The Narrative Goes On And On

So do you remember how last month, while the rest of us were somewhere between stunned and horrified at the savages who killed cartoonists in Paris, half of my colleagues went all sanctimonious and shrieked (I’m informed that’s a sexist word.  Good.  Ladies, if the harpy feathers fit, wear them) all over face book that the REAL issue — the REAL issue — was this bombing of an NAACP office in the springs which not only hadn’t killed anyone, but had barely caused any damage.

The offices are about a mile from the house we were living in at the time, and I THINK I heard the explosion, showing it’s more sound than fury.

At the time I sought out the report, complete with NAACP spokescritter screaming that it was clear it was all about race and wha wha wha poor little us, give us money to atone for your racial sins.

At the time too, if you remember, I said I would bet cash money it had nothing to do with NAACP.  (Granted, I didn’t guess the real motive.  I thought it was personal and directed at the hairdresser that shares the building.  That’s because the real motive was crazycakes.)

The reason is not that I think no one is racist, (impossible, since racism is the default mode of “human”.  Or at least tribalism is.)  It’s not that I think no one would ever have a reason to bomb A NAACP office.  No, the reason I said “unlikely, bordering on the impossible” is that I LIVE in Colorado Springs.

If a bombing of an NAACP office were reported, say, in Detroit or Chicago, I’d sigh and go “Well…”

But Colorado Springs is so white you could pick the few of us who can tan from orbit.

Okay, that’s not exactly true.  Like most places out west, the Springs has  a lot of Hispanics.  If the bombing had been in La Raza headquarters, I’d have gone “I can see that.”

What it doesn’t have is many people of African descent.  Half of the ones it has seem to be from Cape Verde and have come here escaping communism which makes them not the natural constituency for the NAACP.  In fact that community is two streets from my old house, and they are more “Portuguese” than African.  In fact, their kids used to come and drag younger son away to play soccer, which is why all the Portuguese he knows are soccer terms.

A significant portion of the other half are in the military.  Which means, again, they’re less “people of African descent” than “American servicemen/women.”

The demonstrations over the Ferguson thing were pathetic white, privileged college kids (Colorado College.  Liberal arts college.  Google the tuition and stagger) shrieking (yeah, that word again.  If the screech fits, wear it) over “black lives” like they knew their *ss from their elbow, or had ever had less than a comfortable moment in their lives.

In those circumstances, the only way someone could have targeted the NAACP offices would have been if the person doing the targeting had just arrived here from Detroit.  Not that this is impossible, given we import homeless by the busload, due to great “services” BUT you’ll agree highly unlikely.

As I said, it was unlikely enough that I was willing to lay bets it had nothing to do with race.  And I was right. 

Another report here, where they have the good sense not to mention what the NAACP leader said, and the bad sense not to report the full reason for the bombing (or perhaps they didn’t report it, because omitting it lends more credence to the NAACP leader bleating. [Sheep, why, bless you, no.  He’s more of a wolf wearing the pelt.  A really dumb wolf.])

Bleating, you say?  Why, yes.  After they found the suspect in the bombing, they talked to the (very) dishonorable Henry D. Allen Jr. who clearly thinks that yelling wolf is a virtue and also that he’s not quite done milking a totally unrelated incident.  Doubt me?  well, here it is:

Henry D. Allen Jr., president of the local NAACP chapter, expressed skepticism Friday about the accountant version of the story, but he would not say whether he believed his organization was the target.

“He targeted somebody in this building, and in my estimate it was not the tax people,” Allen said. “Does anyone really think this guy is going to admit to this?”

Okay, this guy was just arrested for building a bomb.  I think he might admit it was to the NAACP office.  In fact, had there been the slightest hint of racism or animosity towards people of African descent, dear Mr. Allen, I bet it would be all over the news like your fundraising wet dream.

BUT all that aside, as Charles reported in my comments, yesterday, the guy SAYS he was trying to bomb the CPA’s office in the same building.  Now, this is where the crazycakes comes in, because the CPA is no longer there, having been closed for years and dead since July last year.  And it would seem to lend credence to Mr. Allen’s fighting words.

It would, unless you know the bomber’s history.

Murphy told investigators he made the pipe bomb in his garage the night before the blast, using instructions he found online and materials from his work as a carpenter, according to court records.

Murphy believed the accountant intentionally destroyed his tax records, and he told investigators he “flipped out” because of his financial problems, the documents show. He said he wanted to send the accountant a warning.

“Murphy admitted the rationale for the pipe bomb was rage,” the documents say. According to court records, Murphy owed state taxes.

And also the accountant’s history:

DeHaven pleaded guilty in 2010 to filing false tax returns and was released from federal prison in April 2013.

And yet, despite all this AND this:

Nobody was hurt in the Jan. 6 explosion adjacent to a wall of Mr. G’s Hair Design Studios, a barber shop that also shares the building with the NAACP in a mostly residential neighborhood.

i.e. the fact that Mr. G would have more reason to think it was directed at him, Mr. Allen remains “vigilant.”

“We seek a continued investigation into the motive of the alleged suspect, and we look forward to the culmination of his criminal trial,” he said in a statement. “We will remain vigilant as we continue fighting for civil and human rights in Colorado Springs and throughout the country.”

I think that translates as “despite being proven that our accusations amounted to crying wolf, we remain hopeful our supporters will never see the paper reports.  We will continue to be a divisive force over race in Colorado Springs and the rest of the country.  Give us money.”

I recommend Mr. Allen read the story of the little boy who cried wolf.  It doesn’t end in big fat donation checks.

And I eagerly wait the apologies of my colleagues, those so brave “social” “justice” “warriors” who were offended — OFFENDED — that this non event did not take primacy in reporting over the butchering of journalists for exercising their free-speech and making fun of a barbaric and anti-western minority.

I’m waiting.  Any minute now, they’ll say “we’re sorry for perpetuating a narrative of division and anti-civilizational oikophobia.  Murders are more important than ineptly built bombs that damage the paint on a wall.  Silencing journalists is more heinous than being crazy and hating your CPA. We have intentionally promoted a groundless narrative of race hatred, so we don’t have to confront our own work to undermine the civilization that has made the most people comfortable and prosperous throughout the world since ever.”


Oh, who am I kidding?  I’m NOT waiting with sandwiches by the phone.

Because they’ll never admit they were wrong.  This will never be reported outside local media.  My colleagues will remain convinced they’re more virtuous than the rest of us and that the US is a cesspool of race hatred, much worse than anything Muslim terrorists have done in Paris or even anything ISIS has done.

This is the little self-hatred song that never ends.  The narrative goes on and on.


113 thoughts on “The Narrative Goes On And On

  1. IFF I were concerned about issues of race and/or ethnicity, (and despite the tan-ability of my grandbabies, I’m not), the NAALCP would be the very last organization I would give credence. They have, I think, dispositively demonstrated that they are far more interested in the color of your politics and are using the color of your skin as a stalking horse for the advancement of leftism, which I see as akin to collectivism (if not a part of it), which — by its 20th Century body count ALONE — is the greatest single evil ever encompassed by the mind of man.


  2. Or look at the Chapel Hill killings for a narrative which was born with suspicious speed. The twitosphere wasted no time in telling us the shootings were carried out by a “Christian terrorist”, you know. Also, we got “#MuslimLivesMatter” within a few hours. Funny, all the Muslim lives taken by Saddam and Sons didn’t matter, nor do the ones taken by ISIS, either.

    1. and like this story, the facts are blantantly ignored. The perp is an Evangelical Atheist Leftist (is there one who is a conservative politically? Just one??)

      1. I’ve run into a couple of lesbian atheist Republicans a few times, so I figure it is within the realm of possibility.

        1. The “Evangelical Atheist” type is what was asked about. IE an atheist who makes a Big Deal about being an Atheist and spends as much time mocking Religious People as he does “boasting” about Atheism.

          1. How can you tell a Crossfitter or a Hitchens’ Atheist in a crowd?

            You don’t have to – they’ll tell you themselves within a minute of introduction.

          1. Oh I don’t know. A lot of the Objectivist types are pretty militant about their atheism. It’s part of why I believe Ayn Rand figured out the Soviet Union was a political and economic wasteland, but didn’t understand that it was a spiritual wasteland that created the others.

            It’s also why when I say I’m both Christian and Libertarian, I get looked at like I fell from the moon. 😉

          2. I’m an agnostic. It would be pretty hard to be a militant agnostic.

            “Don’t be so certain! There is a God! Or maybe not! We really don’t know! Join us in uncertainty!”

            1. I don’t know. There is (or was) a type of agnostic that would say “I don’t know if God exists and neither can you”. IE they were positive that nobody could know if God existed.

              Mind you, if such agnostic assholes still exist, they are out-numbered (and out-shouted) by the atheistic assholes. [Smile]

                1. I used to use Joe Haldeman’s version before I really started admitting not believing: “If there is a god, he isn’t someone I’d invite to dinner”

                2. Got it off a button myself.

                  Though I always remember Lewis’s comment: “For agnosticism is, in a sense, what I am preaching. I do not wish to reduce the sceptical element in your minds. I am only suggesting that it need not be reserved exclusively for the New Testament and the Creeds. Try doubting something else.”

                    1. Clearly you need to read more Lewis. 😉

                      Any excuse to read C.S. Lewis is a good one.

                      I know there’s been lots of times I’ve read something by him once, twice, etc., and thought nothing of it, then the next time I’ve gone through it, or a couple of pages later, or sometimes a day or so later, something will click, and I’ll realize, “That was funny!” I don’t know if that’s because I’m slow, or Lewis was sneaky.

      2. Not so far. Every time some new shooting happens, invariably it is some Lefty with mental health issues. As I said elsewhere in the thread, the Left seems to collect crazy like a sweater collecting cat hair.

        As Kate McMillan of Small Dead Animals likes to say, right wing wacko haterz at Westboro Baptist currently running a body count of zero.

        1. Where the shooters are concerned, I think I’ve figured out some of the factors.

          Leftism is kind of the cultural default. Someone who isn’t functional enough to avoid killing people for crazy reasons likely isn’t functional enough to find anything like a sane philosophy on their own. So anything that looks like what a sane person can believe likely was pushed on them by popular culture.

          Pop leftism, at least, seems a poor basis for managing mental health issues. Especially when it comes to staying very far away from recreational drug use.

          As far as reporting and analysis goes, there are a lot of commentators who are invested in not studying the role certain substances may have played in events. We can see this in Ferguson, where the narrative jumped immediately to racism, rather than entertain the possibility that somebody with the right personality and high blood levels could easily behave in way that made self defense legitimate.

          So when they start trying to gin up a panic about the right, then segue into using mentally ill to sell gun control, they don’t really talk about the sort of drugs the shooters had used..

        2. “right wing wacko haterz at Westboro Baptist ”

          Yeah, I’m not convinced they’re right wingers. From what I understand, they’re a family of lawyers and at least the patriarch was involved in democrat politics.

          I think their hatefulness is just a ruse to provoke reactions over which they can sue.

          1. They’re a family of Democrat lawyers and campaign workers. Fred Phelps RAN Al Gore’s campaign in Kansas. The congregation actually threw them out, but couldn’t get them to stop using the name.

            Oh, well, at least we got a good scene in Kingsman out of them.

            1. They are hardcore Woodrow Wilsonesque progs. Their theology is a militant strain of Calvinism that basically consists of them sticking out their tongues and saying, “We’re saved and if you disagree with us in the slightest you can’t be, so nyah nyah!”

              Not sure I’d call that “right-wing.” Maybe primitive progressive?

        3. forget who it was who came out and said they were now all for gun control. No one who was a Democrat or held their views would be allowed to own a handgun or rifle.

          1. I said something to the tune of… I used to scoff when Progressives would explain how they wouldn’t trust themselves with a gun because someone might cut them off in traffic and they’d just start blasting. Change that to “messing with your parking spot” and I said… hm… when they SAY that, maybe we ought to start actually BELIEVING them…

            1. There have been more than one case when it has turned out to be true. Including one of the organizers of the “Million Mom” march.

      3. Usually they get some form of libertarian, since then they can define things so that being publicly religious is an aggression, but lying to obtain a consecrated host and defile it is not. (Usually won’t say it that way, but it boils down.)

    2. Oh, lookee, here’s another one.

      “54-year-old Azzam Ahmed Baytie made two bomb threats at a North Austin Muslim Community Center and a Middle Eastern-style food truck near the Arab Cowboy Cafe and Hookah Lounge. The community center is in North Austin, and the cafe is located in West Campus.”

    3. Yeah. It was an impressive example of organizing a tweet-storm. All the “must be racist” tweets started at one AM the morning after the murders.

  3. Increasingly, I find that the “arguments” and “evidence” being shrieked by SJWs and other Lefty wieners leads me to suspect mental illness. If ISIS is burning guys in cages, but the REAL issue is a fizzle pipe bomb in Colorado that didn’t even burn the paint off the doors of the NAACP office… then the REAL cause of racism in the USA is Lizard People.

    Plus I find when I look up the health histories of the loudest shreikers, bi-polar disorder is often prominently featured. This GamerGate boy/girl creature being the latest example, that one is crazier than a bag of wet weasels.

    1. There are bipolars that are more functional and less messed up.

      I’d suggest that Leftism might be a bit hostile towards best practices for managing the condition.

        1. There is quite a bit you can handle, provided you decide to “handle” it, rather than “embrace” it.

          There is also quite a bit you can’t handle if you decide to embrace it instead of deal with it.

  4. I can’t remember offhand if they were “Evangelical” atheists or not; I only ran into them the two times, and conversation was mostly on other topics. I only knew they were Republicans because they mentioned coming from a local Republican gathering of some sort, and that they were atheist because I overhead one of them ask somebody else if they’d seem them at some atheist group meeting.

    But in general, I’ve found that there is a tendency (particularly on the left, but not too rare on the right, either) to make assumptions that because a person has one trait, they have others. I have encountered rabid environmentalists who are otherwise libertarian; pro-gun, smaller-government, but pro-choice Democrats; young-earth creationist science-fiction fans; and as mentioned above, lesbian atheist Republicans. “Evangelical atheist” and “leftist” might be a common combination of traits, but there is a good possibility it the first does not necessarily apply the latter.

    1. Florence King wrote (heartrendingly) about a lesbian affair in college, and later regretted it because the left side of things kept going ONE OF US ONE OF US. “I was invited to speak at a weekend retreat in the Blue Ridge Mountains put on by a gang of muff-diving Druids whose flyer said: ‘Corn-worshipping Festival, Witchcraft Workshop, Automatic Writing Demonstration, Logic-is-Dead Bonfire, Nude Dancing, Vegetarian Cafe, Non-smokers.’ I returned the flyer with a note across the top: ‘It’s time you knew I’m a Republican.'”

      1. While I understand, given the rest of the flyer, why they would believe logic was dead, I fail to see celebrating the belief as a selling point.

  5. Of course the ‘rest of the story’ will never see the light of day. It doesn’t ‘fit’ the agenda that is already developed. We thought it was a reach to start with, since the bomb wasn’t even on the right side of the building. But those are facts, and obviously little things like that don’t count, since we’re those ebil white racist… sigh

    1. The only possible reason for skepticism about the story is the photograph. That dude looks like he was sent by Central Casting to play this roll in a comedy!

  6. Reblogged this on Head Noises and commented:
    First it was an NAACP bombing.
    Then folks actually looked, and noticed that the main effect of the bomb was discoloration, and it was on the opposite side of the building from the NAACP office– the wall of a hairdresser’s, and the only side that had a very low chance of someone driving by seeing something. So folks inclined to think of it at all figured either “dumb kids” or “attempted insurance claim.”
    Well, we finally found out what caused it. There use to be a guy who did taxes in the building. One of his clients went to jail for tax fraud. The tax guy retired, and died in Arizona before the bombing… but the guy who went to jail was angry that the tax guy didn’t return calls and give him back his tax info, and so planted a bomb at the building.
    The local NAACP guy is really not pleased to find out that now that they finally have an act of aggression, it had nothing to do with them and as just a crazy guy being (thank God!) ineffective.

    1. The local NAACP guy is really not pleased to find out that now that they finally have an act of aggression, it had nothing to do with them…

      Bit disturbing, how accurately this captures the moment.

      1. I did mention this before, but the similar Finnish incident: a pizzeria/kebab place (or combined, it has been a few years and I never paid that much attention to that part) owned by a recent immigrant burned (and a few people in the apartment house it was in the ground floor on died too), looked like possible arson, and everybody, newspapers, politicians and television news either cried racism or at least speculated that had probably been a hate crime. Lots of hang wringing on net forums too, of how horrible Finns can be towards differently colored immigrants with different religions while the poor dears just work hard to make a living.

        Police finds out it was arson for sure. Now everybody assumes that it was a hate crime for sure.

        Police finds out it was the owner . Attempted insurance fraud.

        Crickets. A few voices here and there talking about how you can’t judge all by a few rotten apples. True enough. Except they keep doing that to us native Finns. We are all horribly racist whenever there is even a little bit of proof that maybe a few of us are. And yep, any hostility towards any of these recent immigrants is always of course just because of racism, not, for example, because that particular individual happens to be an ***hole. Or because, for other example, there might be legitimate fears as how bringing in lots of people rapidly from a completely different culture who may not even want to assimilate fully might affect the country.

        1. Same thing happened here in Cincinnati. Perhaps less hand-wringing (we’re already considered backwards racist monsters by the rest of the country, so…), but yeah, “hate crime” turned out to be arson.

    1. Sure, there’s a whole bunch of those: Nobody was ever a Soviet agent all throughout recorded history, especially the Rosenbergs, no matter what all those KGB records we got in the 1990s say; There was never any Soviet penetration of the US Government via all the New Deal hires, no matter what thos KGB records say; National Sociaism was not in any way Socialism, no matter what everyone said at the time; The Nazi-Soviet treaty that enabled WWII was just a clever ploy by Uncle Joe to draw Hitler out, not a mamking of common cause between socialist states; Those years and years of secret joint armored vehicle testing and development before WWII by the Wehrmacht and the Red Army on Russian proving grounds didn’t happen, in spite of all teh records recovered after the war; The Katydin Forest Massacre was Nazi propaganda, ins pite of teh actual bodies; Nobody really died of artificial famine in the Ukraine, just ask Pulitzer Prize winner Walter Duranty; and so on.

      If you accept historical fluidity, everything except keeping up to date with the party line is a lot easier.

      1. My great-grandfather was Ukrainian, who came to Canada 100 years ago. It would be unwise to deny the Holodomor in my presence.

      2. Keep in mind. A lot of these people don’t support the Rosenbergs because they thought they were innocent. They support them because they think they were guilty.

  7. The left won’t admit to anything the Russians have provided us, the NSA has decrypted (e.g. Venona files), or that was provided by KGB or ex-KGB defectors (e.g. Mitrokhin archives.

  8. One of the kids was stymied by an assignment. For Black History Month, they had to write about the black person who had influenced them the most, and couldn’t think of a one. I immediately mentioned their favorite teacher, and they did a virtual forehead-slap and “Duh,” and said “Okay, I’ve got this.” The thing is, we don’t think of people by race first. People are people. There isn’t much to a person who judges another by the shade of their skin, just as person who looks to their skin to define who they are doesn’t have anything else that’s noteworthy.

    1. Pretty much my take on it – the closest I generally come is “damnit, what’s his name? Ok, it’s the guy who looks like that”, and of course race enters into “looks like that”

      1. Unless there’s almost nobody else of that race around, it’s not a very good indicator– especially if you compare it to those folks who look like a Central Casting national archetype, or a specific famous person. One of the “bag boys” at my favorite grocery store looks, I kid you not, like Oz from Buffy. One of my husband’s co-workers looks like he should be wearing a stripped shirt and serving spaghetti while saying “mama mia!”

        By contrast, “the black guy” would be about as useful as going “the one with brown hair, but slightly more helpful than “the guy with a military hair cut.”

        Long way of going “well, of course you don’t generally group folks by race.” (I’ve heard some folks are really good at guessing nation-ancestry, though.)

    2. “the black person who had influenced them the most”

      Wesley Snipes in Blade. Because awesome spinning back kick.

      Also Vanity, because… yowza!

      1. I have a George Washington Carver biography I read a lot as a kid.

        I am not an artist. I am not a pacifist.

        1. +1 for George Washington Carver. Young son has peanut allergy. Thanks to that bastard I have to carry an epipen everywhere we go. What? Influence doesn’t have to always be positive.

          OTOH, Reese’s Peanut Butter cups.

      2. Charles Drew, because after working as a lab tech in the army I got a job at a hospital lab, usually working in the blood bank, and the BB experience led to my transferring to Info systems.

  9. As our fearless leader amply demonstrates, you always say whatever supports and reinforces the narrative at any given moment. When faced with documented proof that you lied, you either ignore the facts or simply claim that your challenger did not understand the true meaning of your words.
    Not at all surprising that so many of the left are lawyers, as it is a given in their world that the truth is whatever you can sell to a majority of the target audience.

    1. It’s become almost a joke to some of the kids. Absolutely everything is “racist.” There are a few still in the literal stage who have to be talked through to reason, but the rest see the epithet as a joke and use it accordingly when the adults appear to not be paying attention. For example, a still-short 6th grader says: “They won’t let me try out for the varsity basketball team! That’s racist!” and much laughter ensues.

      1. Watching a YouTube of a video game the other day: P1: “something something orange juice” P2: “That’s racist!”

        Then there was the opening of a puzzle game called “Diversity”:

        P1: “We’re going to do diversity today.”
        P2: “Why? Did I accidentally say something racist?”

    2. Nonsense. Thinking that blacks are too stupid to get photo IDs is not racist yet. Probably never will be.

  10. But if America isn’t particularly racist, my lack of racism isn’t particularly special. I must be special, and I know I’m not racist (making assumptions about while people based on their race doesn’t count because privilege), so America must be racist. QED.

  11. I lost friends over the whole ‘Bush Lied people Died’ thing, and I was attacked incessively by the people who said that there were no WMD’s in Iraqi.
    Now that the New York Times has -finally- admitted, that yes there WERE WMD’s in Iraqi, and that the Bush administration removed hundreds of them and that the news media just choose not to report it at the time, I’ve let it be known that I’m waiting for the apologies.
    Of course I know I won’t get any, because with the left it has never been about the facts or the truth. It is just about getting their way and winning and they would rather toss you in a ditch and put a bullet through your head than ever admit that you might be right, much less that you were right.

    1. What gets me is there are two simultaneous storylines – “CIA Paid for Lots of WMDs in Iraq” and “Jeb Bush Won’t Repeat After Interviewers That GWB Lied About WMDs in Iraq,” and there’s apparently no recognition of the contradiction.

  12. I was reading a thing about how special snowflakes were boycotting Supanova because Adam Baldwin was a guest… what does this have to do with the narrative of an NAACP bombing that never happened you ask? Oh, wait… it’s obvious to everyone here I’ll bet. The common note is “making sh*t up”.

    “This is your experience and it can not be questioned.”

    Thus, “it never happened” is never an acceptable answer. Even if it never happened you’re not allowed to say so. It’s probably True in some sense of narrative. Never mind that the narrative is, as Sarah pointed out, one of division or anti-civilizational oikophobia. These people are CREATING the world that they’re dedicating their lives to positioning themselves as the noble and scrappy fighters opposing it. I don’t mean “creating” in the sense of deliberately causing backlash. I mean “creating” in the sense of pretending a fictional state into reality. Their fiction becomes an operative part of people’s reality.

    The cupcakes hyperventilating over what will happen in the future if Adam Baldwin shows up and attracts his fans to Supanova really believe it’s true. They were told so. No one dares to call it Bull Sh*t and hurt their feelings because someone that someone once heard of claimed to get objectified when they wore cos-play body paint and it wrecked her whole experience. Just *imagine* if those hordes of sexist gamer gaters show up. No one will be safe! There will be groping and rape in the hallways!

    And that’s the point of the narrative, isn’t it? That’s the point of the NAACP guy *wanting* the bomb to be about racism. Because you’ve got this very important narrative. You get supporters by convincing them that it’s true even if they don’t experience it, even if there is no proof, there are racists out there (no doubt about it) but it’s not something most people experience (beyond annoyance) so there has to be this “narrative” to do the heavy lifting. People will assume that setbacks are race related. They’ll be defensive and uncomfortable and wonder if they’re getting a fair shake. The mission will have been accomplished.

    What will happen if Adam Baldwin shows up at Supanova is exactly *nothing*. Nothing will happen. But people will be *afraid* and will feel *unsafe*. So the mission will be accomplished.

    1. It’s a tactic. They couldn’t get away with saying flat out that he shouldn’t be allowed because he disagrees with us, so they are playing on the fears of the other attendees of being caught in a riot or that somehow his opinions are a dog whistle to his fans that rape is OK, so they’ll show up and do it.

      It’s also a not so subtle hint to the organizers that if any thing goes wrong, even if the SJWs stage it, they’ll claim in the lawsuit that the convention facilitated it by allowing Baldwin to attend, thus creating a “hostile environment”.

      1. The one time when they actually had a groping scandal at a convention, it was that totally leftist kid and his totally leftist buddies who decided that open friendliness meant going in the hallway and openly asking attractive young leftist women if they could rub the boobies in a totally feminist way, and the attractive young openly leftist feminist girls openly accepting. I’m fairly sure that “Ann Arbor” and “marijuana supply” were also involved.

        IIRC, the scandal only happened when the idiot leftist kid wrote about it on Livejournal. (Albeit I’m astonished that convention security or ops didn’t catch them at it. Usually Michigan conventions are a fairly tight ship.)

        1. See?! Now if those noble, decent, principled, right thinking people could do if given the chance, just imagine what the like of US are no doubt scheming to do every minute of the day. We must be restrained pre-emptively because they know how venal and evil their own selves are!

          1. There are leftists who openly state they they would be violent if given guns when advocating gun control. They respond poorly to the observation that it might be them.

  13. Hostile environments, pipe bombs somewhere near an NAACP, Geraldo Rivera claiming RAP is worse than racism, Obama being un-American, cops killing thugs trying to kill cops, atheists forced to walk in front of churches, lesbians living with dogs and cats in the same house… the list is endless of the trails and tribulations of life in modern America for the young progressive is indeed a life of fear and anxiety.

    Man immolated in iron cage: (crickets chirping)
    Coptic Christians mass beheaded on coastline: (more crickets)

    In the real world, it is hard to get excited about the injustices the SJWs worry about, because they are absurd and trivial.

              1. So sad, so true. Since I am a man, I will be tolerated as long as I pay taxes and keep my mouth shut. You Sarah, are a woman who refuses to live in your designated victim cubbyhole, insists that you are responsible for your own actions and had children instead of abortions.

                1. I’m also Latin but always wanted to be American (and made it, yay.) And I like men (and love my husband.) And want to be judged by my skill not my possession of a vagina. They want me dead.

        1. This version of the song (and other remakes do this too) always annoyed me primarily because they omit the line, “And the politicians say, ‘More taxes will solve everything.'” Because of course they believe that it actually will and then they can stop singing anything else in the song.

          In fact, here they even leave in the “The politicians say…” part, just dangling in the breeze. Wankers.

Comments are closed.