Women’s Anti-American Soccer Team

Posted on | June 13, 2019 | 2 Comments

U.S. Women’s National Soccer team co-captain Megan Rapinoe refused to sing the national anthem during Tuesday’s World Cup game in France, only six days after the 75th anniversary of D-Day.
Rapinioe stood silent with her arms behind her back as the rest of the U.S. team placed their hands over their hearts and sang the Star-Spangled Banner ahead of Tuesday’s game in Reims, France.
The 33-year-old U.S. star kept a stony demeanor as the rest of her team sang the Star-Spangled Banner in the Auguste-Delaune Stadium.
Rapinoe had already warned that she would “never sing the anthem again.”
“I’ll probably never put my hand over my heart. I’ll probably never sing the national anthem again,” Rapinoe said in May adding she views herself as “a walking protest when it comes to the Trump administration,” because of “everything I stand for.”
“I feel like it’s kind of defiance in and of itself to just be who I am and wear the jersey, and represent it,” Rapinoe said. “Because I’m as talented as I am, I get to be here, you don’t get to tell me if I can be here or not. So, it’s kind of a good ‘F you’ to any sort of inequality or bad sentiments that the [Trump] administration might have towards people who don’t look exactly like him. Which, God help us if we all looked like him. Scary. Really scary. Ahh, disturbing.”

Women’s soccer is not for heterosexuals or patriots.

So you protest a president by dishonoring yourself and the entire nation? Statists hate America: Megan Rapinoe: My national anthem protests are an 'F you' to Trump administration https://t.co/RB6rIDOulR

— Chris Loesch (@ChrisLoesch) June 12, 2019

After we all looked back last week on the incredible sacrifices and loss of life suffered on D-Day and remembered the American heroes who made victory possible while marking the 75th Anniversary— the timing of this move seems incredibly callous.

https://t.co/lrUwSVlYQr

— Kari Lake Fox 10 (@KariLakeFox10) June 12, 2019

Category: Sports

Oberlin President Says College’s Deficit Is ‘Unsustainable … We Will Not Exist’

Posted on | June 13, 2019 | Comments Off on Oberlin President Says College’s Deficit Is ‘Unsustainable … We Will Not Exist’

Oberlin College President Carmen Twillie Ambar testfied Wednesday as the lawsuit by Gibson’s Bakery has reached the punitive damages phase:

It was an odd day in the Ohio courtroom today. Oberlin College, which got socked with an $11.2 million verdict last week for their role in defaming a small business as racist, spent half the day saying they weren’t as bad as they seem, and the other half claiming they were much poorer than they seem.
As this Gibson Bros. v Oberlin College lawsuit hits the end of the line, with the jury deciding on whether “punitive” damages will be assessed to Oberlin College, much of the testimony today consisted of the jury hearing how much cash the school has. Or doesn’t have.
But at any time when one tries to define the monetary value of anyone – large institution or ordinary person — it usually comes down to how one might interpret what such fun terms as “revenues” and “expenses” and “deficits” actually mean. Sometimes those terms get interpreted in different ways to get the dollar number one wants.
Oberlin College was so hellbent on getting the message out that their cash liquidity was in such dire straits — as the eight-person jury was figuring out if they wish to add $22.4 million to the school’s legal verdict bill — that they brought out the school’s president, Carmen Twillie Ambar to the stand to tell that part the story.
“We’ve created deficits … and over the next ten years, if this continues, that is unsustainable and we will not exist,” Ambar told the jury. She even indicated the school’s grants — about $60 million a year from the school, and lots of students get those scholarships as only 10% of them pay the full $70,000 a year — were important to preserve as “the accessibility of education” was a key component of the school’s purpose. . . .
Rebecca Vazquez-Skillings, the Oberlin College vice president for finance and administration, was brought to the stand by the plaintiffs’ team to go over the numbers and show how the school had lots of money and how a few million more on this verdict wouldn’t hurt them. . . .
The college has more than $1 billion in funds and net assets according to the latest IRS 990 form, an endowment fund that had grown from $440 million to $887 million in the last 20 years, and because of its non-profit status, pays no taxes on any property it owns.
It also had 18 members of their administration making more than $100,00 a year. The president and chief financial officer of the school were both making more than $500,000 a year. . . .
As for [Oberlin Dean of Students] Meredith Raimondo, she was brought to the stand for a short period in what seemed like an excuse for the plaintiffs to show the jury more emails and texts she was privy to or that originated with her. The punitive stage demands the jury find “malice,” in their deliberations, and these emails and texts tended to prove some of that. . . .
Judge John R. Miraldi had ruled yesterday that an email written by Donica Thomas Varner, Oberlin College’s Vice President and General Counsel, who has been in court since day one, was inadmissible.

