Forced Multiculturalism

Maybe everyone would be happier if they had their own spaces?


The Honey Badgers Shoot Themselves

When you’ve got a guilty conscience, it’s easy to jump to the wrong conclusions and think someone is going to out you.  When you find yourself in that situation, don’t go on hours long Twitter meltdowns attacking the person. Because that person might just figure it out.

I have had a certain, small amount of sympathy for MRAs and MRM people.  I mean, I’m almost MGTOW myself in practice so I can’t exactly condemn those guys who’re backing out of society and refusing to have families because women are awful–or whatever it is they believe.  But similar to Verity’s reaction to Cassie Jaye’s The Red Pill, these people are not behaving in ways which engender any kind of support.  The Honey Badger’s behavior on Twitter and on YouTube is deranged.  If men really need activists to get them back their rights, then these are not the people to do it.  These are not the people to help defend western civilization.  These are people who are making a laughing stock of of their whole movement.

The Big Bad NRA… Or was it PP?

Since the latest school shooting, the NRA has been the target of the liberals attacks and tears.  They claim it’s SO powerful and that Republicans have just been bought and paid for by the NRA.  But if that’s true that the GOP are happy to sell their votes to the highest bidder, why don’t they just make larger donations and sit back and wait for gun control to be passed?

That’s the the question Christian Schneider is asking at USA Today: If the NRA owns Republicans, Planned Parenthood owns Democrats

In August 2015, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., took to the Senate floor to decry ongoing Republican attempts to defund Planned Parenthood. The vote was taking place after a summer in which the nation watched grisly undercover videos showing Planned Parenthood abortion doctors discussing the sale of fetal body parts to activists posing as researchers.

Naturally, there was a media outcry over Warren’s speech, given that she had received more than $16,000 from Planned Parenthood during her 2012 campaign. Major newspapers were saturated with stories reminding us that the left was in the pocket of Big Abortion. Who can forget all the hours the news networks dedicated to blaming Democrats for the loss of millions of innocent lives after Planned Parenthood had spent nearly $50 million on elections and lobbying since 2012?

Of course, nobody can forget any of that because none of it ever happened. Instead, Democrats were showered with gushing mainstream news articles praising their fight for “women’s health care” and their personal resolve in standing up to those who want to “take away a woman’s right to control her own body.”

Contrast that with coverage Republicans receive after any mass shooting in America. Suddenly, the National Rifle Association is unmasked as the GOP puppet master, blocking any and all “commonsense” legislation to cut down on gun violence…

The double standard is clear: When Democrats work on behalf of a special interest that aborts millions of children, they are doing so from a place of conscience and ideological purity. When Republicans argue in favor of Second Amendment rights, it is because they have been bought off by a disfavored lobbying group looking to profit from carnage…

Rare are the stories exposing the money spent electing Democrats by unions, trial lawyers or environmental groups — all of which outspend the NRA year after year. In fact, since 2012, Planned Parenthood alone has donated virtually the same amount ($2.6 million) to individual candidates as the NRA ($2.7 million).

USA Today weren’t the only ones to notice the double standard.

LifeSiteNews reported that: Planned Parenthood Spends Almost 10X More Money Buying Political Influence Than the NRA

According to the report, the NRA has donated $3,555,194 to current members of Congress. In contrast, Planned Parenthood spent $38 million on the 2016 elections alone. Almost all of the abortion chain’s money went to pro-abortion Democrats, despite Planned Parenthood’s claims of being “non-partisan.”

“’Just follow the money’ is the simple refrain of those who resign themselves to a lazy kind of materialism,” National Review’s Joe Simonson responded. “And in reality, the NRA’s financial contributions are minuscule. As Davis notes, liberal groups such as Planned Parenthood exert more direct financial influence over Congress …”

The abortion chain has become increasingly political in the past few years as it fights to continue receiving about half a billion tax dollars every year and to keep abortion legal up until birth.

Planned Parenthood is the No. 1 abortion business in America. It brings in millions of dollars aborting more than 300,000 unborn babies every year, on average.

Its massive political spending continued this year, with $734,760 spent on a pro-abortion congressional candidate in Georgia and at least $3 million more on the Virginia gubernatorial race. In August, the abortion chain also announced plans to spend half a million dollars to create an army of pro-abortion activists across the country to help them with political lobbying.

And then there’s the rather glaringly obvious contradiction of pleading to “do something” about the murder of a few teenagers while supporting the brutal deaths of millions of unborn children…

So, NRA Donations Are Stained With Blood, But Planned Parenthood’s Are Just And Moral?

Let’s cut the holier than thou antics.  Every time there’s a mass shooting and politicians from the GOP offer their thoughts and prayers to the victims, the liberal media doles out the tired National Rifle Association donation talking point. Here’s how much money NRA gave to x congressman or x senator. Okay—what’s the issue? We have a Second Amendment. We have a constitutional right to own firearms. You don’t think organizations will spring up and support this piece of our Bill of Rights?


