Seventeen years ago today, America was attacked. Never forget the victims who died, and those who fought back.
In Pace , Requiescat.
![]()
Seventeen years ago today, America was attacked. Never forget the victims who died, and those who fought back.
In Pace , Requiescat.
![]()
Once upon a time, during the Cold War when literal Communists who were literal agents (or useful fools) for the Soviet Union that literally plotted to bring down America, many universities and colleges required loyalty pledges of employees stating that they were not part of this literal Communist conspiracy. The Left, at the time, were outraged that any employer would dare what their employees thought!
Of course, the Left asked for tolerance because that was in the nature of the American they so loathed. Now that they have seized power, they eschew it so as to protect their own power from a take-over such as the one that they successfully perpetuated.

No better example of this hypocrisy can be seen than the recent spate of “diversity oaths” that require employees to monomaniacal support the good sounding yet intentionally vague idea of “diversity“. California Polytechnic University San Louis Obispo even developed a thirty page plan to implement this.
“For Cal Poly, requiring the diversity statement is one part of a larger effort school officials are engaged in to ‘improve diversity’ via dozens of various endeavors outlined in its 30-page action plan. As part of the diversity initiatives plan, the university also has a goal of ‘increasing, in a Proposition 209-compliant manner, the hiring of diverse faculty utilizing cluster hires every other year.'”
The mentioning of Prop. 209, the 1996 California ballot initiative, also known as the California Civil Rights Initiative”, which outlawed racial discrimination (and sex-based discrimination in most cases), makes it clear that this isn’t just about uniformity of thought, but also a way to circumvent the prohibition on racial discrimination in hiring and employment.

News of the Week for Sept. 9th, 2018
Many fast food restaurants have moved from offering carbonated soda beverages in children’s meals and instead have pushed milk or apple juice, by their own choice. California now wants to make that mandatory. SB 1192, which has passed the California Grand Soviet Legislature aims to ban the default offering of any drink other than water, unflavored milk (or milk substitute).

“114379.10. For purposes of this chapter, the following terms have the following meanings:
(a) “Children’s meal” means a combination of food items and a beverage, or a single food item and a beverage, sold together at a single price, primarily intended for consumption by a child.
(b) “Default beverage” means the beverage automatically included or offered as part of a children’s meal, absent a specific request by the purchaser of the children’s meal for an alternative beverage.
(c) “Restaurant” means a retail food establishment that prepares, serves, and vends food directly to the consumer.
“114379.20. (a) A restaurant that sells a children’s meal shall make the default beverage offered with the children’s meal one of the following:
(1) Water, sparkling water, or flavored water, with no added natural or artificial sweeteners.
(2) Unflavored milk.
(3) A nondairy milk alternative that contains no more than 130 calories per container or serving. For purposes of this paragraph, “nondairy milk alternative” means a non-dairy fluid milk substitute that meets the standards for the National School Lunch Program as set forth in Section 210.10 of Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
(b) The beverage listed or displayed on a restaurant menu or advertisement for a children’s meal shall be one of the default beverages listed in subdivision (a).”
Note that this means that the server can not offer an alternative that is available or even note that alternatives are available, even if that alternative is chocolate milk, which sounds kinda racist and oppressive…
The Netherlands, the global capital of homicide-based “medicine“, has so normalized suicide that even involuntary suicide is considered medically acceptable. But the “conditions” that are to be treated by death are not limited to physical ailments, but to any and all psychiatric conditions.
“In January a young Dutch woman drank poison supplied by a doctor and lay down to die. Euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide are legal in the Netherlands, so hers was a death sanctioned by the state. But Aurelia Brouwers was not terminally ill – she was allowed to end her life on account of her psychiatric illness.
“…
“During those last weeks, she spent her time with loved ones, doing craftwork and riding her bike in Deventer, the city she adored. She also visited the crematorium – the place she had chosen for her own funeral service.”

There was a time that a mentally ill person who tried to kill themselves would be stopped and given treatment. Not in the Netherlands, where many “doctors” believe that “when people apply for euthanasia on psychiatric grounds, in some cases they will kill themselves if they don’t get it. In her view, they should be regarded as people with terminal illnesses.” When psychological problems are treated as if they were physical ailments, and “incurable” physical ailments are increasingly routinely treated by just offing the patient, it becomes inevitable that the easiest and most cost effective way to treat someone with psychological issues in a socialized healthcare system is to just kill them off. A bit of a conflict of interest for the “doctors” to, rather than help their patients cope, are complicit in getting their patients to die.
Perhaps more frightening, is how a life-long psychiatric problem can, and is, being equated with life-long medical conditions such as diabetes! After all, if you can legally get a person with psychiatric issues killed, then why not someone, including children, with diabetes to die as well?
Recently, the College Board, which provides the Advanced Placement Exams that allow high schoolers to earn college credit by successfully passing an exam, purged all history before A.D. 1450 from the exam. Interestingly enough, it was the Left that objected the most because it would exclude most pre-colonial societies.

