Archive for the ‘Progressives and Left’ Category

In the last couple years or so, leftists who felt they needed yet another front in the culture war attacked the Washington Redskins football team for having a name that white elitist liberal leftist progressives thought was offensive to American Indians (or Amerinds, or Native Americans, or First Nations people, etc.).

A poll conducted last week confirmed what a poll years ago said – only about 1 in 10 are offended.  The vast 90% majority don’t care.

If you know who Don Burnstick is, you would already know this.  White elitist liberal leftist progressives obviously do not.

Don Burnstick is hilarious.  Native friends who’ve seen him live (on a res, no less) said he’s a riot in person.  He started parodying Jeff Foxworthy’s “you might be a redneck” jokes and took the jokes one step further into their own thing.

don burnstick you might be a redskin

Today from Washington Post (via HotAir), there are white elitist liberal leftist progressives who are mad because:

WaPo: Those dumb Indians don’t even know when they’re being insulted

Just days after the Washington Post revealed that 90% of Native Americans don’t find the term “Redskins” to be offensive, the paper’s own editorial board has proclaimed that they know better about racial slurs than the alleged target of said slur.

In a move that illustrates the height of liberal elite arrogance, the Post proclaimed in their Sunday editorial that “A slur, is a slur,” and despite the findings of the poll, they’re still demanding the name of Washington’s NFL team be changed because, in their enlightened understanding of the world, Redskins is racial slur:

    Where does that leave us? We’ve always made clear that we think fans who embrace the name do so without racist feeling or intent. But we also are clear that the term originates in an era when Indians were considered less than human and were often treated accordingly. References to scalping, war whoops and tomahawk chops hark back to that era and perpetuate stereotypes that can be hurtful, especially to Native American children.

Did you get that subtle insinuation that those polled were just too uninformed to know that they’re being insulted?  “(M)ore than half of respondents had heard little or nothing about this controversy,” the Post says, knowingly. They left out the implied, “those dumb Indians,” but we all get the picture.

In the grand scope of things, there are better things to be pissed off about if you’re an American Indian.  You could be pissed off at how tribal governments are run by corrupt cabals, pissed off at how the feds come in and tell you how to run things, pissed off at all the do-gooders who don’t actually help anything but their own sense of smugness, pissed off at the cycles of alcoholism and drug use that plague reservation communities, pissed off at the economic opportunities lost because of layers of government in the way, or just generally pissed off.

Or you could be pissed off about the name of a football team a thousand miles away because some white elitist liberal leftist progressives told you you should be pissed off about it.

Or you could still be pissed off at white elitists from DC knowing what was best for you and forcing you to be disarmed in a massacre over 125 years ago.

From a little while back, but still a funny takedown of the SJW culture taking over campuses:

Stumbled over this piece on the Daily Beast the other day about how illiberal college students and their enabling leftist professors want to ban history:

Students at Western Washington University have reached a turning point in their campus’s hxstory. (For one thing, they’re now spelling it with an X—more on that later.) Activists are demanding the creation of a new college dedicated to social justice activism, a student committee to police offensive speech, and culturally segregated living arrangements at the school, which is in Bellingham, up in the very northwest corner of the state.

Students have the right to push for robust changes to campus conditions, of course. But if administrators care about free speech at all, they will ignore these calls to create an almost cartoonishly autocratic liberal thought police on campus.

Prefacing the hard-leftist demands with “of course” is an odd thing to include, unless one agrees with almost all of the demands.  Otherwise, it would have gone without saying.  The cartoonishly autocratic “liberal” thought police are exactly what the left wants.

Even a writer for the leftist Daily Beast that sympathizes with them has started to wonder about how far the left has gone, and see much of the problem:

At the heart of this effort lies a bizarrely totalitarian ideology: Student-activists think they have all the answers—everything is settled, and people who dissent are not merely wrong, but actually guilty of something approaching a crime. If they persist in this wrongness, they are perpetuating violence, activists will claim.

It’s not bizarrely totalitarian.  It’s completely understandable.  Their ideas are untenable, fail when left to reality, failed in experience in the past, and so in order to continue they must criminalize dissent to protect those failed ideas.

This is not new, nor is it limited to college speech codes.  It’s endemic to those on the left who know their ideas fail.

Take threats of criminal charges against those who question global warming climate change:

Attorney General Loretta Lynch has considered taking legal action against climate change deniers.

The United States’ top lawyer told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that the Justice Department has ‘discussed’ the possibility of a civil lawsuit against the fossil fuel industry.

She said any information her office has received has been sent to the FBI in a bid to build a case.

With evidence of data tampering on the side of Manbearpig believers, with predictions about weather that continually fail to materialize, with even believers of anthropogenic global warming not feeling it’s really a threat, it’s come to finding threats to the Manbearpig orthodoxy and going after them as criminals.

Of course, we’ve already seen this with Mark Steyn being sued and targeted for criticizing the Hockey Stick graph.

I started looking for a video on that specifically, but instead found this video of him talking about criminalizing of dissenters to a goverment panel and citing numerous examples:

It’s relatively short, but hits a few extra places dissent is being criminalized, mostly in the realm of climate “science”.  Because of course one of the critical parts of the scientific method, right after “observation of experiment” and “conclusions of experiment”, is “organize government to punish potential dissenters”.

First off, via Breitbart:

Immigration activists are pushing for illegal immigrants to be granted the right to vote in New York City and say legislation to that effect could be introduced later this year.

The New York Postreports that a proposal to extend voting rights to illegal immigrants, allowing them to vote in elections for city-wide offices, was highlighted at a Black and Latino Legislative Caucus event.

“We want to expand the right to vote for everybody, not suppress the vote. What a radical idea,” Bertha Lewis, head of the Black Institute, said according to the Post. The Post notes she said they expect such legislation to be introduced in the spring.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has made extensive efforts on behalf of illegal immigrants, including offering a city identification card. According to the Post, Lewis said she sees the extension of voting rights as part of that effort.

It is a pretty radical idea to be expanding the right of sovereign franchise to determine one’s representatives and government to people who are not citizens of the country and not even in the country legally.

Of course it’s part of the plan.  Disenfranchise American citizens who’d vote against people who’d take their rights away and bring in more people who will vote how the leftist collectivists desire so they can finally get rid of the real problems in America – because the root cause of all those problems are Americans.

And from National Review:

I attended a hearing on Monday afternoon before District of Columbia federal district court Judge Richard J. Leon that was one of the most “extraordinary” federal court hearings I have ever attended, to use Judge Leon’s description of the case. The hearing was over the temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction (PI) being sought by the League of Women Voters and a host of other leftist groups to stop the recent decision of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) to allow Kansas, Georgia, Alabama, and Arizona to enforce their proof-of-citizenship voter-registration requirement.

This morning, as I predicted would happen in an article on Sunday, the U.S. Justice Department took a dive and filed a pleading in which it not only failed to defend the actions of the EAC, but agreed with the plaintiffs and consented to both a TRO and a PI. Judge Leon called the pleading “unprecedented” and “extraordinary.” He said he had never seen such a document in his entire experience as a lawyer or a judge. He was obviously astonished that the Justice Department was not defending the agency, and it was soon clear he was not going to allow DOJ to just roll over.

The League of Women Voters, which has a wonderfully innocuous name, is pushing to oppose proof-of-citizenship as a voter registration requirement.  There’s no conceivable reason why they’d want to do this unless they want noncitizens to illegally vote.

The judge issued orders just before the hearing started granting the motions of both the State of Kansas and the Public Interest Legal Foundation to intervene in the case in order to defend the EAC’s position. So Kris Kobach, the Secretary of State of Kansas, was given time to argue against the TRO motion, as was Christian Adams of PILF. The judge opened the hearing by reading into the record an astonishing letter he had just received from the chair of the EAC, Christie McCormick. It informed the court that DOJ had told the EAC that it would not defend the agency, and that it would not allow the EAC to hire its own counsel. McCormick informed the judge that she believed DOJ was not fulfilling its duty and obligation to defend the EAC and had a potential conflict of interest.