When I want to be told about the sanctity of life from those who get money or support an organization that aborts children, I’ll let you know.

Gun Control Pawns

The recent “Student Walk Out” isn’t as grassroots and authentic as the Media says it is?  Well, what a shock!

Considering how easily manipulated or coerced children and teens are, why exactly should government policy be influenced by what children “protest” or clamor about?  Some teens are quite intelligent, but as a whole they’re not known for clear rational thinking and they have very little life experience, especially today when even college students need “safe spaces” and puppies when life is “too stressful.”  Their brains have not even finished developing.  What they think about legal matters really shouldn’t be considered.  But liberals know that marching kids around has emotional pull.  It looks good for their cause.  What handy little pawns they make!

Five Lies About the Student ‘Walkout’ for Gun Control


Thousands of students “walked out” of classrooms at schools across the country on Wednesday to protest for new gun control legislation in the wake of last month’s mass shooting at Marjory Stonemason Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.
The mainstream media are celebrating the “walkout” as an authentic expression of outrage that demands a response from political leaders. But it is not, and there are at least five lies they are telling you about it.

Lie #1: The “walkout” is being staged by students.

In most schools, especially elementary schools, the walkout is being organized by teachers, administrators, and liberal parents. Nationwide, the walkout is being coordinated by the Women’s March, an anti-Trump organization that has a soft spot for radical antisemites like Louis Farrakhan. Big media companies, especially CNN, have been publicizing the protest.

Students are involved, but not in charge.

Lie #2: The “walkout” is voluntary.

Younger children cannot stay in classrooms by themselves, and they cannot opt out. Older children in some schools are reportedly allowed to stay behind, but many will be less likely to do so given pressure from adults and peers.

Somehow, the liberals who argue against prayer in public schools — even a generic “moment of silence” — because of fears of religious coercion are creating a coercive political environment.

Lie #3: The “walkout” is not about gun control.

Organizers are pulling a sly bait-and-switch. At my daughter’s school, for example, staff and the PTA organized a “peace and kindness assembly.” The principal told parents, via e-mail: “There will be NO mention of school shootings, guns, or violence of any kind.” But the PTA said: “Schools across the country and state are supporting their students as they show their support for greater gun control.”

They minimize objections by selling “peace” to parents, then maximize impact by pushing “gun control” in the media.

Lie #4: The “walkout” is non-partisan.

The groups involved in organizing the walkout are all left-wing and Democrat-aligned.

Few, if any, schools are bothering to provide an alternative point of view about the importance of the Second Amendment, or about arming qualified teachers and staff to intercept and deter possible attackers.

Lie #5: If you oppose the “walkout,” you support violence against children.

This is the most pernicious lie of all, and real message of the protests. The goal of the “walkout” — aside from mobilizing Democrats against gun-clinging Republicans in a midterm election year — is to shame Second Amendment supporters into silence and conformity.

It amounts to exploiting our children, as well as those 17 deaths in Florida, for political purposes.

The Sacrifice of Fauxcahontas

Things may be heating up for Fauxcahontas.  The very identity politics she has been promoting and profiting from may turn around to bite her.  These liberal whites apparently are so dumb or arrogant as to think they will somehow be given exception from the rules they are laying down and that their “pets” will never bite the hand that feeds them.  But when you’ve given them everything they need and they no longer need you?  Yeah, you just might be next in-line for sacrifice.  And I doubt there will be any roll reversal in this story where some John Smith type appears to save you.

Do the laws of Identity Politics compel Sen. Warren to take DNA test?

Isn’t it delicious that Fauxcahontas, aka Sen. Elizabeth Warren — the liberal Massachusetts Democrat toying with a 2020 presidential run — is refusing to take a DNA test to finally prove whether her self-serving claims of Cherokee heritage are true?

Actually, watching Warren squirm and Chuck Todd all but flagellate himself for having to ask about the DNA test on “Meet the Press” was more than delicious.

It was tasty, kind of like a French omelet with crab meat at a fancy restaurant frequented by the Duke and Duchess of Windsor.

“I know who I am, and never used it for anything. Never got any benefit from it anywhere,” Warren said, protesting too much.

Oh, no, of course not.

She just claimed Native American status while teaching law at Harvard, and Harvard flaunted it as proof of faculty diversity. It’s all about checking the right racial boxes.

And until she takes that DNA test — or releases the findings to show that she is indeed part Cherokee — it will dog her, like some rogue beast of liberal Democratic identity politics, trotting behind her wherever she goes.

The liberal Democratic Media Complex does not love this story. But Warren’s DNA drama gets to the heart of the thing.

Democrats are thoroughly dominated by the hard left now, and except for bizarre socialist economics drawn from “The Big Rock Candy Mountain,” they’re all about identity politics all the time.

The Democratic Party is hip-deep in the politics of race and gender, and uses these as tools to carve and parcel out power, resources and benefits, relying on skin pigments and chromosomes (or the lack thereof), grievance and victimhood.

Identity politics has been the left’s recipe for years, and watching Warren squirm was just the thing to whet the appetite. Not like a Bobby Flay burger exactly, or a Dutch oven full of Gordon Ramsay’s epic spicy lamb shanks, or Jacques Pepin’s Oeufs En Cocotte.

Rather it was something like “Cold Omelets with Crab Meat,” an alleged down-home, authentic Cherokee recipe submitted by Warren for a book weirdly titled “Pow Wow Chow” just a few years ago.

Yes, there is such a book, still available on Amazon. And no, you can’t make this stuff up.

It turns out that Cold Omelets with Crab Meat, Warren’s “Pow Wow Chow” Native American recipe, might not actually have been all that big along the infamous Cherokee Trail of Tears. It was, however, a favorite treat of the Duke and Duchess of Windsor and of Cole Porter at Le Pavillon restaurant in New York decades ago.

And it was most likely lifted — you might say she Joe Bidened it — from a 1979 New York Times piece by Chef Pierre Franey.

“…to make matters worse,” wrote Politifact in 2017, “some of the (Warren) recipes appear to have been copied from The New York Times wire service.”

The Boston Herald’s Howie Carr wrote he found three pilfered Warren recipes in the Native American cookbook.

“They ought to change the name of the next edition of ‘Pow Wow Chow’ to ‘Pow Wow Ciao,’ and Granny Warren can write a farewell address to any moonbats left who believe anything she says,” wrote Carr.


On NBC the other day, Todd didn’t dare go there. Instead, he cited an editorial by the Berkshire Eagle, a paper that endorsed her campaign for Senate in 2012, asking her to take the DNA test.

“So we call upon our senior senator to screw up her courage and take the spit test,” the Eagle said in an editorial. “If she already has but is keeping the results under wraps, we urge her to be forthcoming with them. She has nothing to lose but her Achilles’ heel.”

DNA racial preference tests will become law sooner or later when the left — having already seized the culture — finally macerates the Constitution.

If Warren’s party has its way, the melding of big government and big business will ultimately bring us chips in our necks for workplace efficiency, and DNA tests to determine government benefits, and IQ tests in utero to determine if we’ll be allowed to live.

Even before then, we’ll have driverless cars to keep us safe.

Me? I’d rather take a Mach I Mustang and head on down the highway.

What’s embarrassing is that President Donald Trump insists on calling her “Pocahontas.” But Pocahontas was not a liberal Democrat who pilfered French crab omelet recipes. She was the daughter of a chief near the Jamestown colony in the 1600s. Legend says she saved the life of Capt. John Smith, one of those Christian fundamentalists with guns.

Elizabeth Warren would never, ever do that.

So best we call her Fauxcahontas, in honor of her French omelet recipes.

In a 2009 paper titled “The Politics of Genomics Research: The Implications of DNA for Racial Identity and Race-based Medicine,” authors Jennifer L. Hochschild and Maya Sten of Harvard cited several cases of vanity DNA tests gone wild.

Texan Danny Villarreal proudly thought himself to be of Hispanic blood. But a DNA test showed otherwise. “Danny Villarreal is (genetically, at least) an Ashkenazi Jew,” they wrote. Professor Henry Louis Gates discovered that he was not Yoruba as he hoped, but that a “number of exact matches turned up, leading straight back to that African Kingdom called Northern Europe.”

The paper also cited California High School principal Wayne Joseph, who thought he was black, until a DNA test ruled otherwise. Before the test, he said, “I was unequivocally black. Now I’m a metaphor for America.”


The Wall

Image may contain: one or more people, people standing, shoes and outdoor

Lovers of open borders will not be pleased that Trump isn’t letting go of the Wall plan easily.  Supporters should be pleased that, although hampered by many opponents, he is still moving forward.

A White House statement from yesterday:

President Trump visits the wall
… President Donald J. Trump travels from Washington to Southern California, where he will examine eight prototypes for the proposed border wall with Mexico. The samples range in height from 18 to 30 feet.

“While Congress considers funding for fiscal year 2018, other wall program activities are moving forward,” Paul Koscak of U.S. Customs and Border Protection writes. Those activities include planning and design, as well as upgrades along less fortified or outdated parts of the southwest barrier.

The President’s visit… comes as more and more Americans express support for his four-pronged approach to immigration reform. In addition to the majorities that support tougher border security and a permanent resolution for DACA, more than 8 in 10 voters want a system that selects individuals based on their education and skills—not one that chooses immigrants based on whether they have relatives already in the United States.