If You're Interested In Intellectual Integrity, Rather Than...

...the propagation of dogma - especially in our "institutions of higher learning", then you probably will want to read this:

NAS Statement: The Architecture of Intellectual Freedom

Of considerable interest to me is the section near the end, "5. Pursuit of Truth". It's a sad sign of the times that this fundamental principle must be reasserted, especially in the elite halls of intellect which have become dogmatically corrupted by various intellectual religions.

American Snipers

The Left is sniping away at the film, American Sniper, and its subject, Chris Kyle.

‘American Sniper’ Complaints Grow in Hollywood: Should Clint Eastwood Be Celebrating a ‘Killer’? (Exclusive)

Over the weekend, multiple Academy members told TheWrap that they had been passing around a recent article by Dennis Jett in The New Republic that attacks the film for making a hero out of Kyle, who said: “The enemy are savages and despicably evil,” and his “only regret is that I didn’t kill more.” Kyle made the statements in his best-selling book, “American Sniper,” on which the film is based.

The film’s straightforward treatment of Kyle, who was killed in February 2013 by a veteran suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, is one of the reasons it has been celebrated by the military and embraced by audiences that have made it by far the top-grossing Best Picture nominee. The film had a massive opening when it went wide at the box office this weekend and is poised to break an historic $100 million this holiday weekend.

But Academy members seem to be paying attention to the criticism that Eastwood and star/producer Bradley Cooper shouldn’t be celebrating a man who wrote that killing hundreds of Iraqis was “fun.”

“He seems like he may be a sociopath,” one Academy member told TheWrap, adding he had not yet seen the film but had read the article, which is being passed around.

And Michael Moore, an Oscar voter and former Academy governor from the Documentary Branch, tweeted on Sunday, “My uncle killed by sniper in WW2. We were taught snipers were cowards. Will shoot u in the back. Snipers aren’t heroes. And invaders r worse.”

Neither distributor Warner Bros. nor the filmmakers have responded to TheWrap’s request for comment, though the studio said they intended to make someone available.

A piece in The Guardian by author Lindy West criticized Kyle this way: “The real American Sniper was a hate-filled killer. Why are simplistic patriots treating him as a hero?” he wrote.

Jett quoted West in his piece in the New Republic, and added: “One answer to that question: Because many Americans are unable to accept that nothing was won in Iraq, and that the sacrifices Kyle and others made were not worth it.”

On the other hand, the complaints are flying that LBJ wasn't portrayed in a more favorable light in "Selma". If the Left is not predictable, then they are nothing at all.

We saw American Sniper this week, and it is a very powerful film. And the drama continues with the assault on Kyle's widow by Jesse Ventura, over a disputed incident in Kyle's book. Ventura's self-righteousness might or might not be justified - there are Seal witnesses on both sides. But a bigger man would have dropped the lawsuit against Kyle's widow. Even though Kyle's widow will likely be flush after the dust settles, it seems sleazy to attack her estate. And sleaze seems to go against Ventura, in that sense.

Regardless, the Iraq war was justified initially to the degree that many Leftists approved it as well as did normal people. What was lost in Iraq was lost, not by the war, but by Obama, and him alone. So what Kyle did as a protector of the approved actions of the troops on the ground was and is, in fact, legitimate, even by Leftist standards.

What is happening now is the standard Leftist redefinition of what is legitimate, both in the war and the actions of those who waged it. It is merely the standard smear in order to protect Leftist dogma, and the same is going on with Selma (which I have not seen).

LBJ was not a moral icon, and he didn't deserve the presidency; he was an accidental president the same as Gerald Ford. The way LBJ handled and lost the Viet Nam War relates directly to the way Obama lost Iraq: they both directed everything war related themselves, personally, out of their own sense of personal superiority to their generals who were their lessers. LBJ and the FBI spied on MLK, and LBJ was not the moral god Leftists wish him to be. I don't know if the movie made clear that the oppressors of the blacks in the south were Democrats. That should never be forgotten. Bull Connor was a delegate to the Democrat convention, for example. Now that the south is not Democrat, blacks are reportedly migrating Southward again in order to find respect outside the ghettos and to engage the now roaring economy in southern states.

So now the amoral Hollywood Left makes a moral case once again. If anyone deserves condemnation as mentally disordered, it is the Hollywood narcissist Left, as a class. If there is any culture which does not deserve a moral say, Hollywood is that culture.

UPDATE:
Go here for the widow's response to the huge audience that American Sniper drew.

