Good Morning!
(Although it was reportedly a rough morning for the former Eleanor Coulouris 67 years ago_)
Or so I was told.
1. It’s NOT okay to be white? CNN Commentator Angela Rye, formerly executive director of the Congressional Black Caucus, told CNN audiences that “white, liberal women” were the cause of the pressure on iconic Michigan Representative John Conyers to resign from Congress. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi would have never called for Conyers to resign if it weren’t the other “white, liberal women” pressuring her to do so. Rye, who earlier in the week said that a racist double standards was causing Conyers to be pressured to resign while white Democratic Senator Al Franken was not, said,
“I think Nancy Pelosi made a commitment to the members of the Congressional Black Caucus that she would not call for Conyers resignation before due process was allowed to take place. Now she’s being faced with the pressure of white, liberal women for the most part who have told her she needs to say something different.”
Rye echoes the reported sentiment of Congressional Black Caucus member Rep. James Clyburn, who noted that all of Conyers’ accusers were white. Doubtlessly agreeing with her is Mrs, Conyers, who told reporters staking out Conyers’ home yesterday to “Go and stalk white people’s houses.”
Observations:
- Race-baiting and using racism as an excuse for any criticism of black politicians is still the reflex response of far too many Democrats, in part because they face no consequences for doing so, and because any whites who object are tarred as white supremacists.
- Until the news media and progressives have the integrity to treat this tactic for what it is, and as exactly as intolerable as white racism, the nation will continue to split hard along racial lines. I guess that’s what the Left wants.
- How can CNN justify continuing to employ a “contributor” like Rye—it has some others, too—who is a stone-cold racist?
- How can anyone who abhors racism in all its forms continue to patronize an intentionally racial division-promoting news source that does employ someone like Rye?
- Here, for people like Rye—you know, stupid people—are some reasons Al Franken’s situation is distinguishable from that of Conyers: he is thirty years younger and shouldn’t have retired about a decade ago anyway; he, unlike Conyers, hasn’t flatly denied all of the allegations against him as they keep on coming; a Senator resigning is a bigger deal than a Representative resigning; and Nancy Pelosi doesn’t oversee Senate Democrats.
Also there are no reports of Franken habitually meeting with female staffers without his pants on. It’s small thing—well, not that small—but still…
2. No, really, it isn’t OK...In related news,Texas State University student journalist Rudy Martinez wrote an article entitled “Your DNA Is An Abomination”—referring to white DNA, of course—for The University Star, the University of Texas student publication. The piece also advocated the death of whites, which is unpleasantly close to calling for them to be killed. If you think I’m going to point out that any student who wrote this about blacks in a student newspaper would be quickly disciplined, while the newspaper editor responsible for publishing such vile material was hounded of campus, you’re right. If the University of Texas administrators had any integrity, common sense or guts, it would, this is what would happen. At least the president of Texas State, Denise M. Trauth, said that “The column’s central theme was abhorrent and is contrary to the core values of inclusion and unity that our Bobcat students, faculty, and staff hold dear.” That’s nice. Why is Texas State graduating racists? From the column:
“Ontologically speaking, white death will mean liberation for all. Accept this death as the first step toward defining yourself as something other than the oppressor. Until then, remember this: I hate you because you shouldn’t exist. You are both the dominant apparatus on the planet and the void in which all other cultures, upon meeting you, die.”
Denise Cervantes, The University Star’s editor-in-chief, pulled the column and apologized, saying “We acknowledge that the column could have been clearer in its message and that it has caused hurt within our campus community. We apologize and hope that we can move forward to a place of productive dialogue on ways to bring our community together.”
Oh, I think it was very clear in its message.
3. “They’re not sending us their best people…” Remember Kate Steinle, the woman who was shot dead in San Francisco by an illegal Mexican immigrant days after Donald Trump announced his candidacy with his infamous statement that illegal immigrants from Mexico included rapists and murderers? The shooter, Jose Ines Garcia Zarate also seemed to fit Trump’s “racist” description because he had been deported five times, always returning to the City by the Bay because he left his heart there, and also because it doesn’t believe in enforcing the immigration laws.
Zarate admitted that he had shot Steinle. His defense lawyer argued, however, that the second-degree murder charge against him couldn’t be proven, because Zarate claimed the gun he was holding went off by accident. (It appears that there was quite a bit of evidence supporting this.) The “Oopsie! My bad!” defense worked, in part because the prosecution over-charged : a jury acquitted him. It looks like the gun offense will send him to prison for a while, whereupon he will be deported, and then Zarate will return because those little cable cars climb half-way to the stars, and San Francisco will again welcome him with open arms.
