The link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-kass-13-nov13,0,2881384.column?page=1
Young Catherine Vogt, aged 14, tried an experiment in "diversity" and "tolerance" at her school. It didn't go too well. This isn't a 'duh' moment because it's the Liberals who failed.
Honestly. Yet they are the ones that preach to us about "tolerance," and "inclusion," and "diversity." They failed, and in rather spectacular fashion. Let's examine each of these three virtues that I listed.
First up is "tolerance." This is a variation of the word "tolerant," but I actually went to the dictionary for "tolerance." http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tolerance Here we go:
"1. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry."
That's a good definition, isn't it? I'm going to parse it down to "a fair, objective, and permissive attitude to those whose opinions ... differ from one's own." I like that. An objective attitude to those whose opinions differ from one's own. But that's not what happened at Miss Vogt's school. " "One person told me to go die. It was a lot of dying. A lot of comments about how I should be killed," Catherine said, of the tolerance in Oak Park."
!!!! She was told to go die?!? Does that sound "tolerant" to you? Granted, the article does describe her suburb, Oak Park, as "liberal." Yet liberals preach tolerance. It appears to me that they failed the tolerance test.
" "That's what we discussed," Cassin-Pountney said about the debate in the classroom when the experiment was revealed. "I said, here you are, promoting this person [Obama] that believes we are all equal and included, and look what you've done? The students were kind of like, 'Oh, yeah.' I think they got it." "
I don't think so Ms. Cassin-Pountney. Maybe they got it that day, but unfortunately some lessons must be learned many times. In my opinion, they'll forget it because schools no longer teach it. They teach political correctness and that anybody who isn't politically correct is a bigot.
Next up is "inclusion." http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/inclusion The first definition is "The act of including."
"Other entries in her notebook involved suggestions by classmates that she be "burned with her shirt on" for "being a filthy-rich Republican."
Some said that because she supported McCain, by extension she supported a plan by deranged skinheads to kill Obama before the election.
And I thought such politicized logic was confined to American newsrooms. Yet Catherine refused to argue with her peers.
She didn't want to jeopardize her experiment."
That's inclusion? How about this? "One girl pulled her aside in a corner, out of earshot of other students, and whispered, "I really like your shirt." " That's inclusion? It seems to me that our oh-so-"tolerant" Liberals failed this one as well.
Now we come to "diversity." http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/diversity I'm going to give all of the dictionary's definitions:
"1. the state or fact of being diverse; difference; unlikeness.
2. variety; multiformity.
3. a point of difference."
You'll notice those words "difference," "multiformity," and "unlikeness." Remember also the definition for "tolerance" http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tolerance "2. a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward opinions and practices that differ from one's own."
"a fair ... and permissive attitude towards opinions and practices that differ from one's own."
Yet it seems to me that they weren't very "diverse," either. They told her she should die, that she should be "crucifixed" (meaning, of course, "crucified.") Crucified for wearing a tee-shirt that holds a view different from your own? That's "diversity" and "tolerant?"
Not in this universe.
(H/T: Michelle Malkin)
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
"Yes, Virginia..."
...I have been away for a week. And I have nobody to blame but myself.
I knew that "the one" or "the Obamessiah" would win the election. Too many people bought into his line about how a vote for McCain was a vote for Bush "by proxy." I'll be blunt in that if McCain had been running against Joe Lieberman (and at least I spelled his name correctly this time!) I would have voted for Mr Lieberman. Had Mr McCain been running against Gen. Powell, I would've voted for Gen. Powell in less time than it takes to blink. Seriously.
But Mr McCain wasn't running against Gen. Powell because the General wasn't running. He was running against Obama. And I could not have voted for Obama if you had been holding a firearm to my head and told me you were going to kill me or somebody close to me. For me, it wasn't about colour or gender. Sadly, too many people still believe otherwise. The facts, of course, speak differently, yet apparently facts do not matter to some people. That is their loss.
I've said it before and I'll say it again; I regret having voted for Bush the second time. But I did, and I cannot change the past.
I voted against Bill Clinton as well. Nevertheless, when he was elected he became my President. As it is now with Mr Obama. When Obama takes the Oath of Office, he will be my President. I am an American Citizen - and that is not open for debate.
Yes, I have rights as an American Citizen, but unlike far too many others I am also aware that those rights come with responsibilities. I know that that is a politically incorrect word, but there you go. Another politically incorrect word is "consequences. As in "for every action, there is a consequence."
Sometimes you get "unintended consequences," which are called 'side effects' when talking about medicines. How many times have we read the pill bottle only to read that this particular medication might make you drowsy and not to drive or operate machinery? I like Benadryl because it really does help me breathe easier. Unfortunately, I've also learned that I go out like a light after only two tablets. Yes, it helps me breathe. It also puts me to sleep for about ten hours and makes me really groggy for an additional six hours. That is but one example of an "unintended consequence."
I believe the United States will be in for several of these "unintended consequences." I also believe that it won't be pretty.
We've all heard by now about how most people believe we are in a de facto recession. Some are even using the "d" word ... "d" as in depression. Many economists are viewing the troubles as "market corrections," however a small but growing number are viewing the stock market tumble not as a "correction" but rather as a "crash."
Yes, I've been gone for a while, but now I'm back. I didn't vote for Barack Hussein Obama, but when he takes the Oath, he will be my President.
I am an American Citizen and it is my duty. If he calls, I will answer. The answer won't be "Go the (censored) away," it will be "Yes, Mr. President."
Having said that I feel the need to make one thing perfectly clear: I reserve the right to speak out against the President and his actions if I believe them in error. Indeed, while I was in the military I had the obligation to do so provided that I follow the Chain of Command and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Obviously, I'm not in the military any longer so those do not apply. That still does not give me the right to go off half-cocked. I have the responsibility to conduct myself according to the privilege of being an American Citizen.
If I believe him or his policies to be wrong I will say so. That doesn't make me disloyal, it means I have an opinion.
Didn't this Nation's Founding Fathers also have their opinions?
I knew that "the one" or "the Obamessiah" would win the election. Too many people bought into his line about how a vote for McCain was a vote for Bush "by proxy." I'll be blunt in that if McCain had been running against Joe Lieberman (and at least I spelled his name correctly this time!) I would have voted for Mr Lieberman. Had Mr McCain been running against Gen. Powell, I would've voted for Gen. Powell in less time than it takes to blink. Seriously.
But Mr McCain wasn't running against Gen. Powell because the General wasn't running. He was running against Obama. And I could not have voted for Obama if you had been holding a firearm to my head and told me you were going to kill me or somebody close to me. For me, it wasn't about colour or gender. Sadly, too many people still believe otherwise. The facts, of course, speak differently, yet apparently facts do not matter to some people. That is their loss.
I've said it before and I'll say it again; I regret having voted for Bush the second time. But I did, and I cannot change the past.
I voted against Bill Clinton as well. Nevertheless, when he was elected he became my President. As it is now with Mr Obama. When Obama takes the Oath of Office, he will be my President. I am an American Citizen - and that is not open for debate.
Yes, I have rights as an American Citizen, but unlike far too many others I am also aware that those rights come with responsibilities. I know that that is a politically incorrect word, but there you go. Another politically incorrect word is "consequences. As in "for every action, there is a consequence."
Sometimes you get "unintended consequences," which are called 'side effects' when talking about medicines. How many times have we read the pill bottle only to read that this particular medication might make you drowsy and not to drive or operate machinery? I like Benadryl because it really does help me breathe easier. Unfortunately, I've also learned that I go out like a light after only two tablets. Yes, it helps me breathe. It also puts me to sleep for about ten hours and makes me really groggy for an additional six hours. That is but one example of an "unintended consequence."
I believe the United States will be in for several of these "unintended consequences." I also believe that it won't be pretty.
We've all heard by now about how most people believe we are in a de facto recession. Some are even using the "d" word ... "d" as in depression. Many economists are viewing the troubles as "market corrections," however a small but growing number are viewing the stock market tumble not as a "correction" but rather as a "crash."
Yes, I've been gone for a while, but now I'm back. I didn't vote for Barack Hussein Obama, but when he takes the Oath, he will be my President.
I am an American Citizen and it is my duty. If he calls, I will answer. The answer won't be "Go the (censored) away," it will be "Yes, Mr. President."
Having said that I feel the need to make one thing perfectly clear: I reserve the right to speak out against the President and his actions if I believe them in error. Indeed, while I was in the military I had the obligation to do so provided that I follow the Chain of Command and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Obviously, I'm not in the military any longer so those do not apply. That still does not give me the right to go off half-cocked. I have the responsibility to conduct myself according to the privilege of being an American Citizen.
If I believe him or his policies to be wrong I will say so. That doesn't make me disloyal, it means I have an opinion.
Didn't this Nation's Founding Fathers also have their opinions?
GoDaddy.Com has REALLY Left the Building
Or ... the lights are on, but nobody's at home. Or as Steve Gibson said "The lights are on, but nobody's @home."
Why do I say this? Simple. I just got yet another mail claiming I'd won an all expense paid trip to Disney/Orlando. The "signer" was our old friend, Sue Madden. The address that I apparently registered from was a business ... a business I've never lived at.
The domain this time was flconnect1.com which resolves to ... GoDaddy.com. Seriously.
This time, however, the registrant did give a valid address. The city, Altamonte Springs, FL actually exists. So does the street address given. The telephone number given in their registration is a valid one and returns to the street address given.
But the domain flconnect1.com is not one that Disney World uses. If they did, it wouldn't resolve to GoDaddy.com
GoDaddy?
I have to ask this again: You do verify these, correct? How long will it be before I get another one that isn't a valid address or phone number? Say an ACORNIFIED address which is a park bench or a vacant lot?
It took me two minutes of searching Google.com, USPS.com and WHOIS.net to verify the registrant. Do you do that?
Hello?
I've sent the standard "abuse" report to GoDaddy, which I am beginning to suspect is an unmonitored emailbox. As soon as it gets full it gets purged and the garbage collects anew.
GoDaddy, this is your chance to make a good impression. Comment?
Why do I say this? Simple. I just got yet another mail claiming I'd won an all expense paid trip to Disney/Orlando. The "signer" was our old friend, Sue Madden. The address that I apparently registered from was a business ... a business I've never lived at.
The domain this time was flconnect1.com which resolves to ... GoDaddy.com. Seriously.
This time, however, the registrant did give a valid address. The city, Altamonte Springs, FL actually exists. So does the street address given. The telephone number given in their registration is a valid one and returns to the street address given.
But the domain flconnect1.com is not one that Disney World uses. If they did, it wouldn't resolve to GoDaddy.com
GoDaddy?
I have to ask this again: You do verify these, correct? How long will it be before I get another one that isn't a valid address or phone number? Say an ACORNIFIED address which is a park bench or a vacant lot?
It took me two minutes of searching Google.com, USPS.com and WHOIS.net to verify the registrant. Do you do that?
Hello?
I've sent the standard "abuse" report to GoDaddy, which I am beginning to suspect is an unmonitored emailbox. As soon as it gets full it gets purged and the garbage collects anew.
GoDaddy, this is your chance to make a good impression. Comment?
Monday, November 3, 2008
Seen (Scene?) in StarWars Galaxies
I play SWG, Star Wars Galaxies. And in the game on a certain planet (in a certain "galaxy" or server) I saw this:
(The screenshot has been heavily redacted to remove character name, planet, toolbar, and other items that could be used to identify me.)
It says "Barack Obama wants to spread the wealth around. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." - Karl Marx. And then, we come to this:
It says "They tried that in Zimbabwe and got hyperinflation. It took 100BILLION of their dollars to buy two loaves of bread."
I think somebody else has been reading this blog.
(H/T: Unknown)
More Obama Voter FRAUD - What a Surprise
My my my...what does that first paragraph say? " ObamaTravel.org is a platform volunteers can use to appeal to their broader community of family, friends or anyone else to help them travel to a swing state."And do what? Vote illegally?
www.obamatravel.org (Dunno if it's still up when you read this.) Ms. Appleton travelled to Florida, voted (http://wthrockmorton.com/2008/11/02/hey-florida-is-this-ok-with-you/ has the PICTURE OF HER HOLDING HER FRAUDULENT BALLOT) and then saying she'll travel back.
Gotta love the Obama people. Apparently, they believe their votes count more than those of us who vote legally (and only once.) Something I'm not sure that ACORN would understand. Remember, they pressured Freddie Johnson from Ohio into registering an astonishing 72 times.
Article: "Chavez offers talks with "black man" in W. House"
The quotes mean that I'm quoting the article's title. Link: http://africa.reuters.com/energyandoil/news/usnN02487792.html
"CARACAS, Nov 2 (Reuters) - Anti-U.S. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez predicted on Sunday the "black man" will win the U.S. presidential race and offered to hold talks with him to improve ties between the superpower and one its biggest oil suppliers."
Hugo Chavez, whom the article itselfs describes as a "socialist."
But read the last paragraph. What beholds us, again, to these regions? Oil. Black gold. Ever read (or hear of) the book "Black Gold Stranglehold" by Dr. Jerome R. Corsi and Craig R. Smith? You should.
Just imagine what we could do with the money we're paying these miscreants for their oil. If we could wean ourselves off of oil (which, for the record we can do. But it will take the will of all Americans to do so) we could tell these countries that we didn't need it any more.
Then they wouldn't have the United States by the testicles any longer. The only way it will happen is if all Americans demand it. And then make the politicians get their hands out of the lobbyist's arses and listen.
"CARACAS, Nov 2 (Reuters) - Anti-U.S. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez predicted on Sunday the "black man" will win the U.S. presidential race and offered to hold talks with him to improve ties between the superpower and one its biggest oil suppliers."
Hugo Chavez, whom the article itselfs describes as a "socialist."
But read the last paragraph. What beholds us, again, to these regions? Oil. Black gold. Ever read (or hear of) the book "Black Gold Stranglehold" by Dr. Jerome R. Corsi and Craig R. Smith? You should.
Just imagine what we could do with the money we're paying these miscreants for their oil. If we could wean ourselves off of oil (which, for the record we can do. But it will take the will of all Americans to do so) we could tell these countries that we didn't need it any more.
Then they wouldn't have the United States by the testicles any longer. The only way it will happen is if all Americans demand it. And then make the politicians get their hands out of the lobbyist's arses and listen.
Tomorrow
Tomorrow. Everything boils down to tomorrow. Michelle Malkin linked to Zombie's site where they have this little gem: http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=70
I'm just going to quote a little part of it. First, the Weather Underground terrorists wanted "organizers" in each "Community" to use "audacity" to bring about "socialism." Zombie gave the entire quotes, to make sure that people couldn't say that he/she was taking people out of context. Read it. Then weep, because unless things change, Barack Obama will be President and we will be the Socialist States of America.
It's the last paragraph I'm interested in, and it says "Theory and ideology are important tools, and we should make study of Marxism-Leninism an important part of our work." (emphasis added)
Barack wants to redistribute the wealth, he himself has said this. But what was it that Karl Marx said? "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Sounds to me like he learned it well.
And what's that about William Ayer's new book? "Race Course Against White Supremacy," which will be published in June of 2009. He doesn't sound reformed to me.
And what did Paul Harvey have to say today during his midday broadcast? He quoted from the latest Pew Research Centre poll. Here's exactly what Mr. Harvey said:
"Shop talk. Is it a biased media? Has the media already made up your mind? Pew Research says most Americans, 70%, think journalists want to see Barack Obama win tomorrow's election. 70% [of journalists] want to see Barack Obama win, and only 9% believe that reporters are rooting for John McCain."
(H/T: Michelle Malkin, Zombie, Paul Harvey)
I'm just going to quote a little part of it. First, the Weather Underground terrorists wanted "organizers" in each "Community" to use "audacity" to bring about "socialism." Zombie gave the entire quotes, to make sure that people couldn't say that he/she was taking people out of context. Read it. Then weep, because unless things change, Barack Obama will be President and we will be the Socialist States of America.
It's the last paragraph I'm interested in, and it says "Theory and ideology are important tools, and we should make study of Marxism-Leninism an important part of our work." (emphasis added)
Barack wants to redistribute the wealth, he himself has said this. But what was it that Karl Marx said? "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Sounds to me like he learned it well.
And what's that about William Ayer's new book? "Race Course Against White Supremacy," which will be published in June of 2009. He doesn't sound reformed to me.
And what did Paul Harvey have to say today during his midday broadcast? He quoted from the latest Pew Research Centre poll. Here's exactly what Mr. Harvey said:
"Shop talk. Is it a biased media? Has the media already made up your mind? Pew Research says most Americans, 70%, think journalists want to see Barack Obama win tomorrow's election. 70% [of journalists] want to see Barack Obama win, and only 9% believe that reporters are rooting for John McCain."
(H/T: Michelle Malkin, Zombie, Paul Harvey)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
