Barack Obama continues to claim victims a year and a half after he left office, as this outrageous case shows. The so-called “University” of California demonstrated they do not care about facts, only about getting a desired outcome. For a “university” to behave this way should cause alarm among students, parents and alumni, because such an obvious disdain for facts is anathema to everything a “university” should stand for. In a perfect world, Obama would be criminally prosecuted for his violent rape of the United States Constitution.
There is not one single protection that a “hate crimes” law would grant that is not already in place. Murder, rape, assault, arson and other crimes are already illegal.
Texas did not need a hate crimes law to execute one of the men who murdered James Byrd, and put another on death row. Indiana does not need a hate crimes law to execute someone for committing a bias-motivated murder.
What a hate crimes law would do is punish thoughts.
When a woman accused Brett Kavanaugh of groping and attempting to rape her in the early 1980’s, it was a powerful story that could have derailed his nomination. But the Democrats decided that they were going to pile on this story with ever more ridiculous and outlandish allegations, and the absurdity of the other allegations damaged the credibility of the first one. That may have saved Kavanaugh’s nomination.
First, we heard that Kavanaugh exposed himself and put his genitals in a woman’s face at a college party over 30 years ago. The woman was by her own admission drunk at the time, and said that her memories were unclear for decades. The memories became clear just as Brett Kavanaugh was about to be confirmed to the Supreme Court and had been accused of sexual assault. Well, that is certainly convenient. It was a weak allegation at best, and caused people to suspect Christine Ford’s allegation.
If we are going to navigate the thorny issues surrounding sexual assault and provide support to victims, then we need to honestly engage in the arguments made instead of setting up weak straw men to knock over. One such straw man was used at Vox last week:
Trump and others appear eager to pit men against women, implying that taking claims of sexual misconduct seriously means unjustly ruining men’s lives.
No, that is not true.
In a discussion of the harm done to men falsely accused of rape, a so-called “feminist” tweeted that the standards need to change to bring justice to the women who have been raped and never saw their abuser punished:
it’s just gunna be too bad if a few innocent men have to carry that burden for the sake of justice for the many.
This tells you all you need to know about modern “feminism.” This is not about equal rights or justice for women. This is about hatred of men, and punishing men generally for the grievances of modern feminists. It does not matter if a man is actually innocent or not. He deserves to be punished anyway, because there have been so many women who have not gotten justice. This is the worst form of identity politics, a tribal hatred that blames an entire group for the actions of a few.
Someone who has had a comment approved already will see their posts right away, but new comments require approval. WordPress isn’t perfect with notifications, so I may not see a new comment to approve. I will attempt to approve comments faster, though.
Hillary Clinton tweeted that Trump asked Russia to hack her e-mails.
Are you really this stupid, Mrs. Clinton? This was obviously a joke. People make these kinds of jokes all the time.
There are two possibilities here. One possibility is that Mrs. Clinton really is so stupid that she cannot recognize an obviously sarcastic statement. The other possibility is that Mrs. Clinton is a liar, but she thinks everyone else is so stupid that they will buy into her “analysis” when she takes Donald Trump’s words literally. I don’t believe Hillary Clinton is that stupid.
Come on now. This argument was over two years ago. Everyone knows it was a joke. Stop this nonsense and move on.
The dishonesty and hypocrisy of the Perry Township Trustee is sad, and his repeated unhinged rants in Herald-Times comments are unworthy of an elected position. The incumbent Democrat needs to grow up and realize that part of being an elected official is getting criticism and suggestions for how to do things better for the taxpayers. If he cannot handle that, he should resign from office.
First, the incumbent Democrat claimed that meeting minutes were always on the township website. This is plainly false. The last meeting minutes on the website as of July 2018 were from February 16, 2017. Either the trustee does not know what his own staff is doing, or he is lying.
Despite the fact that I pointed out that posting meeting minutes and agendas to the Perry Township website would take no more than ten minutes once a month, the Perry Township Trustee continues to dishonestly pretend that it would require a full time staff person, asking if I want to “create a fulltime web designer position for a friend.” So instead of addressing my argument on its merits, the incumbent Democrat wants to attack my character and motivations.
I saw this posted on Twitter:
Billions of Innocent women have been the collateral damage for men’s reputations, it’s just gunna be too bad if a few innocent men have to carry that burden for the sake of justice for the many.
That tells you all you need to know about modern “feminism.”
We are always afraid of the new thing, aren’t we? We do not understand it, and we assume it is worse than it actually is. Then we have the inevitable calls for government to regulate that new thing.
The same pattern is playing out with motorized scooters, new to Bloomington. I am frankly very glad that the scooter companies simply started operating instead of asking for permission, because city government would have likely regulated it into oblivion – if they were allowed to operate at all. Then a convenient (and fun!) way of getting around town would never have been an option. Who knows how many jobs would be affected by this.