4. Let’s not forget, this creep was once appointed to an important job at the White House…Tufts University had invited alum Anthony Scaramucci to speak at an event—that’s bad enough—but after he threatened to sue the student paper for defamation over a negative article written about him, the event has been postponed, I hope permanently. The article, written by 26-year-old Tufts grad student Camilo Caballero, argued that Scaramucci should be removed from the Tufts’ Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy advisory board, because he is an “irresponsible, inconsistent, [and] an unethical opportunist” who “sold his soul in contradiction to his own purported beliefs” and will “diminish the values” of Tufts by remaining on the board.
That sounds about right. Let me turn over the podium to Ken White, the steely-eyed foe of all those who try to stifle free expression by threatening spurious lawsuits:
[Scaramucci’s threat] — made through Scaramucci’s counsel, Sam Lieberman of Sadis & Goldberg LLP — is every bit as blustery and frivolous as the players and circumstances would suggest….Scaramucci’s letter is vexatious, meritless, dishonest, and thuggish. A decent lawyer would not draft it and a decent man would not have it sent on his behalf. It represents the growing trend of the wealthy leveraging a broken legal system to suppress criticism. It is entirely consistent with Scaramucci’s past conduct as a vain, bumbling lout, and inconsistent with his attempts to rehabilitate himself. For shame.
Bingo.
__________________
Sources: Vice, Boston Globe, The College Fix.
Ethics Alarms 
Jack, I found this in my email this morning and think you’ll like it. Non-partisan, juicy ethics issue and it fits with your three circles.
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc1713344?af=R&rss=currentIssue&
Very interesting! My thought process would’ve run the same way: “Honor the statement-wait, what if it’s out-dated, what if some jerk knocked them out and put the tattoo on while they were unconscious?”
Silly student: “You are both the dominant apparatus on the planet and the void in which all other cultures, upon meeting you, die.”
There’s a point to be learned within the ignorance: it’s the modern world and modern culture that rode roughshod over the traditional world, and race was incidental. Ireland’s culture was one of the early casualties, and the Irish are about as white as anyone.
There’s a bizarre claim I’ve seen used to counter your point about the Irish- essentially, that groups such as Irish and Italians (in the US, at least) were once seen as “Ethnic” and therefore victimized by white racists. It was not until they gave up on their culture sufficiently that they were “allowed” to be white.
For those of you playing along at home, yes, this is an insanely dishonest point- it shifts the goal posts so any oppressed people can be defined as “not white” until such time as they gain parity, when their definition changes to “white” so they can be accused of racism.
And lest you think I just heard one lunatic putting this forward, consider that George Zimmerman magically became the fabled “white Hispanic” when it was necessary to make him racist without damaging the “racism is only a white people thing” narrative.
My students, who are mostly Hispanic, were stumped the other day during a schoolwide survey when they saw that there was no “Hispanic/Latino” option under “race,” and shocked when I told them that technically falls under the racial classification of “white,” at least according to the government’s standard. They don’t see themselves as white, and they don’t think most other people do either.
That is likely to change as Hispanics become a majority, though.
There are many stupid things about Rudy Martinez’s hate tract, but perhaps the stupidest is that he’s a college student who still believes race is based on “DNA.”
Look at a photo of Rudy Martinez sometime. If he thinks “white DNA” is an abomination, I’ve got some sour news for him: he appears to have a pretty high percentage of “white DNA”.
He also stated in an interview for the local news here in Austin that he doesn’t “think that colored people can be racist”. The evidence is mounting that he might be a really dumb person.
Well, yes. Though “white DNA” isn’t really a thing.
I understand the predominant academic view of racism is that it is prejudice + power. I disagree with this definition (I even wrote a paper explaining why in a Sociology of Race class, and got an A) but even if I agreed with it, Martinez’s words would still obviously be prejudice, and prejudice is still obviously wrong.
I’m assuming the parenthetical means birthday wishes are in order. Happy Birthday Action Jackson.
As you appear to have, I’ve come to believe our birthdays should be primarily about our mothers rather than us.
“[B]irthdays should be primarily about our mothers rather than us.”
A hearty “A-WOMAN” to that! Happy Birthday, Jack! Dang! I lost a bet with myself. You’re older than me, after all (I am NOT, EVER, gonna state my age!). Well, you seem younger – so it must be because you live more ethically, hence you live well. I’ll probably never catch up with you. (That would be good, for you, and for us all.)
