Archive for racist

How to Identify A Racist

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , on December 6, 2020 by andelino

How to Identify A Racist
By Dave King

The Biden administration is considering race, ethnicity, gender and sexual identity as they fill their cabinet slots, because they want to be the most diverse administration in history.

The obvious problem is that the cabinet candidates are all leftist, Harvard or Yale graduates who believe in big government, and that makes for a lack of diversity so far as personnel makeup goes.

The way you can identify a “racist” is by identifying the person who insists on talking about “race, gender, national origin or sexual identity” first and foremost, to the exclusion of nearly any other quality or difference between people, especially when it comes to hiring employees, or cabinet members for the Biden administration.

“Skin color” is very important to leftist Democrats, and it doesn’t matter what special skills a person has or the very diverse experiences of members of the American population.

If Democrats can state that they are hiring a “non-white” or “non-male” person for a position, they’ll jump at the chance, regardless of what superior qualifications the excluded person possesses. The very fact that race, or sex or whatever else, is the first consideration of the Biden decision-making staff, proves that they are “racists”, and that race is always on their minds.

And although skin color and biological body construction are the obvious things Democrats and everyone else can readily see, it’s the similarities of ideology and belief in government control that brings Democrats together as a racist and close-minded community to select one another for important government jobs that require political discipline.

It may be tacky to mention it, but Joe Biden is perhaps the most “fish-belly-white, non-female, non-sexual-identifying-person” ever to be selecting the members of a presidential cabinet, and although he could have stepped aside and allowed one of his more “diverse“ political allies run for the presidency, he didn’t do it, did he?

Any thinking person would submit that Donald Trump is diametrically diverse from Joe Biden if real diversity is what you’re really looking for, but Joey ran against Trump, not for him, so the lie of the “diversity“ dogma lives loudly within Joe Biden.

So how much of a believer in this “diversity“ thing can Biden be? His own selfish desire to be the big kahuna easily overcame his political discipline and his consideration of, and admiration for, diversity, and he promoted himself instead of allowing a perhaps more diverse, whatever the hell that means, Democrat to run for the White House.

The bottom line is that Joe Biden is running as president in a state of mental unbalance and at least some physical questionability. He stutters and stammers and is unintelligible with nearly any verbal message he tries to utter. He is obviously a stand-in for someone to later actually rule as the president when Joey finally cracks, most likely former prostitute Kamala Harris, but who knows for sure?

The man’s picks for his cabinet are straight from Barack Obama, and the prediction that he is a place-holder for the third Obama administration seems very likely, because Joe can’t object to anything Obama wants, and as the real-life head of the Democrat party, Obama will run any show the Democrats try to put on.

The diversity/racist issues that Democrats tout as being the only criteria of importance when selecting a cabinet are laughable and dangerous for the nation, as these authoritarian fools lay their plans to loot this once free and happy nation.

That’s a big boot for such a little dick of a man.

Racist Margaret Sanger

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , on August 10, 2020 by andelino

A New York branch of the Planned Parenthood abortion chain publicly distanced itself from its founder, Margaret Sanger, amid accusations of “systemic racism” within the organization.

Sanger, who founded Planned Parenthood in New York in 1916, was a well-known “eugenicist” who believed certain groups of human beings were “weeds,” “reckless breeders” and “morons” who should not have children.

Planned Parenthood of Greater New York plans to rename its Manhattan abortion facility, which has long bore Sanger’s name. It also asked city leaders to remove her name from a street sign nearby.

The abortion group’s leaders pointed to Sanger’s eugenics beliefs “rooted in racism, ableism and classism” as the reason for the change.

“The removal of Margaret Sanger’s name from our building is both a necessary and overdue step to reckon with our legacy and acknowledge Planned Parenthood’s contributions to historical reproductive harm within communities of color,” said Karen Seltzer, who chairs the board of the New York affiliate.

However, it appears to be nothing more than a publicity stunt by the New York branch after hundreds of its employees accused it of “systemic racism, abusive behavior and financial malfeasance.”

“Planned Parenthood can rename a building, but it can’t whitewash its eugenics roots,” U.S. Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska responded.

“Planned Parenthood can try to forget its founder’s racist screeds, but it cannot escape the undeniable fact that it makes hundreds of millions of dollars each year by telling an ugly lie that certain lives are disposable and then disposing of them. Big abortion has always been, and will always be, in the business of violence and dehumanization.”

Since abortion became legal nation-wide in 1973, an estimated 20 million unborn black babies have been aborted in America, many of them at Planned Parenthood. And in New York City, where Sanger started the abortion chain, city health data indicates that more African American babies are aborted in the city than are born each year.

Planned Parenthood continues to fight against legislation that protects unborn babies from discrimination based on their sex, race or a disability.

Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser urged Planned Parenthood to not only disavow its founder but also its current “racist and eugenics” practices.

“The next step for Planned Parenthood is recognizing that Margaret Sanger’s racist legacy continues today, as abortion continues to disproportionately impact minority communities, especially the black community,” Dannenfelser said.

She also urged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and former First Lady Hillary Clinton to disavow and return their Planned Parenthood Margaret Sanger awards immediately.

The national Planned Parenthood said it agreed with the affiliate’s decision to remove Sanger’s name, but it did not mention if it will rename its award or anything else bearing her name.

One expert told the New York Times that Sanger’s views have been “misinterpreted,” and she was following the popular beliefs of the day. But Sanger was not just a follower. She helped to lead the eugenics movement, frequently promoting discrimination through her writing and speaking, including in a speech to the KKK in 1926.

In her book “Pivot of Civilization,” Sanger described certain groups of human beings as “human weeds,” “reckless breeders” and “spawning human beings who never should have been born.”

She also wrote about getting rid of people with diseases and disabilities through sterilization and segregation, describing these “morons” as “a dead weight of human waste.” And in a 1939 letter to a friend, she wrote, “We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.”

Even the national Planned Parenthood has quietly “condemned” some of Sanger’s statements.

According to the newspaper:

The national organization said in a 2016 fact sheet that it disagreed with Ms. Sanger’s decision to speak to members of the Ku Klux Klan in 1926 as she tried to spread her message about birth control.

It also condemned her support for policies to sterilize people who had disabilities that could not be treated; for banning immigrants with disabilities; and for “placing so-called illiterates, paupers, unemployable, criminals, prostitutes, and dope fiends on farms and in open spaces as long as necessary for the strengthening and development of moral conduct.”

For years, pro-life leaders have been urging the Smithsonian to remove a statue of Sanger from a place of honor in the National Portrait Gallery.

Sanger’s discriminatory, anti-life views led to the killing of more than 62 million unborn babies in abortions in America. Planned Parenthood leaders have no hesitation to say publicly that “EVERY reason to have an abortion is a valid reason,” including for sex-selection, race and disabilities like Down syndrome.