It was clear that Judge Leon was shocked at what DOJ had done. While he gave the plaintiffs 20 minutes to argue their case, he gave the lawyer from the Federal Programs Branch of DOJ only five minutes because he said that DOJ was obviously on the same side as the plaintiffs. He also said almost immediately that he would not grant a PI without a complete briefing and arguments on the case — despite DOJ wanting to consent to the PI. Judge Leon made clear that there was “no chance at all — zero” that he would do what the plaintiffs and the Justice Department wanted him to do on that issue.

Let that sink in.  The DOJ, which is charged with enforcing the law, is on the same side of this as people actively trying to circumvent the law.

We’ve known the Obama DOJ has been a political organ dedicated to the ends of the hard left since they covered up Fast & Furious, but this is the DOJ outright defending voter fraud – the same voter fraud the left will try to tell you doesn’t really exist.

Judge Leon talked about all of the cases in which the Federal Programs Branch has been involved in his courtroom, and said he had never seen the type of incomplete brief that DOJ had filed in this case. He said that those briefs “usually cover the waterfront” in terms of raising every legal argument to defend an agency. Leon was very dismissive of the DOJ’s position, its behavior, and its failure to mount a defense consistent with its usual practice. Secretary of State Kobach did a much better job than the plaintiffs in explaining why the plaintiffs had not met the standards for the issuance of a TRO. Kobach pointed out the many errors and mistakes made by the plaintiffs’ lawyer. And he laid out the evidence of noncitizens registering and voting in Kansas — which is why this proof-of-citizenship law is needed.

There is a crystal clear example of why proof of citizenship laws are needed, because noncitizens are illegally voting in elections.  And to this, the DOJ responded:

It was clear that this hearing did not go the way the plaintiffs’ lawyers and DOJ had tried to arrange it to go. They thought the fix was in. In fact, it went so badly, particularly with DOJ being called on the carpet by Judge Leon, that at the end when the plaintiffs’ lawyer got up to try to repair all the holes that Kobach had knocked in their case, the lawyer tried to compare the EAC action to Nazi Germany. He waved the EAC opinion at issue in the air and said “this is what Nazis do behind closed doors!” You know a lawyer is desperate when he tries to equate a dispute over an election administration issue to Nazi Germany.

How bad is it exactly when asking that people who are eligible to vote be asked to prove they are eligible to vote since there are people illegally voting?

And how far have we fallen as a country when the Department of Justice is out saying that any state that wants to abide by elections law, when it has evidence of ongoing illegal voting and states demanding justice, will instead call them Nazis?

It figures.

From the Washington Times:

President Obama called on Senate Republicans Tuesday to give his eventual Supreme Court nominee a fair hearing in his bid to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia, as cracks emerged in the Republican leadership’s position of automatically blocking any nominee.

“I expect them to hold hearings. I expect them to hold a vote,” Mr. Obama said at a press conference. “There’s no unwritten law that says it can only be done on off years.”  …

“This is the Supreme Court, the highest court in the land,” the president said. “It’s the one court where we would expect elected officials to rise above day-to-day politics. I understand the stakes. I understand the pressure that Republican senators are undoubtedly under. This would be a deciding vote. But that’s not how the system is supposed to work.”

Unless Democrats were running it.  They did everything in their power to stop Bork from getting on the Supreme Court, and they succeeded.

Senate Democrats had asked liberal leaders to form a “solid phalanx” to oppose whomever President Ronald Reagan nominated to replace Powell, assuming that it would tilt the court rightward. Democrats warned Reagan there would be a fight over the nomination if Bork were to be the nominee.  …

Within 45 minutes of Bork’s nomination to the Court, Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) took to the Senate floor with a strong condemnation of Bork in a nationally televised speech, declaring,

Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens.[6]

On July 5th, NAACP executive director Benjamin Hooks described their position on the Bork nomination: “We will fight it all the way – until hell freezes over, and then we’ll skate across on the ice.”[7] A brief was prepared for Joe Biden, head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called the Biden Report. Bork later said in his book The Tempting of America that the report “so thoroughly misrepresented a plain record that it easily qualifies as world class in the category of scurrility”.[8] TV ads produced by People For the American Way and narrated by Gregory Peck attacked Bork as an extremist, and Kennedy’s speech successfully fueled widespread public skepticism of Bork’s nomination. The rapid response of Kennedy’s “Robert Bork’s America” speech stunned the Reagan White House; though conservatives considered Kennedy’s accusations slanderous,[9] the attacks went unanswered for two and a half months

Democrats scream, lie, throw tantrums, and fabricate everything they can and stop at nothing to block a nomination.

But it looks like the GOP is going to give up on their constituents without a fight.  And they wonder why Trump and Cruz are popular?

SenateJudiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, Iowa Republican, didn’t rule out confirmation hearings and a vote by his panel on an Obama selection.

“I would wait until the nominee is made before I would make any decision,” Mr. Grassley said Tuesday in a conference call with Iowa radio reporters. “In other words, take it a step at a time.”

Dammit, Grassley, just hold the damn line.  Just say no.  Because if you let him appoint a replacement for Scalia, Ginsburg will finally retire and they’ll put in another justice immediately afterwards.  For the next 30 years we’ll have a hard left majority led by Kagan, Sotomayor, Breyer, and they’ll push Roberts over every time and probably Kennedy until he retires.

It’ll be just as bad as when FDR tried packing the court with his justices.

HotAir points out that not only is Grassley wavering under Obama’s pressure, Obama was a hypocrite who filibustered Alito’s nomination.  And he still thinks it’s cool what he did… but they shouldn’t, because now it’s going to be his nominee they stop.

Of course he had to filibuster Alito’s nomination.  Obama’s a Democrat and Alito was a nomination by a Republican president.  And of course the Republicans should respect the polite process of confirming Democrat nominations, because Democrats are shameless hypocrites and Republicans are apparently gullible idiots.

You can contact your senator and tell them to grow a spine here: http://www.senate.gov/senators/contact/

Also, we’re not even entirely sure Scalia’s death was of natural causes.

Veteran homicide investigators in New York and Washington, DC, on Monday questioned the way local and federal authorities in Texas handled the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

“It’s not unreasonable to ask for an autopsy in this case, particularly knowing who he is,” retired Brooklyn homicide Detective Patricia Tufo told The Post.

“He’s not at home. There are no witnesses to his death, and there was no reported explanation for why a pillow is over his head,” Tufo said. “So I think under the circumstances it’s not unreasonable to request an autopsy. Despite the fact that he has pre-existing ailments and the fact that he’s almost 80 years old, you want to be sure that it’s not something other than natural causes.”

Bill Ritchie, a retired deputy chief and former head of criminal investigations for the DC police, said he was dumbstruck when he learned that no autopsy would be performed.

Last night listening to the radio, I heard someone suggest that any really high-profile figure with massive implications for the nation should probably automatically have an autopsy done.

Seems quite reasonable, actually.

It’s a pretty powerful piece.

It’s also being decried in the comments as either a good thing because guns=bad, or by people who are Australians (or claiming to be or speaking for them) who say it’s bull.  Except it’s no fabrication.

The Australians I know who are/were into the shooting sports confirmed it for me years ago.  There are lots of restrictions, and there are restrictions based in which region you live (New South Wales vs Queensland vs Northern Australia, etc.).  There were mandatory buybacks – which are confiscation with a gift certificate.  There are laws like having to leave your firearms at a club rather then be able to take them home (no self defense), a limit on the number and or type of firearm you can own, where you can and can’t use it, and how they have to be inspected and can be revoked as per whims of the police.

A couple years ago I had some interesting conversations with an Australian who’d been a police officer and firearm afficionado (until the ban came and his guns went away) and a New Zealander.  The Kiwi delighted in giving the Aussie grief about how his rights had vanished into a revoked privilege.

Another Aussie I know who was a prolific collector finally just quit because the licensing and legal hassles pushed him out of the hobby he enjoyed.  And he was someone who through family was in a financial position to not have to worry about it.  Of the Aussies I know who were gun folks, only one bothered to keep jumping through the hoops to please a government that actively sought to legislate, regulate, and restrict his natural rights into nearly non-existent and easily revokable privileges.

I’ll start with newest first, as more reports of massive violence against women in Europe on New Year’s Eve has been slowly reported.  HotAir has a piece detailing mass sex assault in Finland by “refugee” “asylum seeker” “immigrants” from the Middle East & North Africa, which wasn’t reported by the Finnish police for a week because it’s just not something they or anyone else in Europe wants to talk about.  Mind you it’s gotten so bad that Norway has begun teaching immigrant men not to rape, because to them, women are property – at best.

“Men have weaknesses and when they see someone smiling it is difficult to control,” Mr. Kelifa said, explaining that in his own country, Eritrea, “if someone wants a lady he can just take her and he will not be punished,” at least not by the police.

British Youtube personality Sargon of Akkad spent a good amount of time breaking down that story almost line by line.  For quick backstory, he did video game reviews and videos about tumblrisms and atheism and other typical youtube commentariat stuff, and then when Gamergate broke, started looking at how political progressives are trying to shape first the video game world and then he looked at education and then the world itself.  He’s been looking at things like intersectional feminism (basically progressive leftism in function, though with a different paint job) and the illiberal left.  I’d say that’s most of the left, but he’s sort of like what you’d get if you took a self-described open-minded everyday liberal from the past – say only as far back as the 1980s – and introduced them to today.  Specifically, he’s not a cultural relativist.  He also tends to make videos on topics of the day that include original sources – things that even 24-hour cable news doesn’t have time to show, but that as someone who makes their own videos – he can allocate time to show.  (Quickie backstory is here because one of his videos is going to be linked below.)

Which leads us to the next big story: Cologne (Köln), Germany, along with other German cities, had a mass sex assault on New Years Eve committed by Middle East & North African men which was then hushed up.

“Shortly after midnight, the first women came to us,” an unnamed police officer told the local Express newspaper.

“Crying and in shock they described how they had been severely sexually harrassed. We went to look for women in the crowd. I picked one up from the ground. She was screaming and crying. Her underwear had been torn from her body.” …

“The crimes were committed by a group of people who from appearance were largely from the North African or Arab world,” Wolfgang Albers, the Cologne police chief, told a press conference.

Eyewitness description, including the confession “I thought it was right-wing propaganda, but this was real”.  Apparently a suspect arrested said (paraphrasing – but not by much) “I am Syrian. You have to treat me kindly. Mrs Merkel invited me.”  The woman mayor responded by saying women should stop asking for it if they don’t want to get raped by organized gangs of men in the streets, because women are lower on the progressive stack than Islamic rapists.

And of course it was covered up by media, police, and politicians – because it was politically awkward.

Internal communication from the police from the days immediately following the attack, published late Thursday night by newspaper Welt am Sonntag, reveals that the police had identified 71 of the around 1,000 attackers by Jan. 2 — most of whom were recently arrived Syrian refugees. Acting on this information, police had made 11 arrests, but chief Wolfgang Albers allegedly covered it all up because it was “politically awkward.”

“We currently have no intelligence on the criminals,” Albers said Jan. 4. “The only thing we know is that they were between 18-35 years old of North African or Arab appearance.”

The emails apparently show Albers was well aware of the fact that most of the attackers were in Germany under refugee status. (RELATED: Germany’s Largest Broadcaster Apologizes For Not Reporting Sexual Assault Attacks)

“Only a small minority were North Africans, the majority of the checked perpetrators were Syrians,” the documents reveal.

Albers also said the attacks were more in the nature of robberies rather than sexual assaults. A police officer told WamS, under condition of anonymity, that a majority of the attackers were after “sexual amusement.”

“What actually happened was the exact opposite,” the officer said. “For the mostly Arabic offenders, sexual assault was the priority, or, to express it from their point of view, their sexual amusement was the priority. A group of men would circle a female victim, close the loop, and then start groping the woman.”

 

Sargon covers a lot of this, though the last report indicating there was a cover-up came after his video was made.  It’s worthwhile – he includes the eyewitness’s video linked above, and provides a bit more backstory.  Just keep in mind that what he’s suspecting by the end of the video, that there was some kind of media/authorities coverup because it’s not politically correct – is in fact what’s happened and been found in the last few days.

Taking it back to the US, this would also be why so many people in the US do not want any Middle Eastern immigrants allowed in at all, or why they don’t want Middle Eastern muslim immigrants, or why even some on the left are skeptical of it.

Frankly, I’m in the “don’t let people in who are actively hostile to our values and don’t want to assimilate and don’t let in masses of people whose ranks are rife with terrorists and their sympathizers” camp.  Kind of a long title, I guess.

Middle Easterners (Christians, muslims, zoroastrians, or whatever) like the interpreters that worked with the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan for years are the kinds of people we should be letting in.  They wanted to improve their lives and home countries, but because we have a president who decided to end a war through retreat, we’re leaving those nations worse than they were in 2008, and we at least owe it to those who worked hard with us to give them a chance here where they won’t be killed by the Islamic State or the warlords the president has chosen to leave in charge of those nations.  Interpreters and their families are the types who would be willing to assmiliate.

These are often people who come from a violent savage culture where women are things for abuse, gays offend Allah enough they must be exterminated, and anyone who disagrees with their totalitarian religion is either someone who must be subjugated and controlled or murdered.  Those who throw off that culture because it’s difficult to escape in their home nations can be welcomed.  Those who bring it with them should never be allowed in, and when discovered should be kicked right back out.

Europe has the problem in that making statements about relative cultural worth are often shot down, because in Europe, culture typically is taken to equal ethnicity.  This leads to nationalist groups (and most specifically, nationalist socialist) groups who are on the “right” in Europe just because they favor protection of their own national identity and excluding immigrants because of their national/ethnic identity.  It’s an important distinction to understand that the “right” in Europe is sometimes a socialist protectionist group that’s often as concerned with ethnic identity of a nation rather than standing for the idea that newcomers should culturally assimilate to the same values & virtues.  This is how groups like Euro-right-wing “Golden Dawn” in Greece are all for expelling immigrants to Greece and protecting the Greece socialist state for ethnic Greeks.  They recognize their nation-state as an ethnic identity as well, and it colors how they see the world.  Europe’s old world problems are still there, and they still go to them.  (Probably the closest thing to the modern “right” in Europe to compare to from US would’ve been the leftist socialist/union groups of the early 1900s US that were both economically and ethnically protectionist.  They’re only “right” because they’re left-wing national socialists as opposed to far-left-wing international socialists.)

Europe today, because it won’t acknowledge that muslim culture (specifically as practiced in the Middle East & North Africa) is fundamentally opposed to western values, has no defense and no understanding of the problem.  Europe has so villified its own nations’ identities (remember you can very easily go to prison for things you say over there) that it’s hard for them to say that men who go together in organized groups to attack women are predatory savages.

They’re going to suffer the consequences of bringing in all the “refugees”, and it’s still going to take a lot of people being hurt for them to begin to understand what they’ve done.  Some of them will deny it while they’re being attacked, too – there will be more victim blaming, and some victims will blame themselves because they weren’t open-minded enough to know they deserved it.  Their entire value system has become one where they believe in the progressive stack and they believe they’re on the bottom due to fanciful fabrications of nonsensical guilt.

Europe is in for some hard times.