Tuesday, November 26, 2024
On Munchausen-by-Proxy and "Trans-kids"
Continue reading ...
On "Karens" and "Service Animals"
1) I'd go even further than Walsh on the issue of morons bringing their animals where animals don't belong -- I'd confiscate the animals and "put them down";
Last year, as I was entering a "farm and fleet" type store, some self-centered idiot was bringing his dog into the store. Or, to be more precise, the dog was *dragging* the fellow toward the door. I don't recall the breed, but it was one of those ugly ones which are disproportionately in the news. Anyway, a few minutes later, the dog had pissed all over the floor. The owner at least had the (uncommon for his type) decency to stand there until it was cleaned, lest someone not notice it and slip.2) There are at least two types of (generally white) women commonly being called "Karens":
2a) Obnoxious and self-centered women who are demanding that the world revolve around themselves;
2b) Women who are trying to confront/correct the behavior of obnoxious and self-centered people who are demanding that the world revolve around themselves, who then falsely call the woman a "Karen".
4) Walsh is correct that "Karen" was a racial slur invented by (jealous) black (women) to mock white women. But, so what? It *also* identifies a recognizable personality-type, much like "Chad/Tyrone" and "Shaniqua" do.
5) On the ADA being mostly a piece of garbage -- it is, indeed. Like *all* such laws, it necessarily creates opportunities for graft and/or scam, and the abuses of such a law *always* quickly overwhelm the few cases the law was intended to rectify. And, of course, it being the nature of bureaucracy, the scope of the law most continually expand.
Matt Walsh Simps For Karens?! (2024/11/25)
Continue reading ...
Thursday, November 21, 2024
Congresscritters and 'Women's Spaces'
Is it ironic that Congresscritter Nancy Mace is/was freaking out about the possibility of trans-Congresscritter 'Sarah' (i.e. Tim) McBride invading "women's spaces" in the congressional office buildings? I mean, considering that Nancy Mace *personally* opened these doors through her womanly invasion of the formerly "male space" of the military academy 'The Citadel'?
Continue reading ...
Thursday, November 14, 2024
Sect. of War
Now that Trump has picked Pete Hegseth to be his Sect. of War ("Dept. of War" is the true name of what is these days euphemistically called "Dept. of Defense"), there is a video clip making the rounds (both pro- and con-) in which he straight-up says that women should not "serve" in combat.
But, NOTICE: Even here, even saying that, he believed himself compelled offer the obligatory pinch of incense to the idols of Feminism and Female Ego: "We've all served with women, and they're great." No, they're not, not in Current Year; some women are great, just as some men are great. And some men -- and some women -- are not at all great. But, and this is the important point, women in the military are never great: for their mere presence, in any capacity, changes the inter-personal dynamics and lowers the effectiveness of the military to do its One Job. This is even *before* standard are inevitably lowered so as to "qualify" more women for higher ranks.Hegseth doesn't go far enough: Women don't belong in the military. Period.
Continue reading ...
Tuesday, November 12, 2024
On "They're not boys!"
A minute or so after the start time I've selected for the video playback in the link below, Megyn Kelly plays a clip from a CNN show, wherein a black leftist (*) tries to speak reason-and-truth about trans-ness and a batshit crazy rabid white leftist is having none of it.
BUT NOTICE: The rabid white leftist's reaction and very words betray that he is an ideological liar.
The somewhat more sane black leftist (*) said "I'm sure [there] are a lot of families out there who don't believe boys should play girls' sports ..."
And what did the batshit crazy white leftist immediately screech? "They're not boys! ..."
If "they're not boys", then how did the batshit crazy white leftist know exactly what reasonable point was bring made? If "they're not boys", than how can it be objectionable to say that "boys should[n't] play girls' sports"?
Megyn Kelley (YouTube, 2024/11/11)
Continue reading ...
Saturday, November 9, 2024
Utterly Predictable ... and Predictably Out-of-touch
Concerning the Democrats' *utterly predictable* -- and predictably out-of-touch -- excuses for why Kamala Sutra lost --
Not many people remember that a black woman ran to be the Democratic Party's presidential candidate in 1972 -- Shirley Chisholm; she didn't make it, which is probably why so few remember her effort.
Now, let me *really* blow your socks off: my father -- a rural Southern white man -- "po' white trash" as they say -- had intended to vote for Chisholm.
How long, do you think, until she files for divorce? --
TimCast: Democrat MSNBC Host ROASTED For MOCKING Working Class Over Grocery Prices
Continue reading ...
Monday, November 4, 2024
A Twist in the Peanut the Squirrel and Fred the Raccoon Saga
Concerning Mr and Mrs Longo doing OnlyFans --
Well, of course they did! How can anyone be surprised at that twist, after seeing the short clip of Mr Longo describing the actions of the government agents and wherein Mrs Longo wiped fake tears from her fake eye-lashed eyes with her fake clawed hands while making sure to stay in the camera's field? I wish that all porno would be outlawed, and could be destroyed; it's destroying people's lives, on an industrial scale, and thus destroying our civilization. BUT, the Longos participation on OP is a separate matter from the abuse to which these government goons subjected them. Consider -- the goons had a warrant to search for and seize a squirrel and a raccoon ... and yet they spent five hours tearing those people's home apart. This is absurd; this is tyrannical.Continue reading ...
There *IS* a Federal Interest in State Murder Law ... Including Regarding Abortion
=====
In "MC Live 11/3/24" you argue that the federal government has no jurisdiction/interest in State murder laws. Of course, in general, you are correct. However, if a State's law regarding murder is in violation of the 14th Amendment, then the federal government does have an interest.
To use your "ridiculous" example (is it, really?), if a State were to de-criminalize any and all murder, then one might *legally* argue that the federal government has no interest or jurisdiction. However, if a State were to de-criminalize the murder of blue-eyed persons, while retaining all sanctions against the murders of all other persons, than that is a direct violation of the 14th Amendment.
Similarly, if abortion is murder -- and it is -- then to de-criminalize the murders of persons who have not yet inhaled atmosphere, while maintaining the sanctions against the murders of those persons who have inhaled atmosphere, is also a direct violation of the 14th Amendment.
=====
Continue reading ...