Planned Parenthood is a billion-dollar abortion chain that kills more unborn babies in abortions than any other group in the U.S. Last year, it reported more than 345,000 abortions, a record number, while providing fewer actual health care services and seeing fewer patients.

The Day I Told My Daughter About My Abortion Decision

Racist “Sniffy” Joe Biden

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , on June 14, 2019 by andelino

 

“Sniffy” Joe Biden has been sniffing a lot of “women and children” during his 30-plus years in the public eye, but has always shied away from sniffing “people of color.”

Why won’t “Sniffy” Joe sniff people of color? Is “Sniffy” Joe a racist? According to past history, “Sniffy” Joe is the purest example of the Democrats that turned the party decisively towards “war, austerity and race-baiting.”

“Sniffy” Joe once called state-mandated school integration the most “racist concept” you can come up with, and Barack Obama the first sort of mainstream African American who is “articulate, bright and clean.”

“Sniffy” Joe was also a staunch opponent of “forced busing” in the 1970s”, and leading crusader for “mass incarceration” throughout the ‘80s and ‘90s.

“Sniffy” Joe has described African-American felons as “predators” too sociopathic to rehabilitate and white supremacist senators as his friends.

Whether “Sniffy” Joe can retain the support of “people of color” after voters learn more about his “race-baiting” past, could very well determine the “outcome” of “Sniffy” Joe’s third presidential run.

To explore that question in more detail, let’s pick through “Sniffy” Joe’s voluminous baggage on “racial injustice” before Obama’s ”halo” will shine brighter than the shadow of “Sniffy” Joe’s dark “racist” record.

“Sniffy” Joe helped kill the most effective policy for “improving” black educational attainment that America has ever known. He was for “desegregating” America’s schools, until his constituents were “against” it. When “Sniffy” Joe launched his first campaign for the Senate in 1972, the Supreme Court had just ruled that the Constitution required policymakers to pursue “the greatest possible degree of actual desegregation,” and that forcing “white students to attend schools in black neighborhoods and vice versa” was a legitimate means of doing so. Being an enlightened liberal, “Sniffy” Joe began his candidacy as an “advocate” for such policies. He accused Republicans of “demagoguing” the busing issue, and appealing to “white voters” ugliest instincts.

But as “Sniffy” Joe’s campaign progressed, and “Sniffy” Joe discerned that the “arc of history” was bending toward “white backlash,” the young whippersnapper“bent” with it. He became a caricature of a “white northern liberal,”  arguing that “forced busing” was appropriate for the South, where segregation was the product of “racist laws,” but unnecessary for the North, where, “Sniffy” Joe pretended, it merely reflected the “preferences” of the white and black communities.

Once in the Senate, “Sniffy” Joe continued to triangulate, voting for most, though not all, of the “anti-busing” amendments that came before him. But for his overwhelmingly “white” constituents, nothing less than massive “resistance to busing” would suffice. The New Castle County Neighborhood Schools Association booed “Sniffy” Joe off the stage at one event in 1974.

One year later, “Sniffy” Joe broke ranks with northern liberals and joined his virulently “racist” North Carolina colleague Jesse Helms in voting to “kneecap” all federal efforts to “integrate” schools, anywhere in the country. Specifically, “Sniffy” Joe voted to “bar” the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare from requiring schools to “provide information on the racial makeup of their student bodies” and thereby making it “nigh impossible” for Uncle Sam to withhold “federal funds” from school districts that “refused” to integrate.

The measure was rejected. Nevertheless, “Sniffy” Joe persisted. And his “cowardly” example inspired other self-professed liberals to throw “racial justice” under the bus. As the historian Jason Sokol writes:

“Immediately after the Helms amendment was tabled, Sniffy Joe proposed his own amendment to the $36 billion education bill, “stipulating” that none of those federal funds could be used by school systems to assign teachers or students to schools … for reasons of race. His amendment would prevent some faceless bureaucrat from deciding that any child, black or white, should fit in some predetermined ratio.” 

Like the Helms gambit, “Sniffy” Joe’s provision would gut “Title VI” of the Civil Rights Act. But this time, a number of liberal senators that had “opposed” Helms amendment now supported “Sniffy” Joe. Warren Magnuson and Scoop Jackson of Washington, where Seattle faced “impending” integration orders; and Thomas Eagleton and Stuart Symington of Missouri, where Kansas City “confronted” a similar fate. Mike Mansfield, the majority leader from Montana, also “jumped” on board. Watching his liberal colleagues “defect” Republican Jacob Javits of New York mused, “They’re scared to death on busing.” The Senate approved “Sniffy” Joe’s amendment. He had managed to turn a 48-43 loss for the “anti-busing forces” into a 50-43 victory.

The NAACP called “Sniffy” Joe’s proposal “an anti-black amendment.” The Senate’s sole African-American member, Ed Brooke, called it “the greatest symbolic defeat for civil rights since 1964.” He helped his fellow liberals to “reconcile” themselves to the “wrong side of history” by recasting integrationists as the real “racists.”

“The new integration plans being offered are really just quota systems to assure a certain number of blacks, Chicano’s, or whatever in each school. That, to me, is the most racist concept you can come up with,” he said in a 1975 interview recently unearthed. “What it says is, ‘In order for your child with curly black hair, brown eyes, and dark skin to be able to learn anything, he needs to sit next to my blond-haired, blue-eyed son.’ That’s racist!”

“Sniffy” Joe echoed this in remarks to NPR that same year, saying, “I think the concept of busing … that we are going to integrate people so that they all have the same access and they learn to grow up with one another and all the rest, is a rejection of the whole movement of black pride … a rejection of the entire black awareness concept, where black is beautiful, black culture should be studied; and the cultural awareness of the importance of their own identity, their own individuality.” 

As of 2007, “Sniffy” Joe believed that this stance had “aged” well. In a memoir released that year, “Sniffy” Joe derided busing as “a liberal train wreck.” Education experts disagreed. Since some municipalities did “integrate” their schools through “busing,” while others did not, scholars have been able to “evaluate” the policy’s efficacy.

In 2011, researchers at Berkeley found that “black” students who had spent five years in “desegregated” schools went on to earn on average 25 percent more than those who “remained” in segregated schools or, in “Sniffy” Joe’s phrasing, schools that honored the “black awareness concept.”

The rationale for integration was not, as “Sniffy” Joe suggested, that black kids need to sit next to “blue-eyed ones” in order to retain information. Rather, it is that, in a racially stratified society, overwhelmingly African-American schools will, almost inevitably, be sites of “concentrated poverty, under-investment, and relatively low social capital”, i.e., places where children from low-income families will be unlikely to form connections with children from higher-income ones. “Sniffy” Joe never ceased expressing his concern for black children’s inadequate educational opportunities. He has done more to perpetuate those “inadequacies” than to remedy them.

