A "fine person", no doubt.
More than you want to know about this fine person --
https://heavy.com/news/2019/04/john-earnest/
A "fine person", no doubt.
Two slimeballs arguing over which is the slimier --
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/27/politics/oliver-north-nra/index.html
If I wasn't aware of what a scumbag you are I would think you were a pretty funny caricature of an idiot t-serivative. Instead you are just a sad example of a self important blowhard.Speak for yourself Golf Ball Thief.....
By its own standards, the New York Times deserves blame for the Poway synagogue shooting
APRIL 28, 2019
Does anyone else remember when a New York Times editorial blamed Sarah Palin for the shooting of Gabby Giffords because of a bulls-eye on a map?
https://www.americanthinker.com/blo...s_blame_for_the_poway_synagogue_shooting.html
Read.So the Mt. Carmel kid drew up his manifesto knowing that the NYT would someday publish an offensive cartoon?
Sucker.
Read.
APRIL 28, 2019
Universities now requiring loyalty oaths taken to ‘diversity’
By Thomas Lifson
I am so old that I can remember when Democrats and the progressive Left regarded forcing college faculty to sign loyalty oaths as abhorrent. Of course, that was when Communist infiltration of colleges, the media, and government bureaucracy was both genuine and a real threat. President Harry S. Truman signed Executive Order 9835 requiring federal employees to sign a loyalty oath and the state of California passed a law, the “Levering Act,” requiring the same of state employees.
The University of California has published a loving, celebratory timelinedescribing the reaction among faculty and the ultimate repeal of the loyalty oath. Loyalty oaths were very, very bad, back then.
But loyalty oaths are back again, and this time, according to the progressive deep thinkers, they are good. Because it is not loyalty to the United States, but rather loyalty to the ideology of “diversity” that is being demanded. Christian Schneider writes in the New York Post:
Consider the University of California, Los Angeles. To be considered for tenure-track positions, applicants are required to write a full statement outlining their commitment to diversity. According to UCLA guidelines, the extent to which a professor promotes equity, diversity and inclusion is a key factor in making progress on the tenure track.
Promoting these ideals “is inseparable from how the University of California conceives of ‘merit,’ ” the school says. UC Riverside, UC San Diego and UC Berkeley all require similar diversity statements.
I cannot interpret this as anything other than an elevation of loyalty to the same or higher level than merit in making decisions about faculty careers. “Diversity” as an ideology requires subordinating excellence to identity group status in making decisions about a person’s fate. This is why Asian-American organizations are suing Harvard.
China, under Mao Tse-tung, faced exactly this question, phrased at the time as “Red vs. expert.” In the Cultural Revolution, it was decreed that “Red” – meaning ideological loyalty to Mao’s Little Red Book – was more important than expertise, in other words, actual professional competence, in appointing officials to be in charge of important public matters.
Blind loyalty to "Mao Tse-tung thought" was elevated to the sole important criterion for judging the merit of anyone. Mobs of Red Gurads brandisihing the Little Red Book containing Mao's thoughts were used to intimidate skepticsinto conformity.
That worked out terribly for China, keeping its talented and hard-working population mired in poverty for decades that followed.
For American universities, it will also work out badly, as any diversion from the path of Truth and excellence undermines the legitimacy of the higher education project. It is more than clear to me that higher education in the United States is headed for a huge crash, dictated by over-expansion, tuition inflation, and ideological slavery.
Irony alertI have read enough of the garbage you copy to know that you don't let facts or logic interfere with a rant.
Like that’s gonna happen. He’s busy with the UT this morn’. Lmao!Read.
So we abort on the front end and they on the back end? Talk about late term.APRIL 28, 2019
Canada’s version of Medicare for All executes thousands of patients a year
By Thomas Lifson
When governments take charge of medical care and expenditures on prolonging life come out of the same pool of money used for the military, road-building, schools and all the other functions of government, the bureaucrats who are the decision-makers have every incentive to encourage a rapid death, if not insist upon it.
Our northern neighbor Canada offers an example of the slippery slope. Wesley J. Smith writes on National Review Online:
Canadian doctors committed thousands of homicides in 2018. According to an interim report published by the government, in the first ten months of last year, doctors lethally injected 2, 613 patients (with one assisted suicide) — and that doesn’t include the homicides committed by doctors in Quebec, Northwest Territories, Yukon, and Nunavut.
This means well over 3,000 people are killed by their doctors each year in Canada, which — if my math is correct — is more than 250 a month, more than 58 a week, and more than eight per day. Heck, that’s about one every three hours.
This won't hurt much, and it will soon be over, anyway