Jack’s a year older than I am. He has the energy of five mere mortals our age. Amazing.
#3 the jury would have convicted if the prosecution had more thoroughly demonstrated that Zarate did not use Steinle’s preferred pronoun.
#3: Listening to a local talk show host who is also a practicing attorney and somewhat knowledgeable about firearms, what the prosecution failed to do was to demonstrate how the gun in question could not have gone off accidentally as claimed by the defense. It was apparently conceded that the fatal bullet was a richocet off the pavement, which probably would have precluded the issue of premeditation required for a first degree murder conviction. But, under the notion that an individual is presumed to intend the natural and probable consequences of his or her acts, pulling the trigger on a firearm (which was necessary for the firearm in question to discharge) would certainly have given rise to enough evidence to sustain some kind of negligent homicide. I understand that the jury had a lot of questions about the firearm itself. The prosecution, therefore, did not do its job in educating the jury as to the impossibility of the gun discharging by accident.
Even if the gun did accidentally discharge…is playing with your gun in a crowed place criminal negligence?
Absolutely.
Right. I thought so but I’m not a lawyer…so then I have No idea why he wasn’t charged with involuntary manslaughter. To believe he found the gun and stepped on it and it went off is insane to me. I think He was playing around with his gun and it went off…maybe shooting at seals maybe not…
Doesn’t killing someone while in the act of breaking another law automatically get treated as 1st degree murder?
Would this illegal immigrant have been breaking any other laws at the time he killed Steinle?
People who cross the border without permission commit a misdemeanor, can’t use that to charge felony murder.
People who enter legally but don’t leave when they’re supposed to are committing a civil violation, again can’t turn that into felony murder.
In any case, you’re talking about someone getting killed during the commission of a crime, not long after, and not unrelated. No honest judge would go for it.
I’m pretty sure that’s right.
Thanks!
I mean… That sounds right, but that’s also probably not the most pertinent law being broken.
If it’s illegal for a person to be in America, it’s almost certainly the case that it’s illegal to posses the firearm he fired… And it’s especially obvious in this case abacus that’s why he’s serving time. I’m not an expert in gun legislation in America, but is a foreign national acquiring a firearm only a misdemeanor?
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN§ionNum=189.
That’s California’s felony murder statute.
So…. Just to unpack this, Tex’s original question was:
“Doesn’t killing someone while in the act of breaking another law automatically get treated as 1st degree murder? Would this illegal immigrant have been breaking any other laws at the time he killed Steinle?”
Your answer was:
“People who cross the border without permission commit a misdemeanor, can’t use that to charge felony murder. People who enter legally but don’t leave when they’re supposed to are committing a civil violation, again can’t turn that into felony murder.
In any case, you’re talking about someone getting killed during the commission of a crime, not long after, and not unrelated. No honest judge would go for it.
My question was:
“If it’s illegal for a person to be in America, it’s almost certainly the case that it’s illegal to posses the firearm he fired… And it’s especially obvious in this case abacus that’s why he’s serving time. I’m not an expert in gun legislation in America, but is a foreign national acquiring a firearm only a misdemeanor?”
And you quoted the murder statute.
My confusion here is whether the murder statute doesn’t allow first degree murder charges for deaths occurring during the commission of other crimes, or not. This is, ideally, a yes or no question…. If the answer is “no” then I find your response that being an illegal is only a misdemeanor confusing. If the answer is “yes”, then is a foreign national possessing a gun not a crime?
The first reply was based on general knowledge of how felony murder laws work in answer to what tex was asking. Your question got more specific and so I looked up the text of the law.
So is the answer “I don’t know”? Because that’s cool, I don’t know either, but that doesn’t really answer the question of whether deaths occurring during the commission of other crimes are considered per se murder or not.
I answered the question with a link to the law. It lists which other crimes make the death a murder.
you can look up sections 206,286,288 288a and 289 as easily as I can.
This specific foreign national possessing a gun probably was a crime though not one I see listed in the statute.
Foreign nationals, generally speaking, can legally obtain firearms.
Foreign, legal residents can purchase a firearm just like anyone else, unless there are other disqualifying issues. This illegal was also a convicted felon, and as such was violating the law by possessing a gun, the minute he picked it up.
Being a felon in possession of a firearm is a felony. Being an illegal immigrant in possession of a firearm is also felony. Having a stolen police officer’s gun isn’t that good either.
Would love to see him spending 10 years in San Quentin. The laws, as I read them, don’t seem to get you to felony murder. He can only be charged under the laws they have.