“Sniffy” Joe worked tirelessly, over several decades, to make America’s profoundly “racist” criminal justice system more “punitive” than any other advanced democracy’s. It is hard to name an infamously “unjust” feature of America’s criminal-justice system that “Sniffy” Joe didn’t help to bring about. “Mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offenders, the sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine, civil asset forfeiture, and extensive use of the death penalty.” He was involved in establishing them all.

“Sniffy” Joe was famous for his “lead” role in crafting the 1994 crime bill, or, as he preferred to call it as recently as 2015, the “1994 Sniffy Joe Crime Bill.” Some aspects of that legislation remain popular within the Democratic Party, among them, the ”Violence Against Women Act, a federal assault-weapons ban, and funds for community oriented” policing. But in 2019 America, a place where our nation’s “violent crime rate” is near historic lows, while its “incarceration” rate hovers around world “historic” highs, the bill’s broader “legacy” is ignominious.

The Brennan Center succinctly summarized that legacy on the 20th anniversary of the bill’s passage:

“It expanded the death penalty, creating 60 new death penalty offenses under 41 federal capital statutes. It eliminated education funding for incarcerated students, effectively gutting prison education programs. Despite a wealth of research showing education increases post-release employment, reduces recidivism, and improves outcomes for the formerly incarcerated and their families, this change has not been reversed.” 

The bill created a wave of change toward “harsher” state sentencing policy. That change was driven by funding incentives. The bill’s $9.7 billion in federal funding for “prison construction” went only to states that adopted “Truth-in-Sentencing” (TIS) laws, which lead to defendants “serving” far longer prison terms. Within 5 years, 29 states had TIS laws on the books, 24 more than when the bill was signed. By 2000 the state had “added” over 12,000 prison beds and “incarcerated” 28 percent more people than a decade before.

And for the bulk of his political career, “Sniffy” Joe made mandating such sentences one of his “defining” causes. As a high-ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, “Sniffy” Joe didn’t just craft the 1994 crime bill, he also ushered a variety of other “draconian” measures into law.

During the 1980s, “Sniffy” Joe helped pass laws reinstating the “federal death penalty, abolishing federal parole, increasing penalties for marijuana possession, expanding the use of civil asset forfeiture, and establishing a 100-to-1 sentencing disparity for possession of crack cocaine (used disproportionately by poor nonwhite people) and powder cocaine (used disproportionately by rich white people).”

“Sniffy” Joe’s support for these measures wasn’t a wholly defensive “responsive” to public outrage over violent crime. Rather, it was a proactive effort to capitalize on the electorate’s increasingly “draconian” mood. In 1989, George H. W. Bush gave a national address outlining his plans to “ramp up” the war on drugs.

“Sniffy” Joe delivered the Democratic response, and “savaged” the Republican’s plan to drastically increase “incarceration” for drug crimes from the right. “Quite frankly, the president’s plan is not tough enough, bold enough, or imaginative enough to meet the crisis at hand,” he told the American people. “In a nutshell, the president’s plan does not include enough police officers to catch the violent thugs, enough prosecutors to convict them, enough judges to sentence them, or enough prison cells to put them away for a long time.”

Four years later, “Sniffy” Joe remained at the cutting edge of “law-and-order” liberalism. In a Senate floor speech spotlighted by CNN’s KFile, “Sniffy” Joe raised awareness of the mythical threat posed by super-predators, a rising generation of “inner city” children so comprehensively “failed” by their parents and society, they had developed into “incurable sociopaths” whom the state could “quarantine but never rehabilitate.”

“There is a cadre of young people, tens of thousands of them, born out of wedlock, without parents, without supervision, without any structure, without any conscience developing because they literally … because they literally have not been socialized, they literally have not had an opportunity” he explained. “Sniffy” Joe then urged his colleagues to support “aid” to such youths now, or else they would “become the predators 15 years from now.”

As for the already existing predators, “they are beyond the pale many of those people, beyond the pale,” he quipped. “We have no choice but to take them out of society … rehabilitation, when it occurs, we don’t understand it and notice it, and even when we notice it and we know it occurs, we don’t know why. So you cannot make rehabilitation a condition for release.” 

The super-predators “proved” to be a myth. But the specter of inner cities teeming with irredeemable “monsters” and abandoned children helped rationalize both “mass incarceration,” and its racially inequitable character.

“Sniffy” Joe says the most racially “insensitive” things when it “suits” his agenda.

Beyond his role in perpetuating “systemic” racism “Sniffy” Joe has long displayed a penchant for political incorrectness. His suggestion that Barack Obama was the first “clean and articulate” African-American to run for president is probably the most infamous of his gaffes.

“Sniffy” Joe also told a crowd of black voters in 2012 that Mitt Romney would put you all back in chains, and has a habit of badly impersonating Indian convenience-store clerks and call-center employees. But “Sniffy” Joe’s most troubling “racially tinged remarks” might be those he does not regard as such.

Specifically, “Sniffy” Joe has long boasted of his warm and often legislatively productive relationships with “white supremacist” southern senators. At a rally for Democratic Senate candidate Doug Jones in the fall of 2017 he said “I’ve been around so long, I worked with James Eastland. Even in the days when I got there, the Democratic Party still had seven or eight old-fashioned Democratic segregationists. You’d get up and you’d argue like the devil with them. Then you’d go down and have lunch or dinner together. The political system worked. We were divided on issues, but the political system worked.”

“Sniffy” Joe’s sentiments read like a “satire of nostalgia for bipartisan comity,” laying bare the “amorality and elitism” inherent to celebrating collegiality for its own sake. Needless to say, a political system in which a man who believed that his “black” constituents belonged to an “inferior race”, and must be quarantined to their own institutions to prevent the “mongrelization” of the white race, was not one that “worked” well for said constituents.

Biden praised segregationist Strom Thurmond as ‘closest friend’ “Biden and Thurmond pushed legislation that created the nefarious sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine.”

Eastland isn’t the only white supremacist “Sniffy” Joe can’t help expressing grudging “admiration” for. He also warmly “eulogized” Strom Thurmond at his funeral, and his insistence on fondly “recalling” his relationship with Jesse Helms “grates on even members of his own team, who have told him as much.”

“Sniffy” Joe’s faith in such senators’ “entitlement” to dignity, and capacity for “redemption,” stands in marked contrast to his erstwhile views on rehabilitating “predators” and “violent thugs.”

How does one reconcile “Sniffy” Joe’s considerable complicity in “racial injustice” with his enviable “popularity” among his racist “African-American” base?

One answer is “Sniffy” Joe’s apparent strength with black voters is “illusory” coasting off of his name recognition and association with Barack Obama. Once the primary campaign puts the “history summarized above” under the spotlight, along with “Sniffy” Joe’s myriad other heresies against “progressivism,” including his support for bankruptcy reforms that hurt low-income consumers, plus his shoddy treatment of Anita Hill, and his advocacy for the “Iraq War,” black voters will see through his “malarkey.”  