Greta Christina Nukes a Black Atheist Clear Into a New Identity

A Black Atheist On Being Blocked By Greta Christina While Discussing Ferguson


"I’ve always respected Greta Christina immensely as a social justice warrior. I’ve never met her, but I’ve asked her for advice on a couple occasions and have generally liked what she had to say, although I haven’t always been sure about her apparent “my way or the highway” approach to social justice issues. I would like to think I believe in protecting the marginalized, but I also would like to be convinced, because I think that convincing arguments go further than mere shame, oftentimes, in making change happen (shame can be a useful tool, true, but I think convincing arguments need to be made, as well).

So when Greta Christina stated:
"There are some debates I am willing to have. The question of whether police should be able to shoot unarmed black men with their hands in the air, and not even get fucking indicted, is not one of them. If you want to have a calm, civil debate about this, save us all some time and stop following me right now. I don't want to have to say "Go fuck yourself, blocked" to every one of you."

I was a bit taken aback. Blind acceptance was not healthy, I thought -- it would hurt, rather than help, the rational argument that there were other very real, substantiated problems, and make it seem as if those that wanted these problems discussed were irrational ignorers of evidence. So I said something briefly -- and, in spite of the prior statement (and partly because no black individuals from the United States had yet seemed to comment on the situation), I thought there was a chance to make a difference with a relevant statement. I was sorely disappointed:
"

Christina has had her Messiah Narrative challenged by a designated Victimhood individual, one who thinks that Rush To Judgment based on racial prejudice might not be a good thing. Even if it satisfies the Oppressor Class/Victimhood Class Social Justice Moral needs of the AtheoLeft. That presents an unsolvable paradox for Christina: the Victimhood Class is always morally right no matter what; But this Victimhood Class individual is contradicting her Victimhood Narrative which is also morally right no matter what. The resulting mental collapse which Christina has is inevitable.

Undoubtedly Christina will continue with her demand for Social Justice, meaning that regardless of the situation, the black is always right and the white male is always wrong. And she will shut out of her mental landscape any thought that another black might also be right - that she is wrong.

Because here is the thing about being right: messiahs as a class are always right - always. So if they are challenged, even by a black, the black becomes an Oppressor, automatically. This black had his identity changed in the twinkling of Greta's keypad.

The New Morality: Justice Equals "What We Demand".

Organizers Train Newly Minted Protesters in St. Louis

"“So what militant non-violent civil disobedience allows us to do is to create a container that we can channel it directly at the state, because this is not about bad apples. This is about a rotten system,” Sekou tells the trainees.

“Because you can be a good cop who doesn’t shoot black people but if you give out more tickets in Ferguson than there are actually people in Ferguson, that’s an evil system.”

Sekou then starts, “So we are confronting an…”

The audience finishes his sentence stating back to him, “evil system."

He continues, “[This is] not about an individual police or about individuals. This is about confronting an evil system. And the thing that guides us is love—not the kind of love that you see somebody and you think they’re cute—not that—deep abiding love. Say that.”

Attendees responded, “deep abiding love.”

“That’s what guides us, because deep abiding love says you’re willing to go to jail for what you believe in. Deep abiding love says you’re willing to risk your life for what you believe in,” Sekou says. “That’s what deep abiding love does. Deep abiding love in the front of tanks and tear gas and pepper spray says you will not bow down.”

Sekou tells the trainees again, “So we are guided by…”

“Deep abiding love” they say back to him. He says, “We are not confronting bad individuals but…” They respond, “an evil system.”"

And slightly later:

"And I also think we’re not going to get change in this society unless white people are just a little bit afraid. "

There is no chance that "self defense" will be considered anything other than police and state oppression by these Messiahs-in-training. A white cop must allow himself to be beaten to death because the black who is beating him is a designated Victimhood person, and therefore cannot be held responsible for his actions. Beating a cop to death is the natural outcome of evil Oppression of the Victim Class. Victims must act out in protest, you know; it's an expectation. So, robbery and beating cops are just natural expression; free speech in a sense. Cops, on the other hand, are the Oppressor Class, the "evil system" which the Messiah Class is morally obligated to hold a Moral Revolution against.

These proto-tyrants are going to remain in place, rioting for an indictment (regardless of the grand jury's findings); for a trial; and for the pre-determined, morally necessary conviction. The sentencing will cause riots because it is not capital punishment. If it is capital punishment, riots will be necessary to stop state brutality. Riots are just necessary, regardless. Because: "Deep abiding love", the faux moral principle of today's tyrant class. They will burn their city out of "Deep abiding love" which is actually hate for the designated "evil system" Oppressor Class, and love for their acquisition of power through domestic terrorism.

