increased and increased… This means that with the hollow promise of Kardashianism, and after just a few months of living the dream as a porn queen in a meat market always looking for fresh meat, countless young women are being chewed up and spit out, their lives ruined forever by an Internet that is forever.
And those are the lucky ones, the ones who don’t try to heal a soul wounded by self-degradation with the kind of illegal drugs that can only be paid for through even more self-degradation.
On the other side of that computer screen is a generation of boys just a click away from a drug that will physically and mentally warp them into the dysfunctional freak Hefner himself eventually became — a lonely, frustrated recluse living in someone else’s decrepit home; a pathetic sex addict surrounded by a harem of living centerfolds, but one who could only perform with the aid of hardcore porn in one corner and his Bunnies pretending to have a lesbian orgy in the other.
Hefner was a media icon, a limousine leftist, the winner of countless First Amendment awards, and a warlock who manufactured a lifestyle filled with perfect cocktails, ideal stereo systems, the most comfortable leather slippers, and the prose of John Updike. But according to a number of witnesses, including late porn star Linda Lovelace, that was all a shiny veneer to cover over a hopeless degenerate who allegedly needed to see women get humped by German Shepards; a man who abandoned a wife and daughter; a man who even into his seventies slipped young women the Quaaludes he called “thigh openers.”
Yes, Hugh Hefner helped to spread freedom, but he is also a reminder of the many terrible costs of that come with freedom.
Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.
via Breitbart News
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/uktKj3
A gay coffee shop owner in Seattle decided to kick out a group of Christian anti-abortion protesters, going on an expletive laden, extremely offensive rant that was recorded and posted on Facebook.
The group, Abolish Human Abortion, appeared not to be bothering anyone. They weren’t in the shop to proselytize, or hand out literature. They just wanted a cup of coffee.
What they got was an obscene, even blasphemous rant from an unbalanced store owner.
The owner heatedly tells the Christians to leave his shop immediately in a video posted to Facebook by Abolish Human Abortion, a Christian group seeking to end the practice of abortion.
“I’m gay, you have to leave,” the owner tells the group. “This is offensive to me. I own the place. I have the right to be offended.”
The group tried to explain that they hadn’t placed any in the shop, but the owner repeatedly told them to”shut up.”
“There’s nothing you can say. This is you and I don’t want these people in this place,” the owner says. The group asks why he can’t tolerate their presence, prompting the owner to ask them if they would watch him have sex with his boyfriend.
“Can you tolerate my presence? Really? If I go get my boyfriend and f*ck him in the a** right here you’re going to tolerate that? Are you going to tolerate it?” the owner asked. “Answer my f***ing question! No, you’re going to sit right here and f***ing watch it! Leave all of you! Tell all your f*cking friends don’t come here!”
The group gets up to leave, as one woman among them says, “just know that Christ can save you from that lifestyle.”
“Yeah, I like a**. I’m not going to be saved by anything. I’d f*ck Christ in the a**. Okay? He’s hot,” he said.
In posting the video, I will quote the warning on the group’s website: “WARNING! This video includes extremely graphic, hate-filled, blasphemous language.”
Accusing people of hate by giving them a hate filled rant? There is a disconnect from reality here that appears to escape the shop owner.
In truth, this is an extreme example of what many gay activist groups have said about Christians. Refusing to grant them the legitimacy of their beliefs and equating their opposition to gays with pro-slavery sentiments is very common in the gay community.
This despicable person simply took that attitude to its logical extreme.
A gay coffee shop owner in Seattle decided to kick out a group of Christian anti-abortion protesters, going on an expletive laden, extremely offensive rant that was recorded and posted on Facebook.
The group, Abolish Human Abortion, appeared not to be bothering anyone. They weren’t in the shop to proselytize, or hand out literature. They just wanted a cup of coffee.
What they got was an obscene, even blasphemous rant from an unbalanced store owner.
The owner heatedly tells the Christians to leave his shop immediately in a video posted to Facebook by Abolish Human Abortion, a Christian group seeking to end the practice of abortion.
“I’m gay, you have to leave,” the owner tells the group. “This is offensive to me. I own the place. I have the right to be offended.”
The group tried to explain that they hadn’t placed any in the shop, but the owner repeatedly told them to”shut up.”
“There’s nothing you can say. This is you and I don’t want these people in this place,” the owner says. The group asks why he can’t tolerate their presence, prompting the owner to ask them if they would watch him have sex with his boyfriend.
“Can you tolerate my presence? Really? If I go get my boyfriend and f*ck him in the a** right here you’re going to tolerate that? Are you going to tolerate it?” the owner asked. “Answer my f***ing question! No, you’re going to sit right here and f***ing watch it! Leave all of you! Tell all your f*cking friends don’t come here!”
The group gets up to leave, as one woman among them says, “just know that Christ can save you from that lifestyle.”
“Yeah, I like a**. I’m not going to be saved by anything. I’d f*ck Christ in the a**. Okay? He’s hot,” he said.
In posting the video, I will quote the warning on the group’s website: “WARNING! This video includes extremely graphic, hate-filled, blasphemous language.”
Accusing people of hate by giving them a hate filled rant? There is a disconnect from reality here that appears to escape the shop owner.
In truth, this is an extreme example of what many gay activist groups have said about Christians. Refusing to grant them the legitimacy of their beliefs and equating their opposition to gays with pro-slavery sentiments is very common in the gay community.
This despicable person simply took that attitude to its logical extreme.
via American Thinker Blog
Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/1c2jbfc