9 Things That Show Black Privilege is Real — and Racist

Another explanation is that black voters find “Sniffy” Joe’s heresies against “racial” liberalism “UN-forgivable.” That said and the severity of “Sniffy” Joe’s ideological “racist” offenses, one can only hope the “black” community steps off the Democratic “plantation” and conclude that “Sniffy” Joe is unfit for the presidency.

“Sniffy” Joe, who will turn 77 in November, also appears to be suffering from a degenerative speech impediment.

To combat his “racist” past, “Sniffy” Joe has announced and “promised” from now on to also sniff “people of color” to gain their “votes” for a third run to become president.

Will Black Voters Still Love Biden When They Remember Who He Was?
Joe Biden’s Fifty Years of Flip-Flops
Old white Joe tees up strike three for the presidency
Senator Biden Lectured City on What’s ‘Good for the Negro 

Green Thumb AOC

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , on June 4, 2019 by andelino

“Green Thumb” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez spent her evenings “teaching” her supporters valuable lessons in how to “re-pot” a plant.

In her weekly episode of “Instagraming with an Idiot” the Bronx “green thumb” socialist live streamed herself for about 20-minutes while she moved a plant from “one pot to another.”

One of the “funniest” moment came when “Green Thumb AOC” tried to open a bag of “potting soil” but failed, and set it down to continue talking to the camera while trying to play it cool.

It’s unclear why it took her 20-minutes to “re-pot” one small plant, but she didn’t spare” any details.

But her viewers did:

“From this day forth, my answer to the prompt, “on a typical Sunday, you can find me…”, shall be: watching @AOC re-pot a plant on Instagram live.” pic.twitter.com/j3DXjUq4tV — Sam (@levoodle) March 17, 2019

 “Just spent the last 45 minutes watching @AOC repot a plant on Instagram live and I have truly never loved anybody more.” pic.twitter.com/pxnP0eR2sQ — Maher (@maheralsakkaf1) March 17, 2019

“.@AOC is trying to re-pot a plant on Instagram live and this is the millennial representation we were promised.” pic.twitter.com/HGnDfT3zcZ — Remy Carreiro (@Remy_Anne) March 17, 2019

In addition to re-potting plants “Green Thumb AOC” suggests the kinds of vegetables she thinks her constituents should be “growing.”

And naturally, those crops to be grown are viewed through the prism of “colonialism,” not the actual growing “climate”, which ironically, she claims to be an “expert” on.

 “Growing cauliflower in community gardens is part of the ‘colonial’” attitudes that my ‘Green New Deal’ will stamp out. What I love too is growing plants that are culturally familiar to the community. It’s so important.

She went on to add that growing cauliflower is “racist” and the reason communities of “color” oppose environmentalist movements.

“But when you really think about it, when someone says that it’s ‘too hard’ to do a green space that grows yucca instead of, I don’t know, cauliflower or something, what you’re doing is you’re taking a colonial approach to environmentalism. That is why a lot of communities of color get resistant to certain environmentalist movements because they come with the colonial lens on them.”

In just a few months of spare time gardening, ”Green Thumb AOC”  has become an expert on which veggies are “white supremist, colonial slave owners” preferred garden variety and the detrimental effects those “vile” vegetables have on the Black and Latino communities.

 

Prior to the “green thumb” gardening lessons, the socialist “lightning rod” complained about having to “work all the time” as a member of Congress.

“Okay guys, I’m just getting out of work, that’s my office behind me. Um the thing they don’t tell you about working in Congress is that if you do what you’re supposed to do, you’re working all the time, which means you have no time to set up your life. So, I spent weeks sleeping on an air mattress, and I don’t own a chair. So, I’m gonna try to do that,” Ocasio-Cortez quipped.

Thankfully, Green Thumb AOC didn’t spend too much time talking about “politics.” At least people know now how to “re-pot” a plant and not grow “racist, colonial cauliflowers.”

I swear “Green Thumb AOC” has the IQ of a “potted” plant.

Why do conservatives hate Ocasio-Cortez’s community garden?

 

Hamberders are Racist

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , on January 21, 2019 by andelino

President Trump buying “fast food” for the 2019 College Football Playoff National champions is “racist” because football is a “predominately black sport” according to ESPN’s Molly Qerim.

It’s “tragic” to say, but with the introduction of the idea that only a “racist” would give football players “Hamberders”, we’ve officially exhausted every possible reason to be angry about serving “flavors of Negros” food in the White House.

 

“ESPN host says @realDonaldTrump was racist to give Clemson football players fast food. This really just happened on @espn air. We’ve got an early lead for wokest take of the year!” Video: https://t.co/ZTnMy45GzD — Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) January 16, 2019

Qerim’s very special moment of “insight” came amid a broader discussion regarding the Clemson Tigers’ visit to the White House, where they were greeted with a fast food meal that Trump purchased “out of pocket” due to the government shutdown.

The White House spread included “burgers, pizza, chicken nuggets, fish sandwiches, and French fries.” Though the players appeared to “appreciate and enjoy” the meal, many in the very serious fake news media felt that the meal represented a direct affront to “decency and kindness.”

ESPN Negro personality Stephen A. Smith, said it was “terrible” that football players were provided with burgers and pizza, calling the meal“disgraceful.”

“It was classless on the part of the president of the United States. I don’t give a damn about White House employees on furlough because of the whole border security issue with the Democrats or whatever. I don’t want to hear all of that,” he said.

Never mind that star Clemson quarterback Trevor Lawrence said it “was awesome!”

Smith added, “At the end of the day, these are elite athletes that are national champions that put forth an absolutely shocking and stellar performance and this is how you greet them. It was classless, it was wrong to do, he could do better than that, and it’s unfortunate that the leader of the free world, the president of the United States, would choose … that he would choose to conduct himself this way. But are we surprised? Absolutely not.”

In contrast, ESPN’s Max Kellerman downplayed the matter, saying “there are much bigger things to be angry about.”

This is when Molly Qerim interjected to suggest the “meal was also racist.”

“I don’t know, I guess I took it very differently,” Qerim said. “When I saw him giving the football players — it’s a predominately black sport and fast food, my thought went a very different place.”

Smith liked where she was going with her line of thinking, adding his own conspiratorial note, “One could also make the argument that it falls in line with an abundance of other things that have transpired with this particular individual.”

Burger King, meanwhile, has responded in its typical “relatable brand” voice on Twitter.

Things like this ESPN discussion really bolster Rep. Steve King’s, R-Iowa, claim this week that the word “racist” is a “worn out label.”

The word has been so badly “abused” that it is now dangerously close to being a meaningless “sound” no different from a ”grunt.“

Accusations of “racism” should be saved specifically for things that are “explicitly” racist like things we do every day that could be “triggers” for racial minorities.

For example “Everything can be Racism” like…

Putting milk or cream in your coffee
I know. You just don’t like the taste of black coffee, right? Wrong. Taste is merely the excuse for your putrid racism and hatred, which you dilute out of existence with a few tablespoons of white liquid. Drinking coffee with your breakfast? You’re practically a full-fledged member of the KKK.