Each of the the two offenses I listed above carry 10 year prison sentences. The first one can be over 15 years if the person has multiple felonies. No need for murder a murder conviction. He should be doing 20 years on the gun charges.
I’m pretty upset that illegal immigrant wasn’t held accountable for her death.
My question is: is playing with a gun in public criminal negligence? He claimed he found the gun and picked it up and then it went off….why anyone would believe that is beyond me but supposedly the jury didn’t know he was a felon.
It seems that the lawyers didn’t try criminal negligence, and overcharged by going straight to murder. Same thing happened with Zimmerman.
The jury would have to have known he was a convicted felon if they convicted him of possessing the firearm as a felon. That offense carries mandatory time in Virginia.
I certainly hope the excerpt from the San Francisco Examiner’s article was not what his attorney presented to the jury because it is incredibly misleading in many places. First off, the gun is a SA/DA firearm. It fires in double-action mode first, meaning the 10 lb trigger pull before you get the single action trigger pull of 4.4 lbs. You don’t just get the SA light pull when you start, you have to fire the gun or manually cock the hammer. The decocker and the warning to use it instead of thumbing down the hammer are standard across many firearms. A 4.4 lb trigger pull in single action is not a ‘hair trigger’. The standard Glock 19 has a trigger pull of ~ 5lbs FOR THE FIRST SHOT, as opposed the the Sig’s 10 lbs. Most of my firearms have a single action pull weight of 2-4.5 lbs from the factory. The NYPD has required double action only for awhile, which causes its own problem. This decision wasn’t because the Sig was especially dangerous, though. You can see modifications to Glocks as well.
http://www.vickerstactical.com/trigger-pull-weight.html
What they didn’t really explain (strangely) is that the Sig does have a defect that can allow it to fire if you drop hard and just right.
1- Whoa Nellie; White Lefty Women in the cross-hairs of a Lefty-on-Lefty circular firing squad? The Humanity!
3- This I find strange, a lower double standard of proof exists for those of “White” Hispanic extraction, am I right?
In addition to being a murdering, POS lowlife blight, Zarate meets that description; what gives?
2. A responsible student paper never would have published that. The apology is terrible. Students should pressure both Martinez and Cervantes to step down. I am wary about the university making them step down as that may have troubling 1a implications, but if anything would justify it, it’s students using school resources to call for the deaths of their classmates.
Off-topic, but I must talk about this.
Earlier this month CNN International reported on a new modern-day slave trade happening in Libya.
Shortly after, Trump lambasted CNN International in a tweet and said it spread fake news worldwide.
Now Libyan media is using Trump’s claim as propaganda to spread denialism about the slave trade in their country.
These are the consequences of the president’s attempts to discredit his own country’s press. While this site has rightly documented the many failings of the media, it is wrong to ignore the important work that outlets like CNN still do. There have been unfair media attacks on Donald Trump, but he also calls true stories “fake news” when they make him look bad. The president should have taken the high road and not created an intentionally adversarial relationship with the media. He should not have called entire news organizations “fake news,” thus discrediting legitimate news stories. He should pay attention when media outlets he despises break important stories that his administration should be looking into. He should not be giving enemies of freedom their propaganda for them.
Chris wrote, “Earlier this month CNN International reported on a new modern-day slave trade happening in Libya. Shortly after, Trump lambasted CNN International in a tweet and said it spread fake news worldwide.”
Correlation does not equal causation. Present the facts that show that Trump actually called the story your are referencing “fake news”.
Chris wrote, “There have been unfair media attacks on Donald Trump, but he also calls true stories “fake news” when they make him look bad.”
Present the facts that show that Trump actually called the story your are referencing “fake news”.
Lastly; do you know for a fact that the CNN story is in fact true? I actually don’t know.
I did not say, nor did I imply, that Trump called this specific story fake news. As I explained, calling the whole of CNN fake news helps discredit legitimate and important news stories such as this one.
Chris wrote, “I did not say, nor did I imply, that Trump called this specific story fake news.”
Nonsense! That Chris is intellectually dishonest claim; of course you stating that “Earlier this month CNN International reported on a new modern-day slave trade happening in Libya. Shortly after, Trump lambasted CNN International in a tweet and said it spread fake news worldwide.” is an implication that Trump called this specific story fake news. Next time be truly honest and state all the facts and the implication won’t be implied.
I agree that things Trump says can have world wide implications just like you are trying to show here.
Are you going to answer my last question?
You’re right; my phrasing implied that Trump’s tweet was in response to the slavery story. My mistake.
