Punks Punking

a major award

“ UCLA law professor learns Ferguson-related exam question taboo [...] Professor Robert Goldstein said the exam question was designed to test students’ ability to analyze the line between free speech and inciting violence. It cited a report about how Michael Brown’s stepfather, Louis Head, shouted, “Burn this bitch down!” after a grand jury decided not to indict Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson in the death of Michael Brown. The question then asked students to imagine that they are lawyers in the St. Louis County Attorney’s office and had been asked to advise the prosecutor “whether to seek an indictment against Head” for inciting violence. The exam reads: “[As] a recent hire in the office, you are asked to write a memo discussing the relevant First Amendment issues in such a prosecution. Write the memo.” But students complained, and writer Elie Mystal at the popular legal blog “Above the Law” opined that the test question was “racially insensitive and divisive.” Mystal also incorrectly alleged that the question asked students to “advocate in favor of extremist racists in Ferguson.” Goldstein has apologized for putting the question on the test and has promised not to grade the question. [...] Shame on Goldstein.  Shame on his students. Shame on UCLA.  Shame on a culture that finds this in the least bit acceptable.  ”

Because they're different than us?

a major award

Categorized, Spindled, and Filed

Rick Perry Smelling the Roses

“

Ham Sandwich Indictments Perry has moved up considerably in my election calculus

”

Wages of Liberalism- Harrison Bergeron

“

Harrison Bergeron 2081 Universal Absurdity by crydixxx A short film adaptation of Kurt Vonnegut's Harrison Bergeron, 2081 depicts a dystopian Obamunist future in which, thanks to the 212th Amendment to the Constitution and the unceasing vigilance of the United States Handicapper General, everyone is "finally equal...." The strong wear weights, the beautiful wear masks and the intelligent wear earpieces that fire off loud noises to keep them from taking unfair advantage of their brains. It is a poetic tale of triumph and tragedy about a broken family, a brutal government, and an act of defiance that changes everything. Featuring an original score performed by the world-renowned Kronos Quartet (Requiem for a Dream) and narration by Academy Award Nominee Patricia Clarkson (Far From Heaven, Goodnight and Good Luck), 2081 stars James Cosmo (Braveheart, Trainspotting), Julie Hagerty (Airplane!, What About Bob?) and Armie Hammer (The Social Network).

”

'births that are unworthy..."

Police State          T “ Author: Gvmt should use microchips to deny births to the ‘unworthy’ Although he admits it “sounds blatantly authoritarian” and “violates just about every core value we possess in a free society,” a noted transhumanist author has said a world government body should forcibly sterilize anyone “deemed unworthy” of parenthood by using implanted microchips. Constitutional attorney and civil liberties expert John W. Whitehead, founder of The Rutherford Institute, warned LifeSiteNews.com earlier this year that political officials would long to use this seminal technology. In an article for Wired.com today, philosopher Zoltan Istvan wrote that the notion first crossed his mind when he heard a blonde nurse say, “with 10,000 kids dying everyday around the world from starvation, you'd think we'd put birth control in the water.” The Ehrlichs co-authored the 1977 book Ecoscience with current Obama Science Czar John Holdren. They endorsed a “comprehensive planetary regime” to control fertility, adding that “compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.” President Obama recently said he relies on Holdren to formulate his science policy. After careful thought, in an effort to “give hundreds of millions of future kids a better life, I cautiously endorse the idea of licensing parents,” Istvan wrote today. The process, he said, “would be little different than getting a driver's license.” Parents must “pass a series of basic tests” in order to “get the green light to get pregnant and raise children.” “Those applicants who are deemed unworthy” for a variety of reasons – he lists homelessness, criminal history, and poverty among his examples – “would not be allowed until they could demonstrate they were suitable parents.” Full TEXT Nice adjunct to the last post (The Giver) ” EXT