Waving at a person of color
Have you ever waved at a “Person of Color” on the street, thinking you’re just being friendly and inviting? Think again. Waving is symbolic of oppression and superiority, which actually makes PoC feel threatened and intimidated. To avoid exercising your white privilege, you should allow PoC to wave first, which you should follow-up with an apology and trigger warning before waving back.

Applying to university
If you apply to university as a white person, you could potentially be taking a spot away from an underprivileged person of color. Knowing this and applying anyway is a loud proclamation of racist intent, which you should be deeply ashamed of. To avoid depriving racial minorities of their right to an education, try e-mailing every PoC in the country and asking their permission to apply first.

Are you enlightened yet? I sure am. Journey forth with me into “post-racial” America.

What else could go wrong with “Negros?”

“>ESPN’s Molly Qerim Implies Trump Is a Racist for Serving ‘Predominantly Black’ Players Fast Food

Gorilla News

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

gorilla-news-02

First came GQ magazine recognizing Harambe as one of the least “influential” animal of 2016 who is up in gorilla “heaven” wondering why he had to “die” for the stupidity of “parents” who couldn’t  control their boy.

Then came Artvoice interviewing “different” people what they “would like to see in 2017” asking the following questions:

  1. What would you most like to happen in 2017?
  2. What would you like to see go away in 2017?
  3. Who would you like to see run for mayor of Buffalo in next year’s election?
  4. Should the new $50 million Amtrak station be at Central Terminal or Canal Side?
gorilla-news-01

Carl Paladino. Developer, School Board Member, Political Activist.

Here is what Carl Paladino, Developer, School Board Member and Political Activist was “wishing” for:

  1. Barack Obama catches mad cow disease after being caught having relations with a Herford.  He dies before his trial and is buried in a cow pasture next to Valerie Jarrett, who died weeks prior, after being convicted of sedition and treason, when a Jihadi cell mate mistook her for being a nice person and decapitated her.
  1. Michelle Obama.  I’d like her to return to being a male and let loose in the outback of Zimbabwe where she lives comfortably in a cave with Maxie, the gorilla.
  1. Someone with a brain, a set of balls and a lack of fear who has enough money so as not to owe anyone anything once elected and who believes in a market economy.
  1. We need a $50 million dollar train station as much as we need parasitic people like Lou Ciminelli, 80% of the school board and the dizziness of socialistic progressive politicians who never signed the front of a paycheck.  At best 400 people a day take a train.  They are not complaining about exchange or Depew.  We are already the laughingstock of America for having the dumbest elected leaders ever.  Why add to it.

Paladino’s interview responses “sparked” an immediate “outcry,” with many calling it racist, but he isn’t “backing” down in the slightest.

In a “lengthy” video statement given to The Buffalo News, Paladino literally told his critics to “go fuck themselves.”

It has nothing to do with race. That’s the typical stance of the press when they can’t otherwise defend the acts of the person being attacked.

It’s about 2 progressive elitist ingrates who have hated their country so badly and destroyed its fabric in so many respects in 8 years.

It’s about them diminishing the respect for their country on the world scene, surrendering its status as the protector of human rights, disgracing the memory of its veterans who gave so much.

It’s about demeaning and weakening what was the most powerful military in the world, firing hundreds of good soldier Generals and Admirals who refused Barack’s illegal and irresponsible dictates.

Michelle hated America before her husband won.  She then enjoyed all the attention, the multi -million dollar vacations, the huge staff and other benefits. Then when Hillary lost, she and Barack realized that without Hillary, there was no one to protect the little, if any, legacy he had.  That’s when Michelle came out and said there is no hope for America.  Good, let her leave and go someplace she will be happy.

As for Barack, he’s a yellow-bellied coward who left thousands to die in Syria and especially Aleppo and he gets on TV and says he feels bad he couldn’t do anything about it.

He supported the mass migration without vetting of people from Muslim countries and the open borders, not for the people, but to expand the democratic base to a permanent majority.

He couldn’t care less about the people.  He just commuted the sentences of another 650 drug pushers responsible for selling poison to our kids.

It’s about the middle class, silent majority, rising up to destroy the Republican and Democrat establishment in America.

It’s about the end of an era when the people took all their information from the main street media, letting them tell us what the issues are and how to resolve those issues. People no longer trust the press.

It’s about that fraudulent, shadow government with a lazy ass president who allowed non-Americans like Valerie Jarret to run the government on a day to day basis and order the Stand down in Benghazi and the later cover-up that does matter.

It’s about Lois Lerner and the head of the IRS and the other criminal officials who haven’t been prosecuted or even investigated because the leaders of the progressive movement are above the law.

It’s about the end of the progressive movement and reset of the direction of America for the next 30 years.

It’s about a president who interfered in a presidential election for his successor so flagrantly that he called Trump unfit for office.

It’s about a president who for 8 years did absolutely nothing for black children in our urban centers held prisoner by the cycle of poverty and illegitimate black leadership more interested in power and preserving their voting base by keeping them hungry and uneducated in the inner cities.

And yes, it’s about a little deprecating humor which America lost for a long time.

Merry Christmas and tough luck if you don’t like my answer

merxmas

WBEN Radio “run” a survey. 51% saw nothing “wrong” with Paladino’s comments.

gorilla-news-03

Paladino Under Fire for Comments to Artvoice

How To Win Elections

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , on October 28, 2016 by andelino

cousin-pookie-00

The secret to “winning elections” is the People’s Hero, “Cousin Pookie,” the guy on the couch.

cousin-pookie-02

President Barack Obama brought back “Cousin Pookie” during a voter rally for Illinois’ “incumbent” Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn.

cousin-pookie-06

Crack smoking “Cousin Pookie.”

Speaking before a crowd at Northwestern University in Chicago, IL., the president “urged” the crowd to “insist” their hypothetical “Cousin Pookie” vote in the “upcoming” November 8th elections.

cousin-pookie-03

“Starting tomorrow, you can vote too. You’ve got to grab your friends. You’ve got to grab your co-workers,” he urged the crowd.

“Don’t just get the folks who you know are going to vote. You’ve got to find ‘Cousin Pookie.’ He’s sitting on the couch right now watching football, hasn’t voted in the last five elections, you’ve got to grab him and tell him to go vote.”

cousin-pookie-04

Obama famously brought out folk characters like “Uncle Pookie,” “Ray Ray” and “Uncle Jethro” during the 2008 presidential elections, as a means to “energizing” minority communities that may not be as “inclined” to vote as others.

cousin-pookie-05

Some black “cultural” critics have suggested “Pookie,” the name of a troubled character in “New Jack City” which has become a symbol for “black-every-day-youth.”

Do your part. Check your couch, your neighbors couch, the couch at the EBT office, the Social Security office, and the mall where you hang out.