Notice that all four of the Oberlin administrators named here — Ambar, Vazquez-Skillings, Raimondo, Varner — are women. Is that just a random coincidence or, as I suspect, is it a result of deliberate anti-male discrimination at Oberlin? Three of them (Ambar, Vazquez-Skillings and Varner) are women of color, and we might further suspect that this reflects anti-white prejudice at Oberlin, which could be of interest to the jury in Lorain County, which is 85% white. Given that this is a case involving Oberlin students making false accusations of racism against private business owners, do you think the jurors will be moved to sympathy by Ambar’s reference to the college’s “unsustainable” deficits?

Oh, and Ambar is being paid more than $500,000 a year to preside over the social justice warrior training camp at Oberlin, while the annual median household income in Lorain County is $52,066.

Where I come from, there’s an old saying, “Payback is a bitch.”

UPDATE: Maximum Punitive Damages: Jury Rains Fire and Brimstone on Oberlin College

Category: Education

In The Mailbox: 06.12.19

Posted on | June 13, 2019 | 1 Comment

— compiled by Wombat-socho

OVER THE TRANSOM
Ninety Miles From Tyranny: The 90 Miles Mystery Box, Episode #649
EBL: What’s Hidden Under The Greenland Ice Sheet?
Twitchy: Watch As Adam Schiff Gets Schooled On James Comey’s Testimony
Louder With Crowder: Vegans Have Themselves Branded, Beaten In Hopes You’ll Stop Eating Meat, also, “I’m Not Sorry. I’m…”

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: Example #1,000,000 Why Women Shouldn’t Have The Vote
American Greatness: Another Media-Fueled Collusion Narrative Falls Apart
American Power: Why We Still Read 1984
American Thinker: John Dean Blows Hole In Democrats’ Impeachment Push
Animal Magnetism: Animal’s Hump Day News
Babalu Blog: Lawyers For Victims Of Havana Plane Crash Harassed, Detained By Cuban Police
BattleSwarm: USA To Turkey: “No F-35s For You!”
CDR Salamander: How Fragile Is Our Navy?
Da Tech Guy: The Democrat 1%ers Counting On The Reaper?
Don Surber: Trump’s Demand-Side Politics
Dustbury: Where Do They Find These People?
First Street Journal: Why Does The LGBT Lobby Want To Introduce Info On Homosexuality & Transgenderism To Second Graders?
The Geller Report: FIRST TIME EVER – India Votes With Israel In UN, also, Girls In Dance Group Forced To Strip Naked By Mob Of 500 Muslim Men During Eid Program
Hogewash: Meanwhile Back At The Court House, also, Team Kimberlin Post Of The Day
JustOneMinute: Bringing The CIA To Justice
Legal Insurrection: Oberlin College Whines To Jury “We’re Cash Poor And A Big Award Will Hurt Students”, also, Conspiracy Theorist Rachel Madcow Chosen To Moderate Democratic Presidential Debate
The PanAm Post: Maduro Owes Hundreds Of Millions To Chicom Tech Firms, also, Socialist Paradox In Venezuela – Inflation Decreases While Poverty Increases
Power Line: Have Liberals Ever Been Right About Anything? also, Good News For Northern Virginia Criminals
Shot In The Dark: Paragraph 10
STUMP: Kerfluffle Over Retirement In Japan – What’s Up?
The Political Hat: The Non-Obsolete Man
This Ain’t Hell: “Let’s Play Twister, Let’s Get Blitzed”
Victory Girls: Bernie Sanders Explains Democratic Socialism
Volokh Conspiracy: Someone (Yet Again) Trying To Disappear Post Criticizing New Britain, CT Volunteer Commissioner Ken Haas
Weasel Zippers: Dem Rep Marcia Fudge Insults Trump Supporters, also, Church Hosts “Social Justice Camp” To Train School Kids To Be Antifa Extremists
Mark Steyn: The Long Legs Of Globalism

Amazon Warehouse Deals

Category: Linkagery

Can Republicans Stop Losing Long Enough for the Left to Destroy Itself?