This, of course, is not too surprising when one realizes that it was the 15th century that introduced the West to the rest of the world beginning with the Age of Discovery. The history of the world, then, was the history of Western Civilization and its unprecedented global influence. In order to combat this and allow Left-indoctrinated teachers to preach the pre-Western utopias of the world, the test will now include world history back to A.D. 1200:
“Since our recent announcement about changes to AP World History, which were meant to alleviate that problem, we’ve received thoughtful, principled feedback from AP teachers, students, and college faculty. This feedback underscores that we share the same priorities: engaging students in the rich histories of civilizations across the globe and ensuring that such important content is given the time it deserves.
“The AP World History: Modern course will begin in 1200 CE, rather than 1450 CE, starting in the 2019-20 school year. This change will ensure teachers and students can begin the course with a study of the civilizations in Africa, the Americas, and Asia that are foundational to the modern era.”
One of the justifications for outlawing “Gay conversation therapy” that seeks to help those with an unwanted physical/romantic attraction to those of the same sex is that such therapies are harmful and even cause people to kill themselves, as has been declared to be holy writ according to the American Psychological Association (APA). That this doesn’t seem to bar a psychologist from helping a patient embrace their homosexual feels simply underscores that this policy position by the APA is based on the assumption that homosexual attraction is set in stone and ought never be altered while it is perfectly acceptable to help people “come out of the closet”.

A recent peer-reviewed journal article questions the APA’s stance:
“The American Psychological Association and other organizations have formally claimed that sexual orientation change therapies should not be used because they are probably ineffective and may cause harm. A survey asking for negative and positive experiences of 125 men with active lay religious belief who went through sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) strongly conflicted with those claims. In our study, most of those who participated in group or professional help had heterosexual shifts in sexual attraction, sexual identity and behavior with large statistical effect sizes, similarly moderate-to-marked decreases in suicidality, depression, substance abuse, and increases in social functioning and self-esteem. Almost all harmful effects were none to slight. Prevalence of help or hindrance, and effect size, were comparable with those for conventional psychotherapy for unrelated mental health issues. Judged by this survey, these therapies are very beneficial for lay religious people, but no Catholic priests were in the sample, and this study makes no recommendations for them.”
While psychology peer-reviewed articles ought to always be held in skepticism, that there is any question of the “established truth” puts into question the “established conclusion” of the APA, and that maybe, juuust maybe, wanting to change to whom one is attracted is and ought to be left as a private matter between doctor and patient.
News of the Week for Sept. 3rd, 2018
The “trans” movement is inherently at odds with the biological reality that is intuitively obvious to the most casual (non-indoctrinated) observer. In order to push the “fantasy” that we are somehow not a sexually dimorphic species, our very words must be mutated into Newspeak and the English language savaged to inanity.
An example of this is the Australian state of Victoria’s pushing “they day” to push politically correct usage of pronouns. The YouTuber Bearing expostulated upon this linguistic crime the state of Victoria’s desire to “reprogram some neural pathways”.
Another “quick takes” on items where there is too little to say to make a complete article, but is still important enough to comment on.
The focus this time: It’s like we’re a sexually dimorphic species that perpetuates itself through dudes and chicks screwing…
First, a little mood music:
Carrying on…

One of the woke views of the future of humanity is a post-humanist view where gender/biological sex are outdated things to be liberated from… especially that entire icky “reproduction” thing. Little surprise, then, that when hardcore Leftists of the most woke bent suddenly realize that they can be identified as the villains in a futuristic science-fiction mecha anime from Japan, where the heroes rediscover how a male and female having a child together is natural and normal, is somehow now “right–wing propaganda“.
It's sad that a show about how a male and a female having a child together is natural and normal is considered "right-wing propaganda" https://t.co/Hop04xKQPR
— Þe Political Hat with "Ralph" The Wonder Llama (@ThePoliticalHat) May 26, 2018
The full meltdown is both inane and worthy of belittling.
![]()