California ups the Abortion Ante

"In a stunning move, California has upped the abortion ante by forcing churches to pay for elective abortion coverage. California’s Department of Managed Health Care has ordered all insurance plans in the state immediately to begin covering elective abortion at the urging of American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which pushed for abortion to be considered a “basic health service”.

This is one reason why I despise the ACLU. Civil liberties for the ACLU includes the right to kill one's progeny for convenience or no reason at all. That's why it's called "elective": let's just kill it. For the ACLU, the First Amendment exists only partially, and then only for Free Speech for the Left (with a few gratuitous crumbs tossed to the common folk now and then). The ACLU doesn't base its attacks on the Constitutional rights supposedly "unalienable" to the founders, but anathema to totalitarians. And Atheists. Messiahs don't need guidance from outside sources, such as the constitution, or even history, much less any concept of decency. They know that killing, as part of the culture, is a step in the Left direction and is absolutely necessary to achieving total control. Attacking churches comes naturally, and is a Leftist essential also.
HT: FRC

Truth v. "Justice"

The following headlines were accumulated at Drudge:

REPORT: Autopsy Reveals Michael Brown Did Not Have Hands Up When Shot...

WASH POST: New evidence supports officer's account...

Black eyewitnesses corroborate...

Brown high enough to trigger hallucinations...

Police Chief: 'Very Unlikely' Officer Will Be Charged...

Protesters march inside Police Dept...

'All Hell Going To Break Loose'...

AUNT: 'They Will Feel And See Wrath Of God's Vengeance Come Upon Them In Mighty Way'...

They scream, "justice!" What that actually want is the preservation of their Victimhood status, under which anything they do, anything at all, is justified by their Victimhood status. This Leftist institution now makes the plantation blacks uncontrollable, purely under the Leftist Messiahist Ideology.

Obama's Racist Tactics Might Go To The US Supreme Court

The Feds have been forcing racial quotas and lowered standards for specified minorities, using "disparate impact" parlance as a threat. The fact is that they have created a huge cash flow from banks and lenders by getting them to pay the fine without fighting it. This is the same theory that led to the housing crisis when thousands of loans were made to people who couldn't afford them. But it is under a different name and approach. Texas is fighting back.

Supreme Court May Yet Blunt Obama's 'Disparate Impact' Weapon

"Race-Baiting: The Obama regime has used a dubious discrimination theory to shake down home and car lenders for $1.1 billion and counting. Finally, the high court may step in to stop this witch hunt.

The Supreme Court has granted the state of Texas a petition for certiorari disputing the use of disparate impact to determine discrimination in housing after a civil-rights group sued its housing department.

The liberal Inclusive Communities Project argues that state tax policies have created racial segregation in the Dallas area and thus have a disparate impact on minorities, allegedly in violation of the Fair Housing Act.

The same legal theory, which is based purely on statistics without any evidence of intentional racism, is actively used by the Obama administration to sue banks for lending bias and employers for bias in hiring. So federal policy also is at stake in this case.

Disparate impact has proved an effective policy weapon for this regime, and it is loath to lose it. In fact, fearing the conservative majority would strike down its favorite race-baiting tool as unconstitutional, the administration sabotaged two prior cases challenging disparate impact before the high bench could hear them.

Barring more bribery and intimidation, lenders may finally get their day in court. If Texas Department of Housing v. Inclusive Communities Project stays on the docket, it could deal a huge blow to the radical racialist agenda of this administration.

If justices throw the theory out, no longer will the Justice Department, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, EEOC or HUD be able to target banks, mortgage companies or employers for supposed violations despite the complete absence of discriminatory conduct.

They'll no longer be able to frame businesses as racist — a threat that has already led thousands to in effect adopt racial quotas in lending and hiring to avoid federal persecution.

"The risk of disparate-impact lawsuits, in the absence of guidance from the court, pressures the residential mortgage lending industry to arrive at particular outcomes and end numbers to avoid such lawsuits," the American Bankers Association wrote the high bench in a joint amicus brief.

"It is not surprising that to avoid legal risk, some businesses may feel pressure to manage end numbers or at least place a 'racial thumb on the scales.'"

