Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

Female Representative ticks off the feminists

This story isn’t that big of a deal, but if the feminuts have their camouflage boxers in a bunch, then it brings a smile to my face.  From Politico:

In any other office, it wouldn’t sound as strange: “OK, let me grab the congressman. Hold on.” 

But in this office it does, seeing as how the congressman is Marsha Blackburn, a Republican U.S. representative from Tennessee, who since joining the delegation in 2003 has preferred the masculine form of the title. 

“It’s not something I see as a big deal,” said Blackburn, 55, the only female member of the Tennessee delegation, emphasizing that she’s not trying to make a statement, feminist or otherwise.
…
But for some, name dropping — specifically the “woman” part — is a touchy subject. There’s a reason for that, say leading female academics, women’s policy analysts and other members: Names do matter.

“When they refer to themselves as congresswoman, this sounds different because it is different,” said Latifa Lyles, of the National Organization for Women, a feminist advocacy group. “I think that is significant,” added Lyles, who supports use of the term “congresswoman.” 

“We don’t have to pretend we’re not women in order to be leaders in this country,” she said. 

Barbara Kellerman, a professor of women’s and government studies at Harvard University, said women — like many minority groups — are repeatedly at odds with issues of nomenclature. 

“Whenever we blend with the male appellation, we are diminishing the significance of the accomplishment,” said Kellerman. …

Here’s a safe bet: if the NOW gang is mad at you, you’re doing something right.

April 17, 2008 Posted by | feminism | 3 Comments

CO government school bans honors graduation robes

The wussification of our children continues.  From Durango, CO:

When Kyra Rogers was younger, she dreamed of being one of those students who had earned a 4.0 GPA – and the right to wear a white robe in the front row at Durango High School’s graduation.

“It was motivational for me when I saw it,” she said of the robes.

Rogers, part of the class of 2008, earned perfect grades and looked forward to the honor. Then she heard that Principal Diane Lashinsky planned to end the tradition.

“We had the rug pulled out from under us,” said Jessica Branson, another member of the Class of 2008 with perfect grades.

Students who earned at least a 4.0 GPA will be recognized by cords, and mentioned in the program at the May 24 graduation ceremony. But this year, the 4.0 students will wear red robes along with all their classmates.

Lashinsky’s decision has generated some controversy at the high school. More than half of the approximately 23 students who earned a perfect GPA have written letters of protest to Lashinsky, students said.

“We’ve been expecting to wear white robes and working toward that for so long,” Branson said.

The students said wearing the white robes instead of red robes was a unique distinction.

“It’s a special honor to get to wear the white robes,” said Mackenzie Kitson, another graduating student with perfect grades.

Lashinsky was traveling and could not be reached for comment Wednesday. But she explained her decision in a recent newsletter.

“Every graduate has met the graduation requirements, and every child is special on graduation day,” Lashinsky wrote. “I feel the white gowns worn by some graduates diminish the accomplishment and hard work of other graduates by relative comparison.” (So what?  Self-esteem is earned, Lashinsky…not given.  Besides, I submit that the red gowns that the honors graduates wear diminishes THEIR accomplishments, which are, whether you want to admit it or not, more notable than those of their classmates! – Ed.)

Lashinsky added that while she was “very proud of the students who earn the highest level of academic achievement possible … part of my role as a principal of Durango High School is to support the growth and accomplishment of every student who walks through our doors.” (Helluva job in proving that, moron! – Ed.)

For the students, the decision to make all graduates wear red was only the latest move by the high school to reduce recognition of high-achieving learners.

The school refuses to release their class rank, sometimes leading to confusion when students apply for college or scholarships. Durango High also has not named a valedictorian for several years.

“They’re taking away the last bit of recognition we do have,” said Emily Horvath, another student with perfect grades. “It kind of seems like the only way to stand out at school is to do something bad.”

The white robes have been worn by 4.0 students the last three years.

“It’s not a long-standing tradition,” said Assistant Principal Mike Freeburn.

Some students may earn a greater-than-4.0 GPA by taking Advanced Placement courses. In previous years, any graduating student with a 4.0 or greater GPA wore white robes.

Freeburn expressed sympathy for the students.

“I know they’re disappointed, and that’s tough,” he said.

One of the students, Branson, plans to attend Colorado State University, where she will apply for the honors program. At CSU graduation, Branson said, honors students wear gold robes, while their classmates wear robes of green.

Got that?  “That’s tough.”  “Little Johnny, did you earn a 4.0?  Were you hoping to wear the distinct color to commemorate your achievement?  Well, sucks for you, pal.”  Nice.

April 17, 2008 Posted by | public education | 6 Comments

Obama: GOP Senator just like a terrorist

The Unifier and Healer of Souls knows how to win friends and influence people, doesn’t he?  Here’s a quote from Barry O from the Dem debate last night, via Capt. Ed:

Afterwards, when asked about his years-long political association with unrepentant domestic terrorist William Ayers, Obama tried equating the Weather Underground bomber with Senator Tom Coburn:

The fact is, is that I’m also friendly with Tom Coburn, one of the most conservative Republicans in the United States Senate, who during his campaign once said that it might be appropriate to apply the death penalty to those who carried out abortions.

Do I need to apologize for Mr. Coburn’s statements? Because I certainly don’t agree with those either.

I doubt Senator Coburn will remain friendly with Obama after equating him to a terrorist because of a policy dispute. Coburn wanted to pass a law through legitimate democratic and political means; Ayers tried to terrorize people into policy changes by blowing up buildings, for which he remains unapologetic to this day. Does Obama really see no difference between the two? And if not, what does that say about Obama?

When he’s not busy condescending to the God-fearing rifle-carrying rubes of rural America, he spends his time crafting crappy analogies and moral equivalencies that are downright shameful.

April 17, 2008 Posted by | Obama, shameful | 3 Comments

Non-political post of the day

Hey, who wants to retire to Scandinavia?  The line starts behind me, people!  From Denmark:

When a male resident at Kildegaarden nursing home in Denmark made an indecent sexual proposal to a member of the staff, the home’s director, Inger Marie Kristensen, told a nurse to telephone for a prostitute.“There was a considerable change in his demeanor after the escort girl had paid him a visit,  (gee…ya THINK? – Ed.)” Kristensen said in an interview. “We do this for our clients just as we offer them other services that they need as human beings.”

… Nurses arranged visits by call girls three times in the past three years.

American retirement homes: free bingo.  Danish retirement homes: hookers.  Choices, choices!

April 17, 2008 Posted by | non-political | 2 Comments

“How the media lost Basra”

This is a most excellent and damning post exposing the MSM for its agenda-based, fact-deprived, reality-denying advocacy journalism.  From Dean Esmay:

Via Glenn, Ed Morissey notes that dextrospheric doubts about the Basra reporting have now been thoroughly vindicated.

Residents say the streets have been cleared of gunmen, markets have reopened, basic services have been resumed and a measure of normality has returned to the oil-rich city.

The port of Umm Qasr is in the hands of the Iraqi forces who wrested control of the facility from Shiite militiamen, and according to the British military it is operational once again.

It seems like only yesterday we were hearing how Sadr had stopped the ISF’s advance and was gaining power from the confrontation. Oh wait — it was only yesterday:

Tue Apr 15, 5:05 PM ET

Sadr’s Mahdi Army has effectively stopped an advance by U.S. and Iraqi forces
…
Sadr’s political power appears to be growing even as the crisis wears on.

Right. Never mind that they’ve driven Sadr’s goons from Basra’s streets and several other smaller cities in the south, and taken mortar positions in Sadr City. Never mind that every political faction has lined up behind Maliki against Sadr. Never mind that al-Sistani, Iraq’s senior cleric and the most respected Shia in Iraq, has said the militias must follow the law. Never mind that all the political parties seem to agree the Sadrists should be banned from elections if they don’t disband their militias.

Roggio reports:

Iraqi troops have cleared the Qiblah in the southwestern portion of the city and the Taymiyyah neighborhood in central Basrah, while the Mahdi Army strongholds of Hayaniyah, Khamsamile, and Garma in the northwest “are now encircled by Iraqi troops who are carrying out door-to-door searches,” according to AFP.

Apparently ”stopped [the] advance” means the Iraqi Army has stopped by the Sadrists’ houses for tea and delivery of numerous pairs of shiny bracelets.

Amazingly, TIME’s earlier reporting was even worse. This article, appropriately published on April Fools’ Day, claims Moqtada Al-Sadr actually won in Basra:

How Moqtada al-Sadr Won in Basra

The Iraqi military’s offensive in Basra was supposed to demonstrate the power of the central government in Baghdad. Instead it has proven the continuing relevance of anti-American cleric Moqtada al-Sadr.

Catch that? The bar for Sadr is set at “relevant.” Not defeating the Iraqi security forces militarily, not holding his ground, not pushing Iraqi Army forces out of Basra, Kut, Umm Qasr and Kerbala, not getting any political support from other Iraqi parties, just being ”relevant.”

Sadr’s militia, the Mahdi Army, stood its ground in several days of heavy fighting with Iraqi soldiers backed up by American and British air power

Given that we’ve already been told Sadr “won,” the bar for Iraqi security forces is apparently set at “instantaneous absolute annihilation of all Sadrists everywhere in Iraq or Iran.”

How did the media lose in Basra? Ed nails it:

Once again, the American media got caught with its pants down and their, er, aspirations showing.

It’s a good thing the MSM has all of those multiple layers of fact-checkers at their disposal, right?

Nope…no liberal media bias!

April 17, 2008 Posted by | Iraq, media bias | Leave a Comment

LAT columnist: calling Obama an elitist is…you guessed it…racist!

When I first read the headline of the following piece at Hot Air, my first question was “Is there anything that doesn’t qualify as racism when inspecting a minority politician’s record, beliefs, etc.?”  I noticed that my question winds up being the exit question in the piece.  From Allah:

A new breakthrough towards the left’s unified field theory of how all criticism of Obama is essentially racist. The last great advance came from Harvard prof Orlando Patterson, scanning Hillary’s pedestrian 3 a.m. ad on Obama’s inexperience and finding the lost sequel to “Birth of a Nation.” Now comes David Shipler, thesaurus in hand, following a trail of synonyms that leads straight to the darkest heart of racist AmeriKKKa:

[W]hen his opponents branded him an elitist and an outsider, his race made it easier to drive a wedge between him and the white, rural voters he has courted. As an African American, he was supposedly looking down from a place he didn’t belong and looking in from a distance he could not cross.

This could not happen as dramatically were it not for embedded racial attitudes. “Elitist” is another word for “arrogant,” which is another word for “uppity,” that old calumny applied to blacks who stood up for themselves…

Furthermore, casting Obama as “out of touch” plays harmoniously with the traditional notion of blacks as “others” at the edge of the mainstream, separate from the whole.

If you take this tool seriously, there’s quite literally no good-faith way to accuse a member of a minority group of being snobbish or condescending. Every road through Shipler’s copy of Roget will lead inevitably back to “uppity,” no matter how circuitous the route may be. He’s also playing games with the definition of “out of touch,” a term typically applied to Republicans not to suggest that they’ve been marginalized from mainstream society but that they’ve become so consummately mainstream and establishment that they no longer relate to average people. The classic example of being “out of touch” is George Bush not knowing how much a gallon of milk costs. “Otherness” is practically 180 degrees from the concept.

But that’s all prelude. Here’s the master stroke, reminding us once again that for people for whom racial stereotypes are supposedly such alien concepts, progressives’ thoughts seem to turn awfully quickly to them:

When Clinton mocked Obama for the supposed emptiness of his eloquence, the chiding had a faint historical echo from Thomas Jefferson’s musings in “Notes on the State of Virginia” that “in music they are more generally gifted than the whites with accurate ears for tune and time,” but “one could scarcely be found capable of tracing and comprehending the investigations of Euclid.”

Hillary tells Obama he’s a blowhard and this guy hears Ralph Bellamy in “Trading Places” talking about what a “musical people” blacks are. QED.

Exit question: What doesn’t qualify as a racist term? Exit answer: See the end of this Perfunction post to find out.

Apparently, only whites can be “elitist”…who knew?  By the way, this Shipler guy who thinks “elitist = racist” apparently has no problem referring to blue-color white folks in the Rust Belt as, to quote the Democrats’ Senate Klansman Robert Byrd, “white n##gers”!  And he wants to lecture us on racism?

Barry O has it made, doesn’t he?  He could get on TV and call us a nation of white devils (or some other Rev. Wright-like drivel), and if I took offense to it, I would be the one branded a racist! There is nothing he can do that won’t elicit a response of “you racist!” from his defenders in the MSM if we question his deeds. Nothing.

April 17, 2008 Posted by | bigotry, media bias, Obama | 1 Comment

   

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 25 other followers