Posted on | June 12, 2019 | 2 Comments

Have I ever mentioned how much I hate infighting among conservatives? This problem didn’t start with the #NeverTrump crowd. It’s been a problem since the 1950s, at least, and what makes it so frustrating to me is my certainty that, if conservatives could just cease quarreling, unite and maintain control of Washington for a few years, the Left would implode from its own internal contradictions. The Left generally, and the Democratic Party in particular, are so obsessed with power — they want to control every aspect of our lives — that whenever they’re out of power, they suffer a sort of collective nervous breakdown. This is the real story of why Donald Trump has been so demonized. After eight years of Obama, Democrats had come to believe they had found the magic formula that gave them a lock on the White House, and the party’s radical grassroots were busy planning what they’d do once Hillary was in office. Having assumed the continuation of their own power (and having believed their own propaganda), all these people were then completely freaked out by Trump’s victory, and they still haven’t recovered from the trauma.

The endless carping of the #NeverTrump crowd undermines the ability of Republicans to consolidate what they gained by Trump’s victory, and distracts from the opportunity for creative disruption — finding ways to rattle the cages of the Left, to threaten their institutional power bases.

Imagine the sense of panic among academic social justice warriors, for example, at last week’s jury verdict against Oberlin College. If they can no longer get away with phony accusations of racism, this threatens the very core of their enterprise, because what’s the point of being Dean of Students if you can’t mobilize the campus for social justice crusades against mythical dragons of racism, sexism and homophobia?

Or consider the frantic efforts of the Left to silence conservatives on the Internet. Demonetizing the YouTube channel of Steven Crowder, whose Thought Crime was to make fun of a liberal, demonstrates just how desperate the Left is to “win” arguments by suppressing dissent. Their digital goon squads have gotten so out of control that they suspended the Twitter account of a left-wing journalist because they found his book cover offensive. When we can demonstrate how leftists always abuse whatever power they have — and their power inside Big Tech social-media companies is nearly as absolute as their power within academia — this is certainly an effective argument against giving them more power.

Consider the messes that Democrats make wherever they obtain power. Do you really want to turn the rest of America into California? Bankrupt bullet-trains to nowhere, junkies shooting heroin in the streets, outbreaks of Third World diseases — yes, Democrats have ruined California, and they want to ruin the entire country the same way. Yet we see certain Republicans, because of their irrational #NeverTrump sentiments, endeavoring to help Democrats regain the power they lost when Hillary was defeated. Why? What kind of short-sighted selfishness or prejudice can explain the behavior of Charlie Sykes, Tom Nichols, et al.?

Category: Politics

In The Mailbox: 06.11.19

Posted on | June 12, 2019 | Comments Off on In The Mailbox: 06.11.19

— compiled by Wombat-socho

OVER THE TRANSOM
357 Magnum: You Miss Payments And Your Car Will Be Repossessed. Unless…
EBL: The Atlantic‘s Jeffrey Goldberg Gets A Taste Of #MeToo
Twitchy: NYT Writer “Will Gladly Eat Crow” If Trump Loses And Leaves In 2020
Louder With Crowder: Pinterest Permanently Bans LiveAction, also, LGBT Paraders Tell Daily Caller Conservatives Are Threat To Freedom

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: Podcast #111 – The Golden Rules Episode
American Greatness: Leftism Makes People Meaner
American Power: As Homelessness Worsens, Democratic Candidates Stay Mum, also, Lauren Southern Retires From “Far Right” Internet Thug Life
American Thinker: Can California Be Saved?
Animal Magnetism: Animal’s Daily Kiwi Guns News
Babalu Blog: Who Knew? Che Guevara Was A Gay Rights Champion!
BattleSwarm: Pentagon Chicom Expert General Robert Spalding On Beijing’s Strategy Against Trump & America
CDR Salamander: In DC, The Zombie INF Fight Is Afoot
Da Tech Guy: The Irrelevance of Personal Likability, also, Hubris And Impeachment
Don Surber: Rainbow Flag Nonsense
Dustbury: Stronger Stuff
First Street Journal: The Stupidity Of Cory Booker And Other Wild-Eyed Leftists
The Geller Report: NY Imam Convicted Of Terrorism, Deported, also, Is America Disinterested Or Painfully Unaware of The Jihad Threat?
Hogewash: One Year Ago Today, also, Team Kimberlin Post Of The Day
Hollywood In Toto: Humor, Scares Scarce In Anti-Trump The Dead Don’t Die, also, SF Scribe Rejects PC Groupthink With New Anthology
Joe For America: Planned Parenthood Allegedly Hired Prostitutes Fro Staff, Donors, & Guests During Functions
Legal Insurrection: Fauxcahontas Polling At 10% – In Massachusetts, also, Media Declares Speculation About Biden’s Health Off-Limits After Speculating About Trump’s Mental Health
The PanAm Post: Should Chavismo Continue To Exist As A Political Force After Venezuela Restores Democracy?
Power Line: “Sacred Conversations” Draw Attention Of Civil Rights Commissioner, also, From The Mixed-Up Files Of Rep. Ilhan Omar
Shark Tank: Gov. DeSantis Signs Prison Bill, Earns Praise From Democrats
Shot In The Dark: Throne Of Games
STUMP: Taxing Tuesday – Phoning It In
The Political Hat: The Christchurch Ball & Gag
This Ain’t Hell: Thomas Gagne, Triple-Barreled Phony, also, Here We Go Again
Victory Girls: 180 CEOs Tell Red States Abortion Laws “Bad For Business”
Volokh Conspiracy: Knife Ban & Vagueness Case At Supreme Court Conference
Weasel Zippers: Biden Promises To Cure Cancer If Elected, also, NYT Writer Takes Swing At Rep. Dan Crenshaw In Defense of Ilhan Omar, Crenshaw Levels Him
Megan McArdle: The Best Explanation For Trump’s Presidency? He’s Acting Like A Real Estate Developer
Mark Steyn: Lindsay Shepherd Vs. Parliament