Anyone who does not find a “Cousin Pookie” will be directly responsible for the “election” results, and be labeled a “racist.”

Go Find POOKIE!

cousin-pookie-01

Found his wife but…still looking for Pookie!

“Pookie” keeps popping up in Obama’s speeches

ESPN Social Justice Warriors

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , on May 3, 2016 by andelino
Curt Schilling 04

Curt Schilling, former “Major League Baseball” pitcher who won three “World Series” titles and ESPN Baseball Analyst Broadcaster.

I guess the below “transaction” was a FEC filing that Curt had to fill out when he “donated” money to an election campaign.

Obviously he “knew” for some time that his days at “ESPN” would come to an end “sooner than later.”

Curt Schilling 05

ESPN’s “Social Justice Warriors” disliked him because he won’t stop being the “truthful”  uncle re-tweeting  “memes” on Facebook, but he’s not “walking” away.

There won’t be an “amicable” split where everyone is “still friends.” You want me gone, “fire me” because I’m not “leaving” as long as the “checks” keep clearing,

Curt Schilling 01

And promptly, the former “Major League Baseball” pitcher who won three “World Series” titles as a pitcher with the Arizona Diamondbacks and the Boston Red Sox was “sacked” from his job as a “baseball analyst” by ESPN’s “Social Justice Warriors.”

ESPN released a statement saying Schilling was no longer “welcome” as a broadcaster. “ESPN is an inclusive company. Curt Schilling has been advised that his conduct was unacceptable and his employment with ESPN has been terminated.”

What was the “final” straw that “broke” the camel’s back?

Schilling “re-tweeted” this meme on Facebook showing a large man “wearing” a wig and women’s clothing.

Curt Schilling 03

The “re-tweet” was apparently in response to the “controversy” over the North Carolina “bathroom bill” law which serves as a noteworthy example of “fair and rational legislation to protect society’s most vulnerable members.”

H.B. 2 is a “pro-freedom and democracy” law that applies “only” to government-run facilities, liberating “private institutions, small businesses, and charities” from coercion by the state.

Schilling was previously “suspended” by ESPN’s “Social Justice Warriors” last year after he “re-tweeted”  a meme about Nazis and Muslims.

Curt Schilling 06

Here is Curt Schilling’s response after getting “attacked” by the mainstream media for being a “racist”

Curt Schilling 02

This is likely the easiest way to address all of you out there who are just dying to be offended so you can create some sort of faux cause to rally behind.

Let’s make one thing clear right up front. If you get offended by ANYTHING in my post, that’s your fault, all yours.

And for you people too dense to understand this one very important thing. My opinion, 100% mine, and only mine. I don’t represent anyone but myself here, on Facebook, on Twitter, anywhere.

1.The Nazis/Muslims meme the world decided to rally behind that I posted months ago. The meme that some of you clowns and more of you spineless looking to be offended folks turned into something it was not. Every one of you gutless cowards, when ‘calling me out’ or calling me a racist, every one of you left out the only word in that entire meme that mattered. You had to, otherwise you’d have had to go elsewhere to find offense and create something out of nothing. Let me help you now. All of you fraudulent media folks, you lazy ass “don’t actually want to work for a story” clowns. The word you left out? The ONLY word that mattered? EXTREMIST. That word being omitted creates two completely different posts with two very different meanings. I don’t dislike or hate Muslims, or people of the Islamic faith. Ask my friends that are both. But then again you all knew that, but when you omit the word EXTREMIST you create a person that doesn’t exist and have a story with traction, even if it is a complete lie.

2.This latest brew is laughingly beyond hilarious. I didn’t post that ugly looking picture. I “re-tweeted” a meme about the basic functionality of men’s and women’s restrooms, period.

See here’s the thing. I do NOT care what color you are, what race, what sex, who you sleep with, what you wear. I don’t care and I never have. I have opinions, but they’re just that, opinions. And opinions are like buttholes, everyone has one and they usually stink.

You know how I know you ‘offended’ people are full of crap? Because I’m not even close to any of the things you so desperately want me to be, so you can whine.

I’m loud, I talk too much, I think I know more than I do, those and a billion other issues I know I have. Like everyone of you I have flaws, but I’m ok with my flaws, they’re what make me, me. I thank the Lord for the life I’ve been given. A life interspersed and occupied by men and women who are gay, by people of all races and religions, by men and women who dress as the other, by men and women who’ve changed to women and men. Not one decision I’ve ever made about a person has anything to do with those things I just mentioned, nor will it ever.

You frauds out there ranting and screaming about my ‘opinions’ (even if it isn’t) and comments are screaming for “tolerance” and “acceptance” while you refuse to do and be either.

YOU’RE the ones making it the issue. I don’t care, if you ask me about any of the topics it’s likely (much to the chagrin of many) I’ll answer with my opinion.

There are things I have deeply held beliefs in, things I have that are core to who I am, things I am passionate about. If you ask me about them it’s likely I’ll give you a passionate answer, whether you like that answer or not is completely up to you. I am not going to give you answers to make sure you like what I say, let the rest of the insecure world do that.

But let me reiterate, I don’t care who, what, where or why you are who you are. I care about people and how they treat others. You will NEVER in your lives find a single person who’s met me/knows me who would ever say I treated them as anything other than a human. None.

Wouldn’t you assume that all of you offended folks would have heard of me treating people the way you needed me to treat them, to be what you so desperately want me to be? If people want to create stories or impressions where there are none, and you want/need to get offended by them that’s on you.

But for now, if you want to be offended and have that offense be by something you THINK you interpreted or you THINK you heard, go for it.

But for the love of God stop making crap up, it’s boring and it’s stupid and there are actual causes that need attention such as homeless veterans and our archaic education system.

Two benefits of this I didn’t foresee. 1) Twitter has made their “Block” far easier to use. 2) You find out who your friends are when folks create crisis about you, that actually aren’t.

Curt Schilling 00

On the “transgender” issue I’m with Schilling. It’s just makes “common” sense.

If you have a “penis” you should use a stall in the men’s room.

If you have a “vagina” you should use a stall in the ladies room.

It doesn’t mean I “dislike” transgenders, it just means I don’t think making one person “comfortable” should come at the “expense” of making another one “uncomfortable.”

Here are some more Curt Schilling’s “I’m not being racist I’m just sharing truth” memes…

Curt Schilling 07

Curt Schilling 08

Curt Schilling 09

Curt Schilling 10

Curt Schilling 11

Curt Schilling 12

Curt Schilling 13

Curt Schilling: Won’t Engage in Political Correctness For Hall of Fame Slot
Curt Schilling – After the Tweets

Plagiarist Fareed Zakaria

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , on January 19, 2016 by andelino

Fareed Zakaria 01

CNN host Fareed Zakaria is calling to censor social media because he was offended by The People’s Cube satire about his writings without mentioning that the satire was a “hyperbolic buildup on his own recent blog writings.”