Such pressure can force lenders to water down underwriting standards and take on more risk, since "down-payment requirements, debt-to-income requirements, loan-to-value requirements, and other neutral, risk-based underwriting requirements can all affect various racial and ethnic groups differently," ABA added"

A writ of certiorari doesn't guarantee the the USSC will hear the case, but it's a step in that direction.

Holder's DOJ Is Now Under Investigation?

Apparently there still exist pockets of un-corrupted government officials; more power to them:

Government case implodes as its former lawyers allege fraud against Holder DOJ

The New York Observer reports that two former Assistant United States Attorneys say the Holder Justice Department engaged in deceit and corruption of justice in connection with the DOJ’s litigation against Sierra Pacific Industries, a California lumber company.

As a result of the allegations, a federal district judge has ordered the recusal from the case of every judge in the Eastern District of California. He reasons that the court may have been defrauded by the government, thus requiring the appointment of an outside judge to handle the matter going forward.

The Holder DOJ brought the case against Sierra Pacific for allegedly being responsible for a wildfire that destroyed 65,000 acres in California. Sierra Pacific maintained that the fire started elsewhere and that state and federal investigators and DOJ attorneys lied about the origin of the fire so they would have a “deep pocket” from which to collect millions of dollars.

Nonetheless, as litigants confronted by the power of the federal government are wont to do, the company settled the case. It agreed to pay $55 million to the United States over a period of five years and to give up 22,500 acres of land.

But now two former DOJ lawyers in the office that prosecuted the action corroborate Sierra Pacific’s claim that the DOJ’s case was based on fraud and deception. Using information provided by these lawyers, Sierra Pacific told the federal court that “the United States presented false evidence to the Defendants and the Court [and] advanced arguments to the Court premised on that false evidence or for which material evidence had been withheld.”

In addition, the United States “prepared key. . .investigators for depositions, and allowed them to repeatedly give false testimony about the most important aspects of their investigation.” The United States also “failed to disclose the facts and circumstances associated with the. . .lead investigator’s direct financial interest in the outcome of the investigation arising from an illegal bank account that has since been exposed and terminated.”

One of the former DOJ lawyers says he was removed from the original prosecution by his boss, David Shelledy, chief of the civil division in the United States Attorney’s office, because he “rebuffed” pressure to “engage in unethical conduct as a lawyer.” According to the Observer, Eric Holder will this week award Shelledy the Department’s highest award for excellence.

It figures.

Another former DOJ lawyer left the prosecution team stating: “It’s called the Department of Justice; it’s not called the Department of Revenue.” He reportedly told defense counsel that in his entire career, “I’ve never seen anything like this.”

Naturally, the allegations of these former prosecutors made a big impression on the court. As noted, the chief judge of the District, Morrison England, Jr., ordered the recusal of all the Eastern District judges from the case due to evidence that the government defrauded the court. He referred the case to Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, so Kozinski could appoint a judge from outside the Eastern District to handle the case.

In a related case, a California state judge found that the investigation and prosecution of this matter by the state involved “egregious,” “pervasive,” and “reprehensible” abuses that amount to “government corruption.” The state court case “betray[ed] the primary purpose of the judicial system—to reveal the truth,” the judge stated.

Holder Bolts

The injustice of Eric Holder

"Contrary to what liberal elites think, the average American isn’t dumb and can see when someone is abusing his office and allowing politics to drive his decision-making. They may think they can fool the American people, but that is a mistake that many arrogant politicians and government officials have made in the past, and Mr. Holder is just another in a long line of such government officials. From his misbehavior in everything from the New Black Panther voter-intimidation case to Operation Fast and Furious to the IRS targeting scandal, Mr. Holder has shown the public why he is the first and only attorney general in our history to be held in contempt by the House of Representatives.

As a longtime, current employee of the Justice Department told us, Mr. Holder and his subordinates have “racialized and radicalized” the department “to the point of corruption.” They have “embedded politically leftist extremists in the career ranks who have an agenda that does not comport with equal protection or the rule of law; who believe that the ends justify the means; and who behave unprofessionally and unethically. Their policy is to intimidate and threaten employees who do not agree with their politics, and even moderate Democrats have left the department, because they were treated as enemies by administration officials and their lackeys. Another black employee who has worked for the Justice Department for decades said to me, ‘There is no justice left in Justice under this administration.’"

Holder has transparently been at war with America, and he has radicalized the Justice Department to carry this war forward. Should a constitution-friendly president be elected next, s/he will have to completely purge this - and many other - federal departments.

Leftist Hatred Of Dissent And The Other

RFK, Jr.: Climate Skeptics 'Should Be at the Hague with All the Other War Criminals'

"Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., says he wants a law to punish politicians who dissent from man-made climate change theory - and calls them "contemptible human beings."

Kennedy made the remarks in an interview with Climate Depot at a climate march in New York on Sunday:"

Kennedy Jr. accused skeptical politicians of "selling out the public trust." "Those guys are doing the Koch Brothers bidding and are against all the evidence of the rational mind, saying global warming does not exit. They are contemptible human beings. I wish there were a law you could punish them with. I don't think there is a law that you can punish those politicians under."

Kennedy also said he thinks the successful pro-energy Koch brothers should be "in jail...with all the other war criminals":

"I think it's treason. Do I think the Koch Brothers are treasonous, yes I do," Kennedy explained.

"They are enjoying making themselves billionaires by impoverishing the rest of us. Do I think they should be in jail, I think they should be enjoying three hots and a cot at the Hague with all the other war criminals," Kennedy declared.

And, Kennedy's not the only climate activist who would like to see dissenters jailed.

As the Media Research Center's Business and Media Institute (BMI) chronicled in a May 2014 analysis, pro-climate change theory media and scientists have long promoted the idea of throwing anyone who disagrees with them in jail - even to the point of calling for "climate Nuremberg" trials:

On May 19, 2014 PBS' "Moyers & Company" played a clip of scientist, David Suzuki, calling for politicians skeptical of man-made climate change to "be thrown in the slammer." On day later, a tweet by well-known alarmist Michael Mann suggested that skepticism could be a "crime against humanity." As least far back as 2006, and as recently as March 2014, liberal journalists and radical scientists have advocated punishing people who doubt catastrophic, man-made climate change.

On March 28, 2014, the popular website Gawker's Adam Weinstein declared "Arrest Climate-Change Deniers." Weinstein explained there was "clear precedent" to "punish the climate-change liars." He was very specific on who should be jailed, as well. Weinstein clarified that the "man on the street" is innocent but just "too stupid." Instead, he focused on "Rush and his multi-million dollar ilk" and "Americans for Prosperity."

James Hansen, a former NASA scientist and prominent climate alarmist, made a speech in 2008 calling for the imprisonment of oil and coal executives. He said "these CEOs should be tried for high crimes against humanity and nature" before fearmongering over "continually shifting shorelines" and a "more desolate planet."

In 2006, David Roberts of the alarmist website Grist.org called for extreme punishment. Grist, which has featured major interviews with both former Vice President Al Gore and PBS' Bill Moyers, called for "war crimes trials for [climate denying] bastards." He escalated that threat, calling specifically for "some sort of climate Nuremberg."

You Are No Longer A Racist; Now You Are A Rapist

Out: Bogus charges of racism. In: Bogus charges of rapism.
Instapundit

Rotherham Ignored

1,400 Girls Are Raped in Rotherham, and Feminists Don’t Care

"You might expect this would be a feminist field day. After all, rape is their favorite and most important issue, the original sin of the male sex, and the primary source of their victim power. So, tipped off by an article by Ian Tuttle in the National Review, I took a look to see what they had to say. And what I found was … nothing. Complete and total silence.

As of this writing, Google can find no mention of Rotherham (except for one or two discussion comments) at any of the feminist websites I examined: Feministing, Feministe, Bitch Magazine, Ms. Magazine, Bust, Crunk Feminist Collective, Jezebel, Broadsheet, and The XX Factor. Progressive news sites including MSNBC, Daily Kos, Think Progress, and Truthout were also completely silent on this topic.

Let’s take Feministing as an example. Demonstrating the feminist obsession with rape, there are currently five links to articles discussing rape or sexual assault on the front page of this well known feminist blog: The Police Violence We Aren’t Talking About, 17 Beliefs About Sexual Assault That Are Totally Wrong, UNC-Chapel Hill revamps sexual assault policy, California legislature passes “yes means yes” bill, and Why the anti-rape nail polish doesn’t work in a nutshell. But no word about 1,400 girls groomed, gang raped, prostituted, and beaten, repeatedly and over many years. Absolute silence.

What’s going on here? Why isn’t there a feminist feeding frenzy over a topic with so many lurid details, so many juicy examples of society’s violence and indifference to women?

There are two facts that explains their silence. The perpetrators were Pakistani Muslims. And the victims were white."

I think that there is slightly more than just that. The criminal enablers were strictly obeying the Leftist principles of Tolerance, Non-Discrimination, and Inclusion on top of their fear of Islamic-style retribution. In fact, their fear of being booted out of the Leftosphere by implicating the serial kidnapper-rapists was probably the greater fear. So they used their Leftist principles as justification for enabling the atrocities. Further, I doubt that there is any serious soul-searching or conscience-aching amongst these Leftists, because they did not violate their Leftist principles and thus see no error in their ways.

Perhaps the above explanatory analysis is correct: For the Left, Muslims are always the Victims; whites are always the Oppressors. The designated Victims have the moral right to their activities, be they terror, beheadings, kidnappings or rape. On the other hand, whites always deserve what they get. That is morality as viewed through the Leftist kaleidoscope.

The Leftist Religion of Abortion

A person called Toriach makes the case for aborting Downs Syndrome and other human embryos at Daily Kos. As always, it starts with "it's the woman's choice" to kill or not to kill her progeny. But the further case to be made is that it is just too much trouble to deal with a challenged progeny:

"What both Dr. Dawkins, and most of those who vehemently disagree with him, have lost sight of, is a very important core truth. Unless they are pregnant with a potential Downs child, the decision is not, and should not, be the purview of anyone, except the woman carrying said child.

Everything else is extraneous moralizing, and well beside the point.

The simple, ugly, truth, is that raising any special needs child, whether they have a physical condition, or a mental/developmental one, is at best, a major challenge for most people. Both materially, and mentally/emotionally. There are many people who feel that it is well worth it. Good for them. I fully support the right of a woman to bring such a child into the world even knowing full well the potential challenges both child and parents may face. But, it is long past time, that we put a stop to the mythologizing of the challenged, and their care givers. For a great many people, children who are typical can be more than a bit of a handful, and for some, even on a good day, they may feel that they are in over their heads. This can be multiplied exponentially when dealing with a child with a challenge, whether physical, mental, or both in combination. We need to stop demonizing those women, who upon being informed that their child may be challenged, take an honest look at themselves and their situation and decide that they, for whatever reason, are not up to the lifelong challenge that raising such a child can bring. We need to stop acting as if these are special magical fairy children, and as if the mere fact of their existence will alleviate all the very serious difficulties that both they and their care givers may face over the course of their lives. "

Fortunately for some, she would support (allow) the birth of challenged children to parents who want them. But not to a mother who just can't deal with it: that means kill it. Just do it: kill it.

"Sadly, there is little hope of making the so called "pro-life" crowd understand this reasoning, let alone accept and embrace it. But far too many people on the Left, who proclaim their support for a woman's right to exercise total sovereignty over her person, suddenly turn into the worst kind of anti-choice zealot where the issue of aborting a fetus diagnosed with a congenital condition is concerned. It is high time that we accept that a woman's right to choose is sacrosanct at all times and in all circumstances. Even at those times that one might personally disagree with her choice or her reason for it. Perhaps especially at those times.

Keep The Faith My Brothers And Sisters!"

Realizing and admitting that abortion is the Leftist religion of killing one's progeny, Toriach calls the woman's right to kill, "sacrosanct". And she wraps up by admonishing, "keep the faith".

The Left is constantly attacking the rights of others. But this new, Leftist "right" is sacred and must not be attacked or... um... aborted. For now, it is the only legal killing that the Left can do, at least in western nations. by turning it into a religious, sacrosanct, article of faith, it becomes the "Allahu Ackbar" of the Left. The Right To Kill {X} is sacrosanct!!

The entire concept of being a mother and mothering is now reduced to the initial decision of "should I kill you? Or keep you? How much trouble will you be? Will you disrupt my life style? How much would it cost to just kill you?

Nope. No Bias Here... Move Along.

Headline:

Networks Dodge Huge IRS Scandal News as DOJ Attorney Says Lost Lerner E-Mails Do Exist

And there is this:

IRS Shocker: Filing Reveals Lerner Blackberry Destroyed [after the hearings were started]

Leftists Can’t Be Hypocrites Because There Are No Morals to Violate (If You're A Leftist)

"Hypocrisy is essentially a conservative disease, because leftists can't catch it"; this is attributed to Alan Colmes, Leftist talk show host. Conservatives have "absolutist" positions from which they might stray; Leftists talk absolutist, but believe and act any way that is convenient and expedient, and that's what they expect of themselves. "Liberals pride themselves on being committed and selfless. In short Liberals pose as our moral superiors, more altruistic, more sensitive to the needs of the oppressed, and less concerned with money and self-interest than anyone else."[1]

I’m going to start a thread today, based on AtheoLeftist hypocrisy. There is so much to choose from that the task would be daunting, so I decided to take it one instance per day… or so.

Today’s offering is this: The Left Cheats Black Employees By Paying 30% Less.

”Campaign staffers who are people of color routinely get paid less than their white counterparts, and are often given less glamorous jobs. How an antiquated understanding of race relations results in minority staffers getting the short shrift.

“If you’re a person of color hoping to get hired by a political campaign, here’s the ugly truth: You’ll probably get paid less than your white counterparts, if you’re even hired at all.

“On both sides of the aisle, there is a racial pay gap in campaign politics. Asian, Black and Latino staffers are paid less than their white counterparts, according to an analysis by the New Organizing Institute.

For example, African-American staffers on Democratic campaigns were paid 70 cents for each dollar their white counterparts made. For Hispanic staffers in Democratic campaigns, the figure was 68 cents on the dollar.

“And a recent study by PowerPAC+, funded by a major Democratic donor, revealed that less than 2 percent of spending by Democratic campaign committees during the past two election cycles went to firms owned by minorities.

“Political operative Michael Gomez Daly worked on two congressional campaigns in 2012 with similar budgets. On one campaign, Daly, who describes himself as “a very light-skinned Hispanic,” was brought in as a field director, primarily for his skills as a Latino operative who could reach out to the Hispanic community. On the second campaign, where they did not know he was Hispanic, “I just came in as ‘Michael Daly,’ instead of ‘that Latino operative,’” he said. “Right off the bat they offered me twice the amount for the same job.”

Straight up racism? Yep:

”The NOI statistics on the campaign race pay gap compare all staffers of each race, and average out the salaries. One of the explanations for lower minority wages could be that they tend to be represented in lower-paying campaign roles.

“Most minority staffers get hired in campaigns in field jobs, and field jobs pay less,” explained Jamal Simmons, a Democratic political operative. “The problem is: they don’t hire African Americans, Latinos in the parts of the campaigns where they spend the most money. The most money in campaigns is spent in communications, polling and data. In those parts of the campaign, it’s very much mostly white.”

This is not racism nor is it hypocrisy, because: neither decency nor law apply to the Left, because they fundamentally don't believe in either. It would be hypocrisy only if conservatives did it, because conservatives do believe that both decency and law apply to everyone.

Notes:
[1] From Peter Schweizer; "Do As I Say (Not As I Do) - Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy"; Broadway Books, 2005. p 5, 6.

Two Things

First:

The US State Department is helping Boko Haram in Nigeria. Here's how Kerry has set it up:

"Ehrenfeld said Christians “have to be able to fend for themselves, because they can’t rely on the government.”

A former military intelligence officer who served with the Defense Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency, Paul Hair, agrees.

Hair told WND Nigerian Christians might have to adopt the tactics of Christians and other non-Muslims in the Central African Republic.

“They might have to fight back brutally with whatever weapons they have. They’re going to need a high desire to achieve complete victory,” he said.

“What else can the Nigerian Christians do if they don’t want to be wiped out? If the government can’t help them, and it’s increasingly questionable if it can, then what use is appealing to it? The U.S. is heavily involved in Nigeria, but the Nigerian Christians shouldn’t expect help from the United States,” Hair said.

He said the American government is allowing its dislike of the Nigerian government’s social policies to interfere with helping counter jihad.

“The heavy U.S. involvement is complicated, and there are certain things the U.S. government doesn’t like about the Nigerian government that is partially hindering whatever working relationship the two governments have. Furthermore, the current U.S. leadership has bizarre priorities in Nigeria, like [Secretary of State John] Kerry’s concerns over Nigeria’s ban on same-sex marriage,” Hair said.

WND reported last week the Obama administration was withholding intelligence from the Nigerian government because of a policy difference over same-sex marriage."

The American homosexual lobby will kill all the Christians and bystanders that it needs to, in order to get itself "normalized" around the world.

Second:

"“African militaries are not trained to keep citizens safe but to keep regime elites safe from the citizens. They are not soldiers but thugs meant to keep unarmed civilians in line. When having to deal with the likes of Boko Haram, they crumble,” Solomon said."

How might this relate to the recently militarized Executive Branch Agencies? The similarity of the entire Executive Branch to third world dictatorships is striking. The personal history of Obama shows that it is entirely within his upbringing and nature. Yet the ongoing Leftist bent of the nation allowed his election, twice.

The Left, From Deep Inside

From The American Thinker:

Ten Reasons Why I Am No Longer a Leftist

This is an honest look at the Left from one who was a true insider. There is too much there to quote here; go there to read the whole thing. It's a vindication for those who want to build rather than destroy; to love, rather than to hate; and to be left alone and tolerate rather than attack with intolerance.

H/T Robert Coble

Obama's and the Left's War On Women

Obama and the Left are specifically ignoring an American's wife in Sudan, who will be flogged 100 times for being Christian. The Left constantly demonstrates its Atheism and anti-Christianity even though it cynically doesn't claim it, and it demonstrates its Leftist overt war on women by treating them like dirt while blaming it on every one else. The Democrat reduced pay scale for women vs pay for men plainly shows that. But this is one woman, arguably an American, definitely in danger of barbarian torture due to her religious conviction. And there is no concern, no outcry from the "empathetic Left". From the FRC:

"Yet while liberals drone on about the "war on women" and the President trades five terrorists for an Army deserter, this small family continues to hit brick wall after brick wall in their appeals for diplomatic help. The situation is even more desperate now, as some British papers report that the 27-year-old wife of American Daniel Wani could be flogged in days if her appeal is thrown out. The stomach-churning ordeal is getting plenty of coverage overseas, as locals describe what 100 lashes means.

A barbaric practice that leaves its victims screaming and pleading for their lives, a man with a whip begins swinging -- and female prisoners, who start off wearing clothes, soon watch the layers disintegrate, "leaving the women bare-backed as the whip 'takes skin' off." Daniel's brother Gabriel says the 100 lashes can kill, "while others hover 'in bad condition' until they are executed."

This is the fate of an innocent wife and mother, married to a U.S. citizen from New Hampshire. Still, the President, who has never needed a shot of positive PR more, sits on his hands -- refusing even to release a simple statement condemning the Sudanese government or to leverage its hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign aid. The President needs to find his voice for two American children who will die in a prison with an infant mortality rate of one per day.

The Left will not benefit by saving a Christian, and being purely Consequentialist utilitarians they care only about what benefits them immediately. Obama, who believes that with his voice he can change the world, speaks not a single word in her defense. Her crime is also a crime to the Left: she is Christian.

Thought Crime = Domestic Terror

With the current players, it was destined to happen.

"In his statement announcing the return of the committee, Holder said he remains concerned about the specter of attacks prompted by Islamic extremists, but he said this committee will be tasked with identifying other threats.

“We must also concern ourselves with the continued danger we face from individuals within our own borders who may be motivated by a variety of other causes from anti-government animus to racial prejudice,” Holder said.

According to reporting from Reuters, the American Civil Liberties Union is pushing back against the DOJ plan, fearing “it could be a sweeping mandate to monitor and collect controversial speech.”

Objecting to Obama's programs and performance is BOTH antigovernment AND racist. We must scrape and bow before the One.

More On Academic Anti-Semitism

Headline:

Professors Engage in Anti-Semitic Rhetoric on Secret Listserv
Professors for BDS slam ‘Zionist’ control of the media, academia

BY: Adam Kredo
May 27, 2014 12:25 pm

"Leaked messages from an internal listserv of university professors involved in the debate surrounding an effort to boycott Israel have revealed a deep bias against the Jewish state and anti-Semitic accusations that Zionists and Jewish people control academia.

The highly charged rhetoric about Israel, revealed last week on a leaked listserv, show that some professors involved in the Modern Language Association’s (MLA) resolution to boycott Israel are motivated by the belief that Jewish people are nefariously pulling the strings in American academia.

The leaked comments have spurred accusations of anti-Semitism in the MLA’s ranks and prompted outrage among Jewish leaders who say that this type of discourse is motivated by a deep seated bias against Jewish people and the state of Israel.

The charges of anti-Semitism were underscored by a controversial Facebook posting by one of the professors involved in the debate questioning the deaths of 6 million Jewish people in the Holocaust.

Other professors involved in the debate referred to colleagues who oppose the boycott measure as “Zionist attack dogs” and claimed that they “control and twist the media.”

The MLA, a 30,000 member-strong organization of academics, is currently considering a resolution to censure the Jewish state. The measure is being viewed as part of the anti-Semitic Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which is behind multiple efforts to isolate Israel from the halls of academia."

The Left is increasingly emboldened to show their true stripes: totalitarian antisemitic elitists who wish to stomp out all who are not part of their pack.