The Giver

“ Showing the Left’s Egalitarian Consequences The movie (The Giver) beautifully demonstrates a fully-realized concept of what radical egalitarianism could look like in practice. In fact, the community could even be faulted for being too kind to egalitarians — the beautiful, idealized world of peace and harmony has, in the movie, existed for generations without falling prey to many of the easy faults of conceived utopias. Everything is clean, the people content, all obvious needs are provided. This idea that people can be perfectly planned for gives credit to the idea of centralized planning in a way that almost undermines the premise of the movie. Of course all of the centralized planning comes at a cost: mandatory injections remove emotion, choice, personal rights, and even color. Essentially the community can only be perfect because people no longer have a choice. The film fills in the gaps with flashes of color — flashbacks of a world with color, choice, freedom, love. It also shows in full color the downside — war, loss, pain and suffering. The injections took away the ability to choose- which is ultimately what makes us human. Already, the Harry Potter Alliance has begun to try to own the narrative of another dystopia: the Hunger Games. Rather than seeing the government as the enemy, the oddsinourfavor.org website tries to claim the problems are due to “economic inequality” rather than government interference. They are teaching young adults the wrong message, and getting away with it because they aren’t being called on it. Ultimately, the plot is resolved when (spoiler alert!) ....   the main protagonist returns choice to the people and they can finally choose for themselves. Color returns to the community, disaster is averted and egalitarianism is finally seen for what it is — cruel control without a conscience. The message is clear: a free people will never allow their choice to be taken away. This is a crucial lesson — if it can be owned and presented as such. One of the big faults of the conservative movement is that it does not often capitalize on narrative, and allows the left to fill in the gaps. Recently, it was uncovered that a giant cabal of left-wing organizations were organizing online in a Google Group called the “Gamechanger Salon”. After some research, one reporter compiled a list of identifiable members, where a group called the “Harry Potter Alliance” was listed with 12 members — one of the most prominent groups on the entire list. This Harry Potter Alliance lists the following as their organizational purpose: “Just as Dumbledore’s Army wakes the world up to Voldemort’s return, works for equal rights of house elves and werewolves, and empowers its members, we: Work with partner NGOs in alerting the world to the dangers of global warming, poverty, and genocide. Work with our partners for equal rights regardless of race, gender, and sexuality.” This egalitarian message demonstrates the exact kind of thinking that would lead to the creation of a community like in The Giver. ​When a society pushes for everything to be the same, people lose their power of will and choice. The liberal fantasy world where the government has the power to equalize everyone is also the fantasy world where government has the power to remove all choice. In practice, the push for “equal rights” becomes “equal outcomes,” as with the class-war “99 percent” movement and failed “war on poverty,” Personal choice is removed in the name of “global warming”, nationality in the name of “genocide” and color in the name of “race, gender, and sexuality”. It’s not hard to see why in this idealized world, you can’t see color — everything is torn down to sameness in the name of “equality.” Read more at NetRightDaily.com: This may be the first movie I see in a theater since, what?  Bad Santa? ”

Liberals Think?

“They have actually turned thinking into a hate crime!” he declared. “ Thoughtful comedian Evan Sayet explained why the American left is so opposed to argument or debate, arguing that liberals view thought as so inextricably bound to race, identity and orientation that they “have actually turned thinking into a hate crime.” “Liberals only do well when they lecture to you,” he asserted. “They do just fine on the 23-minute nightly news, where [NBC's] David Gregory dictates the truth to you. Take those same arguments to the debate and discussion programs on cable, and it’s only Fox News.” “They have cowed us into not speaking,” he continued. “For one thing we’re polite, and they have made debate and discussion something that is ugly. ‘You’re a racist, you’re a bigot, you’re a homophobe, you’re a xenophobe.’” “They have actually turned thinking into a hate crime!” he declared. “The concept behind this is that anything you believe . . . is so tainted by your personal prejudices — the fact that you’re white, the fact that you’re black, the fact that you’re tall, the fact that you’re short, that you’re fat, you’re skinny, you’re rich, you’re poor — anything you believe is going to be just a reflection of your prejudices.” “Therefore the only way not to be a bigot is to never think at all,” Sayet explained. “So it’s not that the liberal is stupid, it’s that he has made thinking into something he will not engage in.” Read more Some will remember that Evan Sayet was once a writer for Bill Maher before he decided enough was enough and struck out on his own.  In 2007 he made a huge splash with this address to the Heritage Foundation: "How Modern Liberals Think" ”