Amazon Warehouse Deals

Category: Linkagery

Democrats and Whores

Posted on | June 11, 2019 | 1 Comment

Seven Democrats in the New York state legislature — Sens. Julia Salazar (D-Brooklyn) and Jessica Ramos (D-Queens) and Assembly members Richard Gottfried, Yuh-Line Niou (D-Manhattan), Dan Quart (D-Manhattan), Ron Kim (D-Queens) and Catalina Cruz (D-Queens) — have introduced a bill that would legalize prostitution in the state.

Who is funding this pro-prostitution agenda? Which 501(c)3 non-profit organizations are engaged in advocacy to support this, and who are the major funders of those 501(c)3 groups? Because no honest and intelligent person would advocate prostitution, we may infer that wealthy perverts, or those who hope to profit from the sex trade, are providing the money to promote this legislation, for which Democrats are acting as pimps.

No parent would wish their daughter to become a whore, and yet Democrats want to make this heinous trade a legal “industry”:

A former sex-trade survivor who says she was victimized everywhere from New York City strip clubs to Nevada’s legal brothels is now at the forefront of the national battle against legalization, telling The Post that it only encourages “horrific’’ trafficking.
“A lot of people are under the misconception that just because it’s legal [in Nevada], then it’s safe and it’s clean and that all the people there are consenting, and that’s just not the truth,” said Rebekah Charleston, who appears in a blistering new anti-trafficking video put out by opponents of legalization.
“I think a lot of people have this happy hooker mindset like, ‘Oh well, she looks happy, and she’s an adult, so she should be able to do what she wants,’ when that’s just not reality. The realities of prostitution and sex trafficking are horrific.”
Charleston, 37, is part of a new campaign launched by a coalition of advocacy groups that includes the video, which was unveiled at the World Without Exploitation conference in Washington, DC, on May 23. . . .
Nevada has a 63 percent higher rate of illegal sex-trade activity than any other state in the country and ranks in the top 10 for trafficked and exploited youth, according to the video, which adds that only 10 percent of prostitution in Nevada is legal.
Nevada also is ranked sixth in the country for rapes and sexual assaults against women, according to Awaken, an anti-sex trafficking non-profit based in Reno.
Charleston, originally from Dallas, Texas, said she was raped when she was 14 years old, became addicted to drugs and ran away from home at the age of 17, when she met a pimp that would sell her across the US for the next 10 years.

A pimp is the lowest form of human life, and any legislator who supports prostitution is an active agent of evil.

Category: Crime, Democrats, New York

NY Times Advocates Censorship by Reporting on ‘Far Right’ YouTube

Posted on | June 10, 2019 | 1 Comment

Did I ever mention I can’t stand watching YouTube videos? As a means of communication, the written word is my preferred medium; it is more time-efficient, because I can read faster than anyone can talk. Even Ben Shapiro, who talks so fast I can barely keep up, talks slower than I can read. Give me the transcript of an hour-long YouTube video, and I’ll quickly skim through it, picking out whatever facts are most of interest to me, in a mere fraction of the time it would take to watch the video. So I almost never watch YouTube videos, and thus my intellectual diet is not impacted by the Left’s demonetizing and deplatforming crusades.

Neverthless, there are many millions of people — particularly young people — for whom YouTube is a habit, and the New York Times recently assigned reporter Kevin Roose to do an in-depth story on how 26-year-old Caleb Cain was “radicalized” by watching right-wing YouTube videos:

The internet was an escape. Mr. Cain grew up in postindustrial Appalachia and was raised by his conservative Christian grandparents. He was smart, but shy and socially awkward, and he carved out an identity during high school as a countercultural punk. He went to community college, but dropped out after three semesters.
Broke and depressed, he resolved to get his act together. He began looking for help in the same place he looked for everything: YouTube.
One day in late 2014, YouTube recommended a self-help video by Stefan Molyneux, a Canadian talk show host and self-styled philosopher.
Like Mr. Cain, Mr. Molyneux had a difficult childhood, and he talked about overcoming hardships through self-improvement. He seemed smart and passionate, and he wrestled with big questions like free will, along with practical advice on topics like dating and job interviews.
Mr. Molyneux, who describes himself as an “anarcho-capitalist,” also had a political agenda. He was a men’s rights advocate who said that feminism was a form of socialism and that progressive gender politics were holding young men back. He offered conservative commentary on pop culture and current events, explaining why Disney’s “Frozen” was an allegory about female vanity, or why the fatal shooting of an unarmed black teenager by a white police officer was proof of the dangers of “rap culture.”
Mr. Cain was a liberal who cared about social justice, worried about wealth inequality and believed in climate change. But he found Mr. Molyneux’s diatribes fascinating, even when they disagreed.
“He was willing to address young men’s issues directly, in a way I’d never heard before,” Mr. Cain said.
In 2015 and 2016, as Mr. Cain dived deeper into his YouTube recommendations, he discovered an entire universe of right-wing creators. . . .

You can read the whole thing, which is not-so-subtly advocating censorship of anyone in that “entire universe of right-wing creators” — in other words, anything on YouTube that might persuade you to vote Republican should be banned, according to the New York Times.

Just by the way, it is a fact — not merely an opinion espoused by Stefan Molyneux — that feminism is a form of socialism. Anyone who cares to research the origins of the modern feminist movement will discover that it arose from radical New Left of the 1960s. There are entire books, written by feminists themselves, documenting this history. Quite simply, feminists adapted Marxist theory (i.e., the class struggle between the industrial proletariat and the capitalist bourgeoisie) to claim that the real “class struggle” was between women and the patriarchal oppression of “male supremacy.” Nor is it controversial to say that “progressive gender politics” is harmful to the interests of young men. One thing feminists borrowed from Marxism is a zero-sum-game mentality which justifies anything harmful to men (i.e., the collective oppressors) as beneficial to the “empowerment” of women. This is why, for example, feminists whipped up the “campus rape epidemic” mob hysteria to deprive male college students of due process-rights, so that any male student could be automatically expelled from college on the basis of mere accusation of sexual misconduct. Deliberate falsehoods like the UVA gang-rape hoax were promoted as part of a feminist propaganda campaign to demonize male students as rapists. Given the abundant evidence that feminism is an anti-male hate movement, why does the New York Times portray Stefan Molyneaux’s critique of feminism as controversial? Perhaps because backlash against feminism helped defeat Hillary Clinton in 2016? Perhaps because reporters like Kevin Roose are Democratic Party operatives with bylines, and this whole article about “radicalization” is just an attempt to help Democrats silence their opponents? Douglas Murray points out that Caleb Cain’s “radicalization” was harmless:

He isn’t a school shooter. He isn’t a mosque or synagogue shooter. The NYT writes of how by November 2016 the subject’s ‘transformation was complete’ but this ‘transformation’ resulted in nothing, other than watching YouTube videos.
This isn’t news. It isn’t even fully informed or nuanced analysis. It is simply another demonstration of the double-standard, drive-by shootings that parts of the media are willing to perform in this inglorious stage of its history. A habit which, funnily enough, demonstrates why people might be becoming skeptical — and moving online — in the first place.

If the only result of watching right-wing YouTube videos is that you watch more right-wing YouTube videos, why is the New York Times devoting so much journalistic effort to this phenomenon? If you want to discuss a genuinely dangerous online problem, how about the way vulnerable teenagers are getting sucked into the transgender cult?

Oh, but the New York Times is pro-transgender, so if your 15-year-old daughter starts demanding you call her “Josh” and wants to inject herself with testosterone and get a mastectomy, it would be “right-wing” (and therefore bad) for you to disapprove. Also, there’s a pretty good chance your transgender child would vote Democrat, so the New York Times would never do anything to discourage them.

(Hat-tip: Ed Driscoll at Instapundit.)