Are you going to answer my last question?
Sure, as soon as you answer my question about whether sapient aliens should have rights.
Chris wrote, “Sure, as soon as you answer my question about whether sapient aliens should have rights.”
That sir is the sign of a trolling asshole. You can take all your faux implications in that deflection and shove them all straight up your ass.
“Sure, as soon as you answer my question about whether sapient aliens should have rights.”
Irrelevant.
Extending human-like rights to mythical aliens that have human-enough interactions sheds no light on the ethics of protecting unborn babies who will reach the standard you claim confers rights if they are left alone and not killed by their mothers…
It does, since you and Z have both previously said that fetuses should have rights because they are human. If you accept that we should extend rights to sapient aliens, you must concede the “human” standard isn’t very good.
But let’s not derail this thread further—you can respond in the abortion thread.
No, there is no “must concede”. This is a total non-sequitur.
Damit texagg04, don’t justify this trolling assholes deflection by actually responding to it, it fuels his fire to intentionally troll. If he want’s to continue this ignorant discussion about his alien rights rationalization then he should do it over where he started the ignorant rationalization to begin with.
EC was right to call you out on your projection. You are consistently the most hostile and deflecting commenter here.
Chris wrote, “EC was right to call you out on your projection.”
What the hell are you talking about now?
Chris wrote, “You are consistently the most hostile and deflecting commenter here.”
Deflecting, really? Do you even know what that word means in context to writing and replying to comments? I think not.
But since you brought up the topic of “consistently”; you are the commenter that consistently misrepresents others because of your own lack of comprehension of the written word.
Whatcha wanna bet that CNN and others will attack Trump for someone in Libya unethically using Trumps statements like this but CNN and others won’t go to bat for Trump in Libya to say that Trump didn’t imply that the slavery story was false.
Oops, I guess that was kinda saying the same thing that Jack said below. I shoulda read his comment first.
Yup.
Getting involved in that matter was just irresponsible.
However, if the news media persists in holding itself up as trustworthy when it isn’t (and it isn’t), then allowing that deception on the public to continue is also irresponsible. Sadly, the President is doing necessary public service by hammering away, although again, this wasn’t the place to do it. The news media is either objective, competent and honest, or itisn’t. It can’t say, “Well, we were accurate and fair HERE”…trust doesn’t work that way. A witness on the stand in a trial who is shown to have lied will have the current testimony devalued.
The news media undermines its credibility in all respects, every day. Boy, would it have been great if Obama and the Democrats pointed out that the news media was breaching its duty by not giving him criticism and scrutiny he deserved—that would have made him an Ethics Hero of the Century. But Trump, as Lindsay Graham shocked CNN by saying, is the constant victim of bad journalism, so small wonder he keeps pulling the mask off.
In the end, the news media undermines its own credibility.
Ok, but he’s also constant victim of *good* journalism. Ethics estoppel applies; if Trump is going to call CNN fake news when it tells the truth about him, he doesn’t get credit for calling them fake news when they lie about him. He can’t effectively “pull the mask off” anyone else when he himself is constantly lying.
It doesn’t matter Chris… Trust is based on an ongoing, consistent level of comfort. If we don’t have confidence that the news media will consistently churn out accurate information, then the trust is broken, and the kernels of truth you’re able to dig out of the pile of shit are just red herrings.
Trump’s “Fake News” rhetoric wouldn’t have gotten traction if the media hadn’t so thoroughly debased itself. You aren’t saying “CNN is Trustworthy.”, you’re saying “Well, they sometimes aren’t completely full of shit.” That’s not a great platform from which to lament someone calling them full of shit.
Would it have been great had Trump been a little more presidential? Constantly… But not in this case. This is a public service. Smug liberals have been far too complacent in their smug self satisfaction, they NEEDED this, and ideally they would have taken the warning shot over the bow and cleaned house, but at with so many other bastions of smug liberal self assurance, they failed utterly to self inspect and instead went on the defensive.
*Trump* is the reason that no one trusts the media in the same way that the spark is what causes the stick of dynamite to explode.
No, it doesn’t. A lawyer who is only honest most of the time gets disbarred. Check out the Ethics Accounting rationalization.
A lawyer who is only honest most of the time gets disbarred.
But I’m not saying that no one should criticize CNN for being dishonest and untrustworthy. I’m saying that Trump is not the person who should be doing so.
He’s the only person who can do so, since the news media won’t.
But it’s neither effective nor ethical. It’s unethical because his motives aren’t pure. He doesn’t care about the media being honest, he cares about them telling him what he wants to hear. He retweets conspiracy sites and fake videos, for God’s sake. He calls negative stories fake news even when they are true. For these reasons, it is ineffective, because he has no credibility with at least half the country. This means that instead of motivating the media to do better, he is merely creating more division.
A competent and honest president who was treated as harshly by the media as Trump is could probably be an effective and ethical messenger at pointing out fake news. Trump is not that president.
You’re gonna LOVE the post I just put up!
“Earlier this month CNN International reported on a new modern-day slave trade happening in Libya.”
That is pretty fucking horrific!
“African migrants being sold as slaves by Libyan human traffickers ‘have their organs harvested, bodies mutilated and roasted like kebabs’ claims Nigerian ex-minister.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5127881/Africans-sold-slaves-Libya-organs-harvested.html
Can you even fathom???
Whaddya bet the toothless, thumb-twiddling U.N. is more concerned with trying to shake down richer countries for Climate Reparations?
Shades of Rwanda?
#2 Rudy Martinez is a truly disgusting human being, his racist promotion of “white” genocide should be considered a real threat in the same way that some KKK members threats should be considered real. Allow these kind of people any kind of real power and watch out!
For the record, Texas State University, located in San Marcos, Texas and the University of Texas in Austin, Texas are two different entities…though both have become about as liberal as you can get.
I have a suggestion for student journalist Martinez, and frankly, for the rest of the people on campuses throughout the country that want safe spaces and all this other stuff: Let’s go back to segregated schools and colleges and universities! If you don’t want white people around, let’s have you have your own separate but equal schools and colleges and universities. Let’s go back to the future. Let’s for get about Brown v. Board and return to what, 1953? We can have black universities and Mexican universities and white universities.Or maybe people of color can go back to historically black colleges. Heck, let’s create racially separate states. We can all relocate among the states to segregated states and cities. Businesses will be allowed to serve only certain races of their owner’s identity. That’ll solve Mr. Martinez’s problem!
You miss the point, OB: they want us dead, and ALL the suddenly ‘unowned’ loot for themselves.
This is what my formerly non political friends and family are picking up on: they see riots, they see no justice for progressives who commit crimes, and they hear that progressives want whites dead, or at least to be slaves. This is why they voted for ANYONE other than Hillary, and thus: Trump.
How can CNN justify continuing to employ a “contributor” like Rye—it has some others, too—who is a stone-cold racist?
Guess you missed this item, Jack. This is a new Diversity rule all organizations, businesses and professions are expected to follow. Or die. Or something: Minimum ratio of 2:1 . . . Race (restricted to 1 Caucasian); Religion (restricted to1 practicing Christian); Age (per decade, from 10-100); Disability (mental and physical: individuals’ preferred access and environment supplied); Political party (restricted to 1 Republican; Voting history preferably Democrat-to-Left); Education (affirmative action enrollment preferred; diploma/degree not required); Sex as declared, (restricted to 1 male); Gender with pronoun preferences (restricted to 1 straight); illegal aliens (unlimited, unquestioned, translators available). All decision-making and media outlets will be policed by anti-white, anti-male progressive feminists.
Welcome to Insanity.
Happy Birthday Jack. Have a good one.
2. [YAWN] Predictable – no real consequences for anyone who is responsible for the stupid anti-white (what is “white,” anyway?) hate screed – just an isolated gag on the author, who is now beyond famous and who will likely go down in (future) history as a “founder of a great and overdue movement” – what the hell, I’ll even help its followers, stooges and tools name it:
“The Reconquista On Speed Movement.”
(¡Arriba, arriba! ¡Ándale, ándale!)
https://star.txstate.edu/2017/11/30/a-message-from-the-editorial-board/
I want to hunt down that Martinez creep for some of HIS DNA.
Rudy Martinez’s ideas seem familiar.
I could have sworn I read rumors about a country in central Europe that, about eighty or so years ago, adopted values similar to that of Martinez.
Is there any truth to these rumors? Did anything bad happen as a result?
I’ll have to check that. Can’t imagine which one you’re thinking of…
Happy birthday, Jack.
Happy birthday!
Thanks, Chris!
http://www.ajc.com/news/national/waffle-house-customer-cooks-his-own-meal-after-finding-staff-sleeping/EaUxndlkwTYsyMQ1DufABI/amp.html
Congratulations on one more lap around the sun!
You’ve clocked 39.128 billion miles around that big ball of fire.
Hope it was memorable and with family and friends.