Voting Liberal

1000 Words

cuzrick

The Duck That Got Way

When Democrats are in charge                                                Duck Dynasty: The Show That Got Away “ [...] This is what happened.  The whole idea of the show was to parade these nouveau riche Christian hillbillies around so that we could laugh at them. "Look at them," we were supposed to say.  "Look how backward they are!  Look what they believe!  Can you believe they really live this way and believe this stuff?  See how they don't fit in? HAHAHA" When the producers saw the way the show was shaping up, different than they envisioned it, they tried to change course.  They tried to get the Robertson's to tone down their Christianity, but to their eternal credit they refused.  They tried to add fake cussin' to the show by inserting bleeps where no cussword was uttered.  At best, they wanted to make the Robertson's look like crass buffoons. At worst they wanted them to look like hypocrites. They desperately wanted us to laugh at the Robertsons.  Instead, we loved them. [Full] Tangentially related .. this reminds me of the Clarence Thomas affair.  Aftermath polls showed that 66%—across the board; Blacks, Whites, Women, Men, Democrat and Republican—66% thought Clarence Thomas was being truthful and Anita Hill the liar.  Hollywood kicked in with references on TV sitcoms and stand up comedy about what a liar Thomas was, and before you know it, the polls reversed themselves.  Which of course demonstrates just how dedicated to the Liberal cause our media are.  And why we have this government.  Sir H ”

Paul Weston : I am a racist

Oh My

cussin' cuzzin ricky

Liberals and the destruction of a fine culture

When Liberals are in charge                                                TO THE REAR, MARCH! After its historic vote to grant membership to openly gay youth, leaders of Boy Scouts of America are anxious to “move forward” as a unified Scouting family, even as an unknown number of chartering organizations, councils, troops and members reassess their participation in the iconic institution. The new membership policy — approved by 61 percent of nearly 1,300 voting members — says that “no youth will be denied membership in the Boy Scouts of America on the basis of sexual orientation or preference alone.” Boy Scouts will ‘move forward’ after vote on gays

Before the invention of writing, these stories and legends were handed down from generation to generation in the form of rituals and oral traditions. The reappearance of certain themes, time and again, in different mythologies, leads to the realization that these themes portray universal and eternal truths about mankind   .... Campbell states that modern society lacks the stability it previously derived from being educated in the mythology and legends of the Greek and Roman classics. Campbell and Moyers agree that there is no effective mythology in modern society by which individuals can relate to their role in the world. The Power of Myth, Joseph Campbell Things may have changed, but when I was a Boy Scout I had to, at twelve years of age, move up to the Explorer Scouts. I didn't want to, so I quit.  The point being that wtff?  Eleven-twelve year-old kids?  We are just getting pubic hair; we have no idea about "sexual preference." We like to see naked girls (and that included all the kids I knew who as adults became hairdressers, ahem). We are however highly suggestible.  When I read about syphilis at age 14, I was absolutely certain that I had it,  based on God only knows?  Toilet seat?  A steamy dream? I went to the movies with my family (Peyton Place) and was afraid  to put my hand in mom's popcorn box when offered for fear of contaminating the family.  The Boy Scouts capitulated then because the Liberal media infrastructure have portrayed them as hateful, venal MOFOs, for not formlly accepting homosexuality; denied them use of public lands, andtook their property.  Another tradition and ritual then have been destroyed by the same pricks who have all but destroyed this nation's cohesive fabric; our national identity.  What we really need from the BSA is  more of this .

ineptocracy

ineptocracy (in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) -

“ — a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers The definition of  ineptocracy was sent by El Jefe.  I found it so delicious that I've endeavored to find the author.  The nearest I can determine,  it was a chap named Bud Miller, in November of 2011. ”

Blame your union

Don't get me wrong; I appreciate the hell out what y'all did, but ...

“ In January, a 53-year-old policeman retired with an annual benefit of $90,312 for life, plus $256,000 in a lump sum payment. Another policeman, 57, got almost $74,000 annually, plus $313,000 in a lump sum. A 54-year-old firefighter got an annual pension of $90,130, plus $178,000 in cash... Sigh