Zakaria “cries” for government protection of his “hurt” feelings, making it clear that he “can dish it out but can’t take it.”

Taste your “own” medicine, Fareed!

Progressives have “trolled, ridiculed, satirized, maligned, insulted, bullied, and lied” about conservatives since the “inception” of the Internet. But once they see the signs of oncoming traffic, they “cry” and run to mommy – “or to the nanny state in this case” – asking to make it a “one-way” street once again, where only they can “ride their tricycles, wear funny hats, and fling poop at those whom they consider inferiors.”

Watch Fareed Zakaria on camera “wiping” his face from the poop “flung” at him.

Open letter to Fareed Zakaria from The People’s Cube

Dear Fareed,

There have been studies showing that a foreign-born author’s unique perspective can help the natives to boost their own creative thinking through the so-called “schema violation,” which occurs when our world is turned upside-down. You may argue that your “otherness” benefits and enlightens this country, with an implication that those unwilling to be enlightened by you are bigots who resent your “otherness” and won’t have their old schema to be violated by a newcomer.

Like you, I am a foreign-born author whose English is a second, or, rather, a third language; I know what it feels to be “the other.” I also like to help the natives to boost their creative thinking by turning their reality upside-down and sending their temporal and spatial cues off-kilter (my website, The People’s Cube, is one such big schema violation). I don’t resent anyone’s “otherness” as long as they don’t attempt to make me comply to theirs. In sum, I am not concerned with your ethnic or cultural “otherness.” It is your ideological “otherness” that bothers me, which you happen to share with native-born misguided “progressives.”

Now that we got the implication of bigotry out of the way, let’s get down to business.

On January 2, one of our contributors posted a satirical response to your Washington Post article where you apparently gloated over the premature deaths of white males in America. Our author took your argument to its logical conclusion, adding the need to exterminate white females as well – through Jihad, rape, and sex slavery as recently seen in Europe and elsewhere. This parody wasn’t meant to be taken as factual reporting, given the context of our website and especially considering the author’s credentials at the top: Chedoh, Kommissar of Viral Infections, Hero of Change, Prophet of the Future Truth.

On January 14, you responded to our satire in your Washington Post article titled, Bile, venom and lies: How I was trolled on the Internet, and today you started your show on CNN with a segment titled, Fareed’s Take: I was the target of Internet trolling, in which you were mostly reading your earlier article from the teleprompter. Among other things you claimed that our story “was cleverly written to provide conspiracy theorists with enough ammunition to ignore evidence” and complained that some people took our “reporting” seriously and re-posted it in social media with impolite comments, all of which led you to conclude that someone must create a mechanism in social media “to distinguish between fact and falsehood.” And since that someone can only be the government, your statement can only be understood as a vague call for the government censorship of the Internet.

However, neither your article, nor the CNN segment mentioned that our grotesque fiction was based on your own controversial ideas that many Americans found insulting and grotesque. Why? Was it because such an admission would have undermined your argument that people were angry at you over nothing?

And why in the world, Fareed, did you decide to bring up the term “radicalization,” which in today’s world is mostly associated with Islam? Do you have such a tin ear – or do you really think that if you broaden the definition and talk about “American radicalization,” people will begin to see the two as morally equivalent? Do you think they are morally equivalent, Fareed?

Fine, let’s talk about radicalization.

For you, sitting on the top floors of your well-protected media establishment’s ivory tower, it’s easy to downplay the threat of Islamic radicalization and throw the “Islamophobia” labels at all those little people down at the street level. The only radicalization to which your skewed radar is attuned is the faintest sound of protest from the little people, when they get fed up with your condescending elitism and begin to rebel against the “progressive” establishment. That’s what scares you the most, doesn’t it, Fareed? That’s when you mouth off your grave concerns on CNN and write in WaPo about the threat of radicalization.

But who is at fault that Americans no longer trust the establishment and its media? Have you considered the possibility that none of this would be happening if you and your colleagues weren’t so radical yourselves, feeding the people with half-truths, distortions, propaganda, and outright lies, placing your Utopian “progressive” ideology above facts, smug and secure in your impenetrable media castle? Did it occur to you that you and your media establishment may be the very reason why so many people suddenly like Donald Trump, whom you so despise, and nothing you say on the subject can change their minds because no one trusts you anymore?

Fareed Zakaria 02

When you talked about a study where “simply by talking to one another, the bigoted students had become more bigoted,” has it even occurred to you how perfectly this describes your “progressive” echo chamber, where tolerance towards opposing philosophical viewpoints is nonexistent? If you think that calling those who disagree with you “bigots” makes you an anti-bigot, let me share a little secret. There are two kinds of bigots today: the bigots and the anti-bigots, and it’s hard to say which kind is worse.

A good example of “group polarization” involving radical “anti-bigots” is JournoList – a highly biased group of about 400 left-wing journalists and political activists who for three years (2007-2010) participated in a private online echo chamber where they, in violation of public trust and professional ethics, conspired to coordinate media attacks on conservatives, to promote certain issues while burying others, and to influence the 2008 elections in favor of Barack Obama. To paraphrase Kolbert’s study, “Simply by talking to one another, the radical left-wing journalists had become more radical left-wing journalists.” To use your exact quote, “It is how radicalization happens and extremism spreads.” Say, were you just as worried about “group polarization” then as you are now?

Another example of such “group polarization” and radicalization is a knee-jerk impulse of allegedly mainstream journalists to describe anyone who doesn’t lean left as “far-right,” as you have demonstrated in your CNN segment, or “ultra-right-wing,” as you have demonstrated in your segment.

Isn’t it a little too late to complain about America’s radicalization, Fareed? Where were you during the George W. Bush years, when your fellow “progressives” trolled, ridiculed, and slandered the U.S. President and his supporters, with full support of the mainstream media? When there no longer was any distinction between a drug-fueled street protester and a media commentator?

Did you complain when “progressive” satirists collectively created a false, hyperbolic reality around Bush, conservatives, Fox News, and America in general, which was then regularly disseminated as the truth around the world, translated into many languages, and contributing to the anti-American sentiment? Some of my own family members in Russia and Ukraine still honestly believe that those “facts” really happened. As you so eloquently stated,” the people spreading this story were not interested in the facts; they were interested in feeding prejudice.” Did you complain then, or did it feel too good to let go?

You refer to a scientific study of Facebook users, which found that “people mainly shared information that confirmed their prejudices, paying little attention to facts and veracity.” That sounds reasonable. For example, even without a scientific study I know that an overwhelming majority of your fellow “progressives” believe that Sarah Palin has actually said “I can see Russia from my house,” paying little attention to the fact that it originated as an SNL skit. Did you complain about that in 2008? Were you at all concerned that Tina Fey’s “Palin” videos might confuse voters and skew the election? Probably not; it was just satirical hyperbole.

What if social media encourage misinformation, rumors, and lies, you ask. But did you ask the same question when misinformation, rumors, and lies were coming not from social media but from a seasoned mainstream journalist named Dan Rather – or, more recently, The Rolling Stone Magazine? Or, worse yet, from the nation’s political leaders whom you support and admire? Wasn’t the entire debate on and implementation of ObamaCare based on misinformation and lies? Were you alarmed when Joe Biden told a black audience that the Republicans would put them back in chains?

Did you speak against radicalization when the “hands up don’t shoot” movement, based on misinformation, rumors, and lies, and encouraged by the mainstream media, resulted in looting and the destruction of property, followed by the murders of innocent police officers?

The answer to all those question is “no.” You have never violated the “progressive” schema, Fareed. You’ve been a loyal Party soldier, albeit a mediocre creative thinker, having traded your “otherness” for “group-think” and sacrificing your unique perspective to what you thought was “progress.”

Examples are plenty; more can be provided upon request. Now let’s talk about victim-hood.

You say you are the victim because you have received some hateful messages and comments. I have also received many hateful messages and comments from your fellow “progressives” over the years. Now what? You claim you have received a late-night phone call that woke up and threatened your little daughters. Indeed, Fareed, making threatening calls is a crime. Did you file a police report? Did the police trace the number and find the perpetrators, who are hardly a sophisticated organization behind an impenetrable firewall? If not, I can’t believe every claim that comes from a confirmed plagiarist. You may as well claim that someone kicked your three-legged puppy and it made you cry.

While you played the world’s saddest song on the world’s smallest violin, I was the one who took the real hit. Snopes.com, a “fact-checking” website rooting for the “progressive” team, has not only debunked our satire as they’ve done it many times in the past – this time they also made an unsourced and slanderous allegation that our site is “known for spreading malware.”

Next, some busybody contacted one of our advertising providers, Content.ad, which then declined to pay our advertising earnings due to “serious quality issues.” The money we lost as a result may be small change compared to your CNN contract, but if you were penalized for your writings in the same proportional amount, I’m sure your righteous indignation would go well beyond just one article in WaPo and a five-minute segment on CNN.

There is only one victim of lies, prejudice, and institutionalized bias here – and it ain’t you, Fareed. But don’t let this stop you from playing your upside-down game of “victims and radicals” while you still can.

So you think your opponents are radicals? Here’s a news tip: down here in the streets below you, it’s the other way around. Growing numbers of Americans see you and your media colleagues as radical ideological hacks. You can call them any name you want, adding ultra-, far-, uber-, and other hyphenated insults; that won’t change the fact that their thinking is the norm and yours is not. Like all normal people on this planet, they don’t respond well to insults. But they are also the ones who make sure you have the freedom to call them radicals.

Oleg Atbashian
AKA Red Square
People’s Director,
Department of Visual Agitation and Unanimity

Zakaria said that it is not obvious that “The People’s Cube” is a satire page to paraphrase. Yet the Washington Post declared them as “Arguably one of the Internet’s most satirical websites”. And if “that” isn’t enough maybe the author, a “cheeto dressed as Che Guevara,” might have been another dead giveaway.

Really this whole “episode” reminded me of two “clips” I’ve seen from another “satirical” source. Although it may not be “clear satire” if we were to use the “racist plagiarist” Fareed Zakaria’s standards.

To underscore Zakaria’s call to “censor social media” he was suspended by CNN and Time magazine after he admitted that he had “plagiarized” portions of an article he wrote on “gun control” for Time, from the New Yorker magazine.

He issued an apology saying he had made a “terrible mistake” and his lifting a paragraph from the article by Harvard University professor of American history Jill Lepore was an “ethical lapse.”

Zakaria, 48, a Yale and Harvard graduate, had written the column on gun control that appeared in the August 20 issue of Time magazine.

Newsweek adds “plagiarism” warning to all Fareed Zakaria “articles”

And here Zakaria “slams” Sarah Palin as being “retarded”

The wrongs of Fareed Zakaria
America’s self-destructive whites
Fareed Zakaria seems fine with white people killing themselves
This Country Has Had To Give Classes To Teach Muslim Immigrants NOT To Rape Women
CNN’s Fareed Zakaria Calls For Jihadist Rape Of White Women

Gentrification

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , on December 9, 2015 by andelino

Gentrification 01

The “common” living arrangements of “Next Tuesday” in urban areas in American cities are “endangered” by white, heterosexual, “wealthy” capitalists.

Gentrification is “whitey’s” clever plan to “disrupt” single parenthood, government “dependence,” and our beloved diverse and inclusive “EBT” lifestyle by displacing the less “fortunate” and building high rise, “non-subsidized,” luxury housing.

Gentrification 03

Fight this “gentrification” of displacement. Stand against this “travesty,” or face the “indignities” of “neighborhood watches, homeowners associations, and stores” that don’t provide “free” government handouts!

Gentrification is the “buying and renovating” of houses and stores in “deteriorated” urban neighborhoods by “wealthier” individuals, which in effect “increases” property values and “displaces” low-income families and small businesses.

This is a “common” and widespread “controversial” topic in urban planning. It refers to “shifts” in an urban community “lifestyle” and an increasing “share” of wealthier residents and businesses.

Gentrification 02

In a community “undergoing” gentrification, the average “income” increases. Poorer “pre-gentrification” residents who are “unable” to pay increased “rents or property taxes” may find it necessary to “relocate.”

Everyone knows gentrification is “racist,” fostering “discrimination” that hurts “marginalized” people and “destroys” communities and cultural “reality” in which people with more “social, political and economic power” have more control over the “less” fortunate.

When I think about “gentrification” it’s not a clear picture of “behemoth” corporations and “soulless” developers snatching real estate from “impoverished” communities while comically “evil” landlords evict their “tenants” into surefire, immediate “homelessness” and politicians throw “money” in the air, laughing maniacally.

Instead, what many “experience” is a more subtle, nuanced version of “gentrification,” in which not every change is “bad” and there aren’t any obvious “heroes or villains” around every corner.

When “regulation” makes it harder to “build or to alter” old buildings, the effect is higher “costs” and reduced “choices,” which can makes things “harder” for the poor. Regulation saves some “old” things people like, but those people will never even know what “new” things they missed out on.

Gentrification 04

If nothing like “gentrification” ever happened in the world, we all still would be living in the same “caves” our ancestors lived in “thousands” of years ago.

The snappiest “push back” against gentrification, and against “development” of any kind, really, is by Chain and the Gang.

“Devitalize the City” is an anthem celebrating “chaos” in the face of market-driven “homogenization” in Washington and “elsewhere.”

New Obama housing rules target segregated neighborhoods
How Obama Will Plan Your Neighborhood
Barack Obama and the Gentrification of America
The Myth of Gentrification
9 Ways Privileged People Can Reduce the Negative Impact of Gentrification
Gentrify!

%d bloggers like this: