Summer Sabbatical

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , on July 12, 2017 by andelino

Whether you are a reader of this blog, signed up somewhere along the path or are a relatively new recruit we have become a family of kindred souls committed to staying the course and guide this ship of state away from the shoals. 

I need to take a bit of a break. This break becomes mandatory as the chores don’t do themselves around here, the half-done projects do not resolve on their own and the new maintenance projects seem to multiply like rabbits.

So the long and short of it is I need to spend less time blogging and more time maintaining.

I’m not shuttering the shop, just cutting back on posting until early September in order to tend to other business.

And I won’t be checking in regularly as I normally do.

In the meantime, while Trump continues to clean up the swamp,  I will be cleaning up and fixing up everything that’s falling apart closer to home.

Advertisements

Radical Violence Calls

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , on July 11, 2017 by andelino

Remember in March when Loretta Lynch called for “radicals, leftists, lone wolves and agitators” to come out of their “comfort zones” and take the “fight to the enemy” on behalf of the Senate Democrats?

Did she get her “wish” along with Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Bernie Sanders and the Obama deep state that has been “vilifying and targeting” the Republican administration?

Was that the purpose behind the “bizarre”video?

“I know that his is a time of great fear and uncertainty for so many people. I know it’s a time of great concern for people who see our rights being assailed, being trampled on and even being rolled back. I know that this is difficult, but I remind you that this has never been easy.”

She urged the “radical” Democrats to attack their “enemies” of other political “stripes,” saying:

“We have always had to work to move this country forward to achieve the great ideals of our founding fathers. And it has been people, individuals, who have banded together. Ordinary people who simply saw what needed to be done and came together and supported those ideals, who have made the difference. They’ve marched, they’ve bled, yes, some of them have died. This is hard, every good thing is. We have done this before, we can do this again.”

She’s deliberately “vague” and those words can be “interpreted” in a multitude of ways.

Here are some “other” Democrats calling for “violence” in the streets.

“Fanatics” often hear what they “want to hear” and interpret things the way “they choose to.”

They “bleed” just as Lynch recommended, just as a “terrorist” do in the pursuit of their “political” ideology.

They “die” as per guidance from a former “Chief Law Enforcement Officer” of the United States.

There is no “shortage” of reckless incitement to “violence” and assassination “threats” by the left.

The “corrupt” Democrats in the Senate and this most “criminal” former Attorney General have “helped” to set the agenda.

“Violence” is the way “forward” for them. Fomenting “chaos and discord” is the Democrat specialty, particularly under Caliph Obama’s “resistance” meddling.

The “evidence” of these facts is “everywhere” you turn.

Loretta Lynch calls for violent protests against Trump
Former AG Lynch Facing Possible 5-10 Years Behind Bars
Grassley Feinstein Agree To Subpoena Comey For Answers In Lynch Clinton Collusion
Feinstein Calls For Senate Investigation Into Lynch Comey Collusion With Clinton
POLITICAL VIOLENCE IS A GAME THE RIGHT CAN’T WIN
Assassination List Found On James Hodgkinson’s Body
Radical Agenda EP317 – Ultimate Punishment

Gay Sex in Prison

Posted in sex with tags , , , , , , , on July 10, 2017 by andelino

In case you didn’t know, Boosie BadAzz has spent quite a bit of time behind bars. During his time in a cell, the Baton Rouge, LA bred “rapper” probably experienced quite a few things he “never” would have in any other circumstances.

Apparently one of those things was seeing a “sexual encounter between two men.”

“I remember when I was down in Angola Prison I walked in on a nigga riding a nigga dick from the back,” Boosie recounts in the video.

“That nigga had a nigga ankles riding that bitch from the back, man. I ain’t know about the Coke can in the shower, you heard me? A nigga ain’t even tell me. I walked straight in, six in the morning—nigga riding that dick. I said I want to go home, man.”

From there, Boosie went on to call one of the men involved in the sex act a “nasty muthafucker” before continuing to call them sick. “Nasty ass nigga. Same nigga walking around that bitch talking about you a gangsta. Bitch you a punk. Bitch you gay. These niggas like asshole man, forreal.”

Boosie says a “bit more” but, you get the idea. While it’s probably not “too great” to walk in on anyone having sex, Boosie appears particularly “disgusted” with what he saw in jail.

If you’ve been following Boosie “long” enough, you already knew he has quite a “few” opinions about “homosexual” relationships.

Last summer, the rapper explained his belief that TV was forcing children into homosexuality.

This past March, Boosie BadAzz “bashed” Disney for showing two gay characters kissing.

Barstool Sports Comments…

Two things first. I didn’t know “Lil Boosie” changed his name to “Boosie BadAzz.” That’s a significant change. You can’t go from prefix “Lil” to suffix “BadAzz,” it’s too severe. You gotta just drop the Lil. Bow Wow didn’t go from “Lil Bow Wow” to “Bow Wow I’m A Fucking Savage Woof Woof,” he just went to Bow Wow. Gotta ease folks into that because I thought Boosie BadAzz was a completely different person.

Second, I’m gonna ignore the pretty blatant “homophobia” and just focus on the funny parts of this. Because that recounting of catching dudes “banging” in the showers had me in “tears,” man. I’m telling you, actual tears “streaming” down my face. If you’re not in a similar “fit of laughter” then we would absolutely “never get along,” under any circumstance.

I don’t even know what the “funniest” part is and it’s only like three sentences, that’s how funny it is. But the “imagery” of Boosie walking into a shower, “bright eyes and bushy tailed,” ready to start the jail day, and seeing a dude “twerk” on a dick is uproarious. The fact that he didn’t know “shower sex” in jail was a thing is hysterical. The idea that it wasn’t the “solitude, or the lack of friends, or the lack of connection” to the outside world that made him not “want” to be in jail, it was the dude “sex” is just amazing.

Picturing Lil Boosie, of “Wipe Me Down” fame, have that “I’ve made a huge mistake” look wash over his face because he saw a “dude working a dick” is the absolute funniest thing I’ve ever imagined. It’s just “funny,” folks. It is.

I mean how did the guy not know “Coke can in the shower” was a thing? Had he never “read” a newspaper or “seen” a TV show or “heard” any prison rumor ever? That’s like the “only” thing I know about jail and I’m a “white” dude from the suburbs: “People have sex in the showers.”

That last line, too. My goodness is that comedy gold. “The niggas like asshole man, forreal.” As if he’s trying to “convince” the listener, “Dudes screw each other! No, no, no I’m serious. Like they fuck. They honestly do it. In the asshole.” I’m telling you, if you can “read” this stuff without “tears” in your eyes there’s something “wrong” with you. Granted, there’s a “difference” between “knowing” dudes fuck and “seeing” dudes fuck, but Boosie “legit” sounds like an adult man who went to “jail” to get a middle school “biology” lesson.

Yeah, “Boosie BadAzz”, it’s called “gay sex in prison.”

Hypocrite Hillary

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , on July 9, 2017 by andelino

Hillary Clinton tells the “suck ups” in the audience at the sexist “Women in the World” gathering that she is “doing pretty well, all things considered.”

If she means that she’s not in “prison for life” or under “death penalty investigation for espionage and treason” and filthy rich to “boast as a result of her crimes,” who could argue.

Instead of being in “jail” she’s getting paid to “whine” to a bunch of sycophantic “morons” about losing “despite” her best efforts to “cheat and steal” her way into the White House.

Clinton plays the “sympathy card” saying the aftermath of the election was “so devastating that everything that has come to light in the days and weeks since has been also, troubling.” 

She must be “talking” about the Democrats, led by Susan Rice and Caliph Obama “spying” on her opponent.

Yeah, Clinton, that’s got to “bother” her almost as much as Donna Brazile “feeding” her debate questions or her husband “meeting” Loretta Lynch in her airplane for some “last minute negotiations.”

Troubling is “hardly” a strong enough characterization, “outrageous” would be better.

Clinton revealed that she had been taking a lot of “long walks in the woods,” probably meeting up with “Russian agents” after learning that email isn’t the most “secure way to sell government secrets.”

“So, I’m okay,” she says, “as a person I’m okay. As an American, I’m pretty worried.”

The woman who laid all of our “secrets” open to every nation around the world “claims” to be concerned about future “instances” of Russian hacking.

She bases it on the “false” narrative that she’s pitching as the “real reason she lost.”

It’s not because she’s a “crook” who destroyed everything she touched and “sold” out her nation, it’s because Russia “released” her emails, the same thing she did to America.

It’s no big “deal” when Hillary does it, but Putin is “evil incarnate” when he’s “falsely” accused.

She says she “believes” what Putin wanted to do was sow “distrust and confusion,” as well as “influence” elections. That’s the job “She, Obama and CNN” were doing. Is she now “worried” about “foreign” competition?

Old hag Hillary “brags” that she’s knows Putin very well and has “sat” with him before, calling him somebody who “plays” the long game.

Perhaps he’ll be back in 2020 for more “illegal” American uranium if Clinton should “run” and win in 2020, or is “working” with the Podesta brothers on some “banking and energy” sector deals.

She claims that people ask “why” Putin would do such a thing to her, the “fake” election meddling, not the “bribes” for the uranium.

Clinton explained, “I don’t think it’s too complicated, he had his desire to destabilize us and others and, you know he’s not exactly fond of strong women, so you add that together and that’s pretty much what it means.”

Putin may not be fond of “treasonous” women who  sell out their country for “personal” profit, or older, unattractive “globalist” women like Hillary, but not “strong” women.

His Foreign Ministry Spokesperson, Maria Zakharova, is “quite” strong. She’d eat Hillary for “lunch” and have the intestinal “fortitude” to choke back the overwhelming “gag” reflex.

She demonstrates that “strength” regularly, most recently in warning CNN  and the US media about the “fake” Russia news you always repeat.

Another “strong” woman, Irina Rodnina, an MP from Vladimir Putin’s United Russia party and a triple Olympic champion figure-skater, took on Caliph Obama by “posting” a picture of him being “tempted” by a banana.

Putin didn’t seem too “intimidated” or put off by her strength in “challenging” the American Muslim “usurper.”

It’s probably just a simple matter of “revulsion,” Hillary. Even a former KGB agent finds you “disgusting.”

A producer at the “Women in the World” event had an “awkward” moment when he was “caught” in the spotlight helping “frail” Hillary onto the stage.

The “backstage” assistant could be seen with his “hand” on Clinton’s back “pushing” her onto the stage and “pointing” her in which direction to “walk” to get to her position.

Hillary “gingerly” walked across the stage to “greet” Samantha Bee, who introduced her, letting out hearty “barks” while negotiating the riser.

Moments later, Clinton “conquered” the single step before “plunging” into the seat.

All that’s left “now” is to be being “hung, drawn and quartered.”

Mr. President, I’m sorry.
Hillary’s Other Private Email Server Troubles
Hillary Clinton cites ‘Misogyny’ as cause for her defeat
Hillary Clinton Explains Why She Really Lost to Trump
Clinton Tells Trump How To Handle ISIS And Syria Problems She Created
Syrian Calls Clinton, Left Hypocrites – Wants Safe Zones Inside Syria
A New Fairy Tale about How Hillary ‘Forgot’ White Voters
The ultimate hypocrite, Hillary Clinton

NATO Article V

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , on July 8, 2017 by andelino

President Donald Trump says the U.S. is “committed” to Article 5 of the “NATO” charter, which “requires” each member of the “alliance” to come to the “defense” of any other.

He made the “remarks” from the White House Rose Garden during a joint “news” conference with the president of Romania.

“Certainly we are there to protect, that’s one of the reasons I want people to make sure we have a very, very strong force by paying the kind of money necessary to have that force.”

Trump has been “critical” of NATO and hinted at times to “abandon” NATO if members did not meet a “defense” spending benchmark of “two percent of GDP” that they collectively “agree” on.

“Even 2 percent of GDP is insufficient … 2 percent is the bare minimum for confronting today’s very real and very viscous threats,” Trump said.

Currently, only “five” of the alliance’s “28 members” have met the “two percent” goal.

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said European Union members must “increase” defense expenditure in “protecting” the bloc.

Everyone knows about Article V, right? It is repeated “ad infinitum” in press releases and news stories about NATO. “An attack on one member state is an attack on all.”

The “implication” here is if, say, Russia overtly “attacked” even one of the “tiny” Baltic or other far off “front-line” states, the U.S. would “respond” as if Florida was “invaded,” and we’d be in a no-nonsense “war” with the Great “Bear” of the East.

I don’t think so. Like so many things in life, the “actual” understanding of Article V “requires” drilling down deeper into the “details” of the treaty.

Here is the “relevant” part of Article V:

Bruce Fein, in the Washington Times, has “dissected” this more.

He notes that “Article 11” of the NATO treaty “clarifies” that any use of “armed force” by NATO parties in carrying out “Article V” must be in accord with their respective “constitutional” processes.

“For the United States, that means Congress must enact a declaration of war before the President may employ the armed forces to defend a NATO  Member from external aggression.  Article 5 is not and could not be made to be self-executing— even by amending NATO.  The United States Supreme Court held in Reid v. Covert (1956) that treaties are subordinate to the Constitution.  The Declare War Clause may not be circumvented by any treaty whatsoever.”

This means that taken as a “whole and contrary” to the popular understanding, the NATO “treaty” does not require the U.S. to “automatically” commence war if a member country is “attacked.”

Congressional approval — “both Senate the House of Representatives” — would be needed.

To which I’ll add that the “verbiage” in Article V itself gives tremendous “wiggle room” to avoid being dragged into a “full-fledged” war.

To repeat Article V, it says NATO member states “will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”

The action “deemed necessary” can be almost anything and is something that is left up to the “discretion” of each member state. And “will assist” should not be construed to mean that the U.S. will carry the “bulk of the burden” of the military action as was done in “WWII and the Cold War.”

Consider this for example. The“front line” NATO states are in Europe. Why then doesn’t the “wealthy” European powerhouses of Germany and France take the lead in “defending” them by stationing a serious “military presence” of their own there instead of expecting “distant” America to do it?

So that brings us to “how” the NATO treaty is likely to be “interpreted.”

It should be “obvious” that it makes a world of difference if Donald Trump, Rand Paul, or Ted Cruz is president as“opposed” to a globalist in the mold of John McCain, Hillary Clinton or any of the rest of the “run-of-the-mill” establishment politicians eyeing the high office.

It is likely that the former group would be “constrained” in the call to war and would likely “comply” with the Constitution by seeking a formal “congressional declaration.”

As for Sen. McCain and his fellow “globalists,” many of them can be expected to “jump” at any pretext to “march off” to go to war.

To many observers, it seems that the “likelihood” of Russia commencing outright “hostilities” in Europe is extremely “low,” the Ukraine notwithstanding.

So maybe it’s best to follow the “old” adage that the best time to “fix a leaky roof” is not when it’s “raining” but when the sun is “shining.”

This means we should have a “national” discussion clarifying our “commitment” to NATO.

Both as a “candidate and now as president,” Donald Trump has started the “ball rolling.” But more needs to follow.

For example, some of the “questions” for the American people to “decide” on includes:

Is it really in America’s interest to continue to carry over 70 percent of the financial burden of NATO?

Is our national security truly enhanced by promising our full military support to defend states like Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Lithuania, Montenegro and the like?

Are we really serious about defending Islamic Turkey and if so, why?

Is it wise to station U.S. troops in front line NATO states whose presence serve more as a trip wire than anything else?

Many “benefits” would flow if questions like there were “openly” debated about NATO.

First, the American public would be “enlightened” as to just what the post-Cold War “foreign affairs” establishment wants “to commit us” to in Europe.

Second, “airing” the issue can only help constrain the “overreaching” ambitions of the pro-NATO coalition, especially as it pertains to “Article V.”

Also, it would soon “dawn” on the Europeans that America’s commitment to “defend” them is not “unlimited” as they now “imagine” it to be.

Rather, the U.S. will “assist” Europe in fighting off “aggression” but we will not “do it for them.”

All this would be “healthy” developments.

Trump believes in NATO’s Article 5
Trump publicly commits to NATO mutual-defense provision
Are We Near the End of NATO?
TIME TO CLOSE SHOP?

Children of Darkness

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , on July 7, 2017 by andelino

What happens when you make a compilation of “Social Justice Warriors” (SJW) going “insane and chimping out,” and then “replace” the audio of the video compilation with the “voice-over” of an old documentary about “mental illness?”

You end up with what can only be described as “top quality accidental comedy.”

If no one “informed” you that the video you were watching wasn’t the “original” visual image of the audio, you “probably” wouldn’t know.

Turns out that “SJW” aren’t so different from “mentally insane people.”

If you were to come across someone who “cried” in the streets, who saw the world in terms of black and white and made death threats against strangers, who “cowered” in a special room and made public displays of “naked self-harm and bloodletting,” you might conclude that they were “suffering” from some kind of “personality disorder.”

All these symptoms can be found in the “High Conflict Personality Disorder” category known as “Axis II in DSMV, including Anti-Social PD, Histrionic PD, Paranoid PD, Narcissistic PD, and Borderline PD.”

Alternatively, you might “reason” that these are the everyday “behaviors” of the modern “Social Justice Warrior.”

Of course, not every SJW has a “personality” condition, but sufferers from “High Conflict Disorders” are often drawn to extreme “beliefs and behaviors” under the illusion that they are “acting politically.”

A 2016 UK survey found that, since 1990, rates of “depression and anxiety” among the young have “increased” by 70%, while the American Counseling Association has reported a “rising tide of personality disorders among Millennial’s.”

That such disorders appear to be an “acute” problem with this generation may be an unintended “outcome” of the unprecedented experiment “conducted” in the 1990s and 2000s by “progressive” parents.

Persecution Complex and the “Safe Space”

In 2014, a “survey” of 100,000 college students at 53 U.S. “campuses” by the American College Health Association found that 84% of U.S. students feel unable to cope, while more than half experience overwhelming anxiety.

A byproduct of such “fear” has been the growth of the “safe space,” a safe-haven for minority groups and “distressed” students from what they perceive as “threats” within campus life.

Safe spaces contain “comforting” objects that evoke childhood memories like “bean bags, soothing music, Play-Doh and coloring books.” The spaces often “forbid” entry to straight “white men or political opponents.”

The idea of “running to the safe space” is a form of psychological “regression.” The safe space presents a “fantasy barrier” against imagined exterior “evils,” and so encourages “persecution paranoia and hyper-fragility.”

These are all “symptoms” of histrionic, borderline “paranoid personality disorders” that emerge from problems with the early “child-parent” bond.

The majority of “millennial” children (now aged 18-34) had two “working” parents; this was partly an “ideological” project of feminism and partly “economic” necessity.

The “downside” was the damage done by “daycare services” which grew by 250% between the 1970s and 90s (see Laura Perrins’ work on psychological trauma caused by daycare).

According to Bowlby’s “Maternal Deprivation Thesis,” babies require two years of “intimate” attention to enable them to form the “caregiver-child” bond essential for secure “ego” formation.

Any “disturbance” of this process will “predispose the children to respond in an anti-social way to later stresses.”

The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development has found:

“Children in full-time day care were close to three times more likely to show behavior problems than those cared for by their mothers at home. The more time in child care of any kind or quality, the more aggressive the child.”

The result is young people who, a decade and a half after daycare, “scream” at the parent/State for not “protecting” them sufficiently. It is no coincidence that “safe spaces” resemble daycare centers.

Unfortunately, “safe spaces” enforce the distressed person’s fear of the world, “trapping” them in their original trauma within a psychological frame of “permanent and inescapable victim-hood.”

“Trigger Warnings” and “Helicopter Parents”

 For the “SJW” everyday speech contains a multitude of “micro aggression’s,” or subconscious “power” dynamics which conceal “colonial or patriarchal” oppression.

Failing to use the “words” prescribed by SJW activists, most particularly in the case of “trans-people,” is seen as an act of “violence” equivalent to “physical assault.”

See, for example, a “statement” made by a protester at UC Berkeley in January 2017 at a protest event that “turned” into a violent riot: “Your free speech is raping and killing us.”

 People with “High Conflict Personality Disorders” experience similarly “paranoid” emotions about “hidden messages, omnipotent threats, and imminent violence.”

They are “hyper-alert” and live with higher than normal levels of “cortisol and adrenaline,” which in turn causes lasting “neurological” damage, affecting their ability to “reason” and to regulate “emotion.” They “panic” easily and “regress” to infantile distress.

Faced with “histrionic” students, university staff end up behaving like “Helicopter Parents”: those largely absent, full-time working parents who “overcompensated” by flying in to fuss over their child.

Attempting to assuage “parental guilt,” one of the tools they used was “positive parenting,” a philosophy created by “Social Progressives.”

Parents were taught to not “scold or punish,” and instead to use “positive reinforcement” in an attempt to “raise” their children with “high self-esteem.”

This “ideology” also became fashionable within an increasingly “progressive” school system that awarded children prizes for “non-competitive sports” and for merely taking “part in school activities.”

As they passed from “day care to through high school,” these children with artificially enforced “high self-esteem” were also told that they were “morally superior” to generations that came before.

They were “inducted” into politically correct language and were even “taught” to lecture their own parents on “racism, equality, and ecology.”

From the ages of six to eighteen, they took part in yearly multiculturalists “save the planet” projects. They were told they had a heroic destiny as “agents of change.”

A “false” picture of the world and a vastly “inflated” sense of self-importance did not “compensate” for the foundational trauma of “parental neglect.”

Instead, as Dr. Jean Twenge has explained, “Positive Parenting created young people with a ‘narcissistic wound’ for whom the real world would be perceived as a threat to self-worth.”

Border Violation and Self-Harm

The “Positive Parenting” movement expounded the beliefs that “there is no boundary between you and your child” and that “you are friends and equals.”

For the child growing up without “paternalistic laws and boundaries,” the only way to find “limits” was to attack the only boundary it knew: “its own bodily boundaries.”

In this light it is worth “exploring” why the Fourth Wave feminist/social justice activist group known as “Femen” should mimic the outward signs of the “BID” sufferer.

Their “trademark” form of protest is public “toplessness,” with slogans written over the “belly and breasts” in fake or real blood. One classic Femen image is of an “almost-naked” woman holding a protest sign that reads: “Rape Me. I’m a Slut.”

The “intention” may have been to “demonstrate” that no matter how “sexually” a woman dresses she is still not “asking for it.”

But public “nudity” as a protest against sexual “violation” is a contradictory signal, sending out “conflicted” messages around dangerous “sexual” subjects is a symptom of “BPD and NPD.”

The Femen “protester” may subconsciously be saying, “show me boundaries and control, show me authority and concern.” She might be “displaying” the pain of living within a “self-in-contradiction.”

Contradiction and Splitting

 SJW protests are “awash” with contradictions. SJWs claim to “fight” for freedom, but are “opposed” to freedom of speech, support “banning” videos and books, and support the “violent” disruption of public talks, as was seen with the “riots” at UC Berkeley, Middlebury College, and elsewhere.

SJWs believe in a world with “no boundaries” where “everyone is equal,” free immigration, open access to healthcare and education, etc., but at the same time are “obsessed with creating segregated spaces.”

While they protest against the “fascist patriarchal state” they are, at the same time, fundamentally “Statist,” demanding that the government “police” language for them and “punish” their enemies.

While SJWs claim to fight for “human rights,” they parade the symbol of the largest “genocides” in history, the “Communist” flag. They are “pro-feminist,” and at the same time defend “Sharia law.”

“Living-in-contradiction” is similar to the “Love me — I hate you” dynamic in Borderline pathology called “Splitting.”

In splitting, everything is “all or nothing,” and the thing that was passionately “idealized” suddenly becomes an “object of hatred.”

“Traitors” are everywhere. This was exemplified by the “expulsion” of gay men and “TERFS” — “Trans exclusionary radical feminists” — from LGBT+ groups by “Inter-sectional” feminists.

Along with splitting comes the symptoms of “low-impulse control, histrionics, dysphoria, a pervasive sense of emptiness, suicidal ideation, and self-harming.”

Symbolic demonstrations of “self-harming behaviors” are widely used in SJW protests.

Along with “smearing” faces with fake blood to “signify” female oppression, a protest group called “Lesbians and Gays Support the Migrants” in the UK in 2015 took “razors” to their arms in public to “spill rivers of blood.”

With an attempted “self-immolation” and a reported contagion of “suicide threats” occurring during the Trump protests, thousands attempted to use “politics as an alibi for a deeper inner compulsion to self-harm.”

The Results of the Human Experiment

 Trapped among “infant” neglect, artificially elevated “self-esteem,” and identity “dysphoria,” the Millennial’s were “set up” for a fall.

When they were “pushed” out of their parental homes in the 2010s, they “discovered” they did not have the tools to construct “stable” selves.

They couldn’t “blame” their parents or teachers. Instead they searched for a “vast, abstract, all-encompassing enemy.”

In “identity politics” they found a temporary unity, through “hatred of Patriarchy, of Capitalism, of White Men.”

In President Trump they found their savior.

 In the stages before “psychosis,” sufferers from High Conflict Personality Disorders “fixate” on one object of hate. Subconsciously, they need this “super-enemy” so they can feel whole.

This is the tragic “truth” of the identity politics of the SJW. Without a totalizing “object of blame,” the personality of the “warrior for social justice” falls apart.

While the SJWs idealize themselves as “victims” of omnipresent evil, they are in fact the victims of well-meaning “liberal” parents and “progressive” teachers who subjected them to an “experiment in social engineering.“

They were the “guinea pigs” of the progressive project. Older generations of “radicals” then exploited their “volatility and rage” for political ends.

Now is the time for your lovin’, dear, and the time for your company.
Now when the light of reason fails and fires burn on the sea,
Now in this age of confusion I have need of your company.

For I am a wild and lonely child and the son of an angry land,
Now with the high wars raging I would offer you my hand,
For we are the children of darkness and the prey of a foul command.

It’s once I was free to go roaming in the wind of a springtime mind,
Once the clouds I sailed upon were sweet as lilac wine,
Then, why have the breezes of summer, dear, been laced with a grim design?

And where was the will of my father when he raised his sword on high?
And where was my mother’s wailing when our flags were justified?
And where will we take our pleasure when our bodies have been denied?

What “Children of Darkness” are actually asking for, when they scream at us, “is our hlp.”

Millennial’s Killed 19 Things Last Year

Mansplaining

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , on July 6, 2017 by andelino

Sweden has now entered the “terminal” phase of a nation’s “existence.”

While importing “massive” numbers of people from cultures that believe women are “sexual” property, they have “decided” that emasculated men have not been “broken” down enough.

Women who have things “mansplained” to them in the workplace can now report it to a dedicated “hotline” if they are having troubles “coping” with it.

“Unionen,” Sweden’s largest union, is encouraging members to “call” when male colleagues give them “unsolicited” lectures on things they “already” understand.

The organization, which represents 600,000 private sector workers, launched the “advice” line which will be open from 10am to 4pm “everyday” for a week as part of a “campaign” to highlight and stamp out the “insidious and damaging” practice.

For those who might not be familiar with the modern “portmanteau,” the union defined “Mansplaining” as when “a man explains something to a woman without being asked, particularly something which she might already know more about than the man.”

Unionen said the commonplace practice “diminishes” women, by making them appear less “competent” than they are.

A study by the “American Psychological Association” found that men “tend to overestimate their intelligence to a much greater extent than women” and showed that “self-assurance in men grows with age.”

Here is how “Mansplaining” is done in America…

Unionen said the phone line, which will be staffed by a “gender” expert and a group of “feminist” politicians, comedians and scientists, is “about equality.”

“It is about putting your finger on the small everyday problems which become large when they stack up.”

When left unchecked, “Mansplaining” can contribute to men “earning” more than women, and being “promoted” faster, the organization said, “something most of us, regardless of sex, think is unfair and want to change.”

The hotline will advise “upset and frustrated” callers on what “action” they should take next, and “aims” to help them move on.

But there are no “set” answers, instead the people staffing the line will have the “freedom” to say what they want, based on their “own” experiences.

Unsurprisingly, the “initiative” unleashed a flood of “negative” comments on Unionen’s Facebook page, “particularly” from men.

“How would women react if you used words like ‘old biddy chat’ or ‘female whining’? Equality can’t be won using negative invective, but should be built using mutual respect and partnership. But maybe I’m the only one who thinks so,” Daniel Bergman of Sundsvall wrote on their Facebook page.

Others, such as Jim Brännlund from Stockholm, were even blunter. “Just what we need in society, more polarization. And people wonder why right-wing populism is on the rise. You. Are. Retarded.”

Others “defended” the campaign, however. Linda Landgren wrote: “Good initiative. Judging by the comments, it seems quite a lot of men feel this is aimed at them, so it shows how much this kind of work is needed.”

Some said that while they would support a campaign against “sexist” behavior, they thought that the references to “Mansplaining” should be removed.

“Change the name of the event, ‘Mansplaining’ is incredibly sexist,” Fanny Uppenberg said.

But Unionen said it was “important” to look at historical, structural “inequality” in society.

“The campaign is not intended to single out or add debt to all men.The campaign aims to raise awareness among all of us, regardless of gender, about this phenomenon and hopefully begin a joint change. Everyone benefits that we visualize suppression techniques and talk about them.”

It added: “There is a structural problem built into the concept Mansplaining that cannot be ignored. The Union shares the analysis that Mansplaining is more often performed by men and we believe it is important to talk about the problem on the basis of the analysis for us to bring about change.”

Unionen’s gender “expert” Peter Tai Christensen “elaborated” on this explanation.

“We all react differently to changes in society. Some of us develop and integrate while others of us consciously or unconsciously resists. Mansplaining can be interpreted as a reaction to the fact that traditional gender roles are being renegotiated. Mansplaining is maneuvering, tricks and suppression techniques designed to put women in their place and thereby consolidate or restore a privileged position.”

He said whether it was intentional, a form of “misguided benevolence”, or just a habit, ” the problem is basically that women are assumed to be less knowing, competent, important, or legitimate.”

“It is obviously not the case that all men expose women to ‘Mansplaining’ all the time. It would be an absurd assertion that lacks reality. But enough women are exposed to enough ‘Mansplaining’ for it to be a problem that needs to be highlighted, discussed and solved.”

From my “personal” experience, when it comes to “unsolicited” preaching, there’s nothing a “man can do that a woman can’t do better.”

It’s called “Nagsplaining.”

Mansplaining? Windbags come in both genders
Mansplaining Isn’t The Worst, And Here’s Why
Mansplaining Menstruation
Femsplaining
Swedish woman social justice workers love refugees

%d bloggers like this: