Why do we put up with liberals?

Written by David DiCrescenzo on . Posted in Guest Articles

Publisher's note:  Once again Tim Dunkin grabs his topic by the horns and dissects it down to its basic elements.  In a very short, easy to read article, Tim discusses the utter ridiculousness of the left and the foolish hissy fits they throw at every turn.  Sit back, relax, and enjoy.

Tim Dunkin:  Why Do We Put up with Liberals?

Left-wingers and progressives in America are becoming insufferable, are they not?  It’s quite apparent that they have no desire to “live and let live,” but want to force their delusions off onto everyone else.  You will live, think, and do as the Left tells you, whether you like it or not.  Even in the pettiest of way, they can’t help themselves.  

Take, for example, this story coming out of the University of Oregon.  To summarize for the reader, a student named Elle Mallon, who was running for office in student government filed  a number of grievances against a rival student organization also running candidates in the recent election.  The grievances she claimed?  First, that the rival group – We Are Oregon – had organized a campaign event in a building which did not have “gender inclusive bathrooms.”  She successfully (!) managed to get the ASUO (Associated Students of the University of Oregon) Elections Board to sanction We Are Oregon for this transgression, causing that group to be forbidden to campaign for 36 hours.  The campaign manager for We Are Oregon, a student named Taylor Allison emailed an apology (!) to Ms. Mallon.  Mallon then filed an addition grievance, claiming that Allison had “misgendered” her and charged her with sexual harassment.  How so?  Because Ms. Mallon has invented a whole set of pronouns – all her own – and demands that people address her using these pronouns (!).  She wants people to use these entirely made-up words (“Mx” for “Ms.,” “xe, xhem, and hyr,” presumably for “he, it, and her” [?]) when referring to her or addressing things to her.  Because Allison referred to her as “Ms.” Mallon in the apology email, this was “sexual harassment” and grounds for additional sanctions.  

Did you feel as ridiculous reading that as I did in writing it?

Eventually, the Student Constitutional Court heard the case and lifted the sanctions against We Are Oregon – but not on the grounds that the whole set of complaints were preposterous nonsense from start to finish and a waste of time that could have been spent more profitably watching paint dry.  Rather, the court ruled for We Are Oregon solely on the technicality that bathroom access is not actually a “campaign related purpose,” though not before admonishing them to be more mindful of their manners in the future,

“While this Court is empathetic towards Respondent’s original grievance, and advises all future campaigns to remember their cultural competency trainings in order to promote as inclusive a community as possible, access to a bathroom is not a campaign related purpose…. “Sexual harassment is a very great evil, but the record supports the conclusion that only a single unintentional gender-based microagression occurred. To conflate the two may serve to salve the sense of anger Respondent may feel at Petitioner’s mistake. However it may serve Respondent, it is unnecessarily inflammatory and risks damaging the reputation of Petitioner, an ASUO member who the record shows made a mistake, and then took the first opportunity to apologize. At no time was any of this relevant to the matter before the Court, which is a dispute over whether the Elections Rules require campaigns to provide gender-neutral restrooms.”

“Cultural competency training”?  “Microaggressions”?  Seriously?

No wonder American millennials are “overeducated and underprepared” – they’re too busy avoiding microaggressions and ensuring that their dorms will accommodate fifteen imaginary genders to have any time to actually learn anything of any value or use in the real world.  

But the point here is not how ridiculous it all is, but how, despite its ridiculousness, this became a serious issue at this university.

Look, it’s a free country.  If Elle Mallon wants to invent weird little pronouns and use them in her speech and writing, that’s her business.  What she is NOT (or at least should NOT be) free to do is to require other people to have to use them, and to punish those who don’t.  

Yet, this story is really a microcosmic view of modern liberalism, leftism, progressivism, whatever term you want to apply.  Everything the Left wants is coercive and detrimental to the rights of everyone else.  Use the wrong pronoun?  We’ll sanction you.  Do the wrong thing to or with your own property?  We’ll slap an injunction on you and sue you for tens of thousands of dollars.  Donate money to the wrong political cause or group?  We’ll hound you out of your job, and we may even sic armed SWAT teams on you. Don’t want to bake a cake for a “wedding” that goes against your deeply-held beliefs?  We’ll fine and imprison you.  On and on it goes.  Everything – and I mean everything – that those on the Left do is designed to force, coerce, compel, bully, or intimidate you into doing what the Left wants you to do, rather than simply allowing free people to do what they like in their own lives.  

The question I have is this: Why do we tolerate this?  Why do we tolerate them?  I’ve already pointed out that left-wingers have broken America’s unspoken-yet-real social contract for civil society, so why do we still feel obligated to show them any tolerance or any “fair play”?  They deserve no tolerance from us. None at all.

It is high time for liberty lovers to wake up and get serious about resisting the left-wingers, the cultural marxists, the social justice warriors, and the rest.  They only get away with the things they do because they are organized and we are not.  A small minority of radical left-wing fanatics are busy making life increasingly miserable for the normal people in this country.  Why continue to allow them to do so?  Why won’t we take the time and energy to stand up for what’s left of the good and decent things in America? Why not get serious about putting them down at every turn, opposing them, protesting them, mobbing them, making things difficult for them?  I am convinced that we have the numbers - but not the organization.  It’s time for conservatives, traditionalists, and liberty-lovers to get our heads out of the sand and stop being concerned only when something personally and directly affects us individually.  What happens to the other guy today can and will happen to YOU tomorrow.  Fight them, or suffer the consequences of cowardice and inaction.

Add a comment

The Lesson from Indiana...

Written by David DiCrescenzo on . Posted in Guest Articles

Publisher's note:  As many of my regular readers know, Tim Dunkin appears in these pages with some regularity.  Once again, Tim has spelled out one of the most critical issues facing our basic freedoms these days.  It's a bit long, but well worth the read.

Tim Dunkin:  The Lesson from Indiana is that We Need to Repeal Public Accommodation Laws.

"Freedom of association includes the freedom not to associate." – Ayn Rand

The past week has presented this nation with the spectacle of raw, unadulterated freedom-hating liberalism in action.  The state of Indiana passed a law which allowed for religious freedom to be used as a defense for both individuals and businesses when facing discrimination lawsuits.  Because one of the key points in the leftist cultural marxism agenda has been to create a legal environment in which businesses (and eventually churches) can be punished for refusing to participate in gay “weddings,” the Left went absolutely bonkers because this law worked directly contrary to that goal. The radical Left desires nothing less than a regimen in which any wrongthink by a business owner can be penalized, and laws which place gays into “protected” categories can be used as a bludgeon to destroy the enemies of the Left.

Indeed, that is what started this whole thing to begin with – the use of the radical gay agenda to go after Christian businesses that refused to participate in gay “marriage” ceremonies.  The gays would seek out these businesses, purposefully target them knowing they would refuse service, specifically so they could then hound them legally through short-sighted and wrong-headed laws on the books. Indiana’s law was intended, among other things, to prevent this sort of thing from happening.  It was not a proactive law that “encourages” or “allows” discrimination; rather, it was a defensive law designed to help protect religious liberty by requiring the state government to apply a strict “compelling interest” argument when considering whether to override a citizen’s or a business’ religious liberties.  And it protected everyone, not just Christians – under it, a Jew couldn’t be compelled to arrange flowers for a Neo-Nazi event, nor would a gay baker be compelled to bake a cake for Westboro Baptist church.  

I think much of the discussion has been off-base on both sides of the aisle.  So much sound and fury has been made about the particular issue of homosexuality and “discrimination” against gays that the greater point – that of fundamental liberty of the individual – has been lost.

Specifically, this controversy should raise in the minds of anyone who actually cared about individual liberty the question of whether we should even have public accommodation laws – the sorts of laws on the books that declare certain groups to be “protected” and disallows “discrimination” against those groups by businesses because these businesses, by virtue of operating publicly, are “public accommodations.”  I believe that rather than extending the reach of these laws, they should instead be stricken from the books because they are assaults on the First Amendment freedoms of association.

Let me begin by asking a question that will shock many folks, but which needs to be addressed in a rational, reasoned way that doesn’t involve a bunch of emotionalism and dramatics.  

“Why shouldn’t individuals and businesses be allowed to discriminate against anyone they want?”  

Add a comment

Another Liberal Fails History

Written by David DiCrescenzo on . Posted in Guest Articles

Publisher's note:  Another triumph by Tim Dunkin.  Whether you agree with him or not, his very fair and to the point arguments point out the flawed rhetoric of yet another America hating, leftist that has the unmitigated gall to call herself a journalist.  Please read along as Tim takes this woman downtown with a strong dose of reality.

Tim Dunkin:  A friend recently sent out a link to an article in the Greensboro (NC) News and Record, in which a left-wing columnist by the name of Susan Ladd decries the notion of American exceptionalism.  To her, the idea that the United States of America is better than anyone else, or has even been a positive force for good in world history, is “hypocritical” and just plain wrong.  She is appalled that people would protest against the recent revisions of the AP History curriculum, a revision which was developed by left-wing activists and which leaves out large chunks of actual American history.  To her, these criticisms of the new standards are tantamount to “ethnocentrism” and indicate that we “think we’re better than everyone else.” Keep in mind that this is in response to criticisms of an “American” history course that omits mention of D-Day and Bunker Hill – two pivotal episodes upon which two major and defining events in our history turned.  That is what she’s upset about being criticized.  Incomplete, one sided, inadequately covered, purposefully slanted activism being taught as “history.”  

From reading her article, it is readily apparent that the author is not only a left-wing agitator, but a rather unoriginal one at that.  The litany of sins from America’s past which she lists are nothing new.  Neither are her rather inadequate examples from recent current events that she relies upon to prove that America is still following her terribly errant ways.  Logical errors abound through the article.  It’s surprising that a major regional newspaper would have published it, on the grounds of professionalism alone.  

However, they did, and so it falls to me to address it.  

I’ll begin by noting that the whole premise of her article rests on a straw man argument.  Essentially, the whole article seeks to “refute” her non-existent opponents who propose that there are no black marks at all on American history.  However, nobody to my knowledge, not even those who have been criticizing the AP History curriculum, has argued against it on the grounds that negative aspects of American history are mentioned.  The criticism centers upon the contentions that only negative facts about our history are mentioned, and that (as mentioned above) many pivotal and positive aspects of our history seem to have been purposefully omitted.  In other words, the AP presentation is one-sided and unfair, as well as simply being poor history and factually specious.  

Obviously there are black marks in American history, just as there are in everyone else’s.  Nobody denies this.  Nobody that I know of claims that Americans are a race of irreproachable colossi, striding upon the earth as gods among mortal men.  But when you actually stop to look at these marks – as we will the ones that Mizz Ladd lists – one would be hard pressed to find how these make us worse than anyone else.  At the very worst, these marks would only make us as bad as pretty much everyone else in history (but, as we will see, they don’t even do that).  So let us look at them in order.

Add a comment

If an Atheist Kills Some Muslims over a Parking Space, Why is it Still My Fault?

Written by David DiCrescenzo on . Posted in Guest Articles

Publisher's note:  Once again, Tim Dunkin has broken down a situation, which the left is trying to no avail to twist into something it isn't, into bite sized, understandable sections.  

In this excellent article Tim navigates us through some of the facts of the recent school shooting of three muslim students by an avowed atheist, proving it had nothing to do with the religion of the victims, and everything to do with a deranged man over a parking space.

Tim Dunkin:  By now, the reader has surely heard about the murder last week of three Muslim students at the University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill by Craig Stephen Hicks, a local resident.  Because the killer is a gun-owning white male with a rather unshaven appearance, the immediate assumption made before the facts of the case began to come out, even by many conservatives, was that Hicks must be a right-wing Christian Tea Partier who killed the students because they were Muslim.  The reason for this assumption is because this is the “narrative” that the news media have trained Americans to follow, even though this narrative has little actual history to substantiate it.

As it turns out, the assumption was completely wrong, in just about every way possible.

Rather than killing the students over their religion, Hicks appears to have killed them as the culmination of a long-standing dispute over a parking space at their apartment complex (not that this is any better a reason, of course).  Further, far from being either a right-winger or a Christian or a Tea Partier, Hicks is an atheist who hates all religion and who is a staunch supporter of feminism and gay rights.  Among the “likes” on his Facebook page were the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), the Huffington Post, and a whole bevy of radical atheistic websites.  He hated all religion, and if Hicks had been the type to go on a shooting rampage against religious people, it’s just as likely that he’d have tried to shoot up a church as shoot his Muslim neighbors.  

So the left-wing narrative went right out the window.

In a reasonable society, we’d have all simply accepted the facts on the ground, condemned Hicks as the vile murderer that he is, and gone on with our lives.  Unfortunately, our society – of at least the left-leaning half of it – is not reasonable.

Despite the well-established facts that Hicks is an anti-theist and that he killed them over a parking space, the rabid, wacko Left and their allies in the radical Islamic movement continue desperately…Desperately…DESPERATELY to try to find some way to spin this story back in a “right-wing Islamophobia” direction.  For example, CAIR included a statement in its response to the murders,

“Based on the brutal nature of this crime, the past anti-religion statements of the alleged perpetrator, the religious attire of two of the victims, and the rising anti-Muslim rhetoric in American society, we urge state and federal law enforcement authorities to quickly address speculation of a possible bias motive in this case…”

Because killing someone over a parking space is all about murdering them for their religion, rather than because you’re such a sorry excuse for a human being that you think killing someone over a parking space is a reasonable alternative in your dispute.  

Chapel Hill’s reliably nutty representative in the House, David Price (D-NC), issued a reliably nutty statement about the “serious barriers to mutual acceptance” caused by “intolerance and hatred that divide our society.”  Dr. Mohammed Abu-Salba, the father of one of the slain students (who, incidentally, leads a mosque that was raided by the FBI for a plot to kill US Marines), continues to shamelessly exploit his daughter’s death by blathering on about how the US media are “bombarding every American every day with news about what they call Islamic terrorism, none of which is Islamic at all…they are really preparing people [sic] such tragedies and triggering them and provoking them.” Yet, these same media, when they touch this story at all, continue to downplay the actual facts about the story, and try to cast it as a case of “Islamophobia” gone wild.  Run-of-the-mill left-wing twits all over social media opined that even though there’s not any evidence for it, we just “know” that Hicks acted out of “toxic hatred” and “intolerance.”   Click below to continue...

Add a comment

Nation of terror protests killing in US?!

Written by David DiCrescenzo on . Posted in Guest Articles

Publisher’s note:  Once again my friend Dawn Ellen has merged some very well considered thoughts with her keyboard and arrived at the following commentary.  I will let the truth of what she has to say speak for itself.

Dawn Ellen:  In Doha, Qatar, several thousand people marched to express their anger over the killing of three Moslem students in the US last week who as they put it were ‘murdered by white neighbor’. They were appealing for ‘protection against hate crimes’ for the tens of thousands of fellow Moslems studying in the U.S.

You just have to sit back and laugh….Qatar is the international sponsor of terrorism which funds ISIS, Taliban, and Hamas! Where is their ‘anger and ‘marches’ over the victims of 9/11, the Boston bombing, those slaughtered at Fort Hood? There has been nothing but dead silence. Protection? No one here in the U.S. is hunting down Moslems. Moslems have the personal ‘Islamic appeasing protection’ of the Obama administration.

The “Institute of Islamic Learning” Al-Azhar based in Cairo called the student murders a ‘cowardly terrorist act’ and said they are ‘deeply concerned’ that ‘racism and Islamophobia’ are responsible for the murders. 

Three Moslem students are murdered over a parking space and suddenly the Islamic communities cry ‘terrorism’? When have these Moslem organizations used the word ‘terrorism’ for any of the 25,120 attacks worldwide since 9/11 in the name of allah? Where is their outrage or tears when Kuffar are slaughtered by Moslems? Here we go again with the racism word. Moslems are not a race they follow a ‘religion’. I am tired of the ‘Islamophobia fairytale’. It’s Kuffarphobia.

The 57-nation ‘Organization of Islamic Cooperation’ said they are ‘deeply concerned’ about “rising anti-Moslem sentiments and Islamophobic acts” in America.

Anti- Moslem sentiment? That never happened after 9/11 when 3,000 Americans were slaughtered by Moslems, so why would it start now? Moslems get a ‘free pass’ here in America. They are protected, appeased and coddled. In fact, they are given ‘special treatments’ not allowed for other ‘religions’. Look, there are no beatings, hangings, stonings, burnings, rapes or murders of Moslems in the U.S., (except of course for the ‘Honor Killings’ by Moslems). Let’s stop the nonsense. Moslems have been living in complete safety here. Kuffar on the other hand are living with the knowledge that they are targets of Islamic terrorism here in America and across the globe!

If we don’t get a handle on the Islamic propaganda and quash it, we will suffer the consequences. I refuse to lose my country to Islamification. Moslems do not need to take over America all they need to do is convince the majority of citizens that Islam is peaceful, moderate, that Jesus was a ‘mere prophet’ and ‘allah’ is the same as Jehovah. This dangerous propaganda is being accepted by countless Americans. Please keep speaking out and sharing the facts. Silence is submission. I refuse to submit.

I am free and will remain free.

Add a comment