RIP Cleveland Indians

I find liberal solutions interesting. Retarded... but interesting.

This time, liberals have gotten their collective outrage in a twist over the use of Indian names by sports teams. Apparently, naming your team after something like a red man is meant to ridicule those same things. Take that Jets, Tigers and Boilermakers! Hence, it is offensive that a team might be named the Indians or the Eskimos or some such thing, and those names must go. Thus, the Cleveland Indians have succumbed and will henceforth be known as the Cleveland Aunt Jemimas (No word on changing the Jets yet).

Welcome to liberal land. Not only have they completely misunderstood the point to naming a team after something -- for the record, it is meant to honor that thing -- but their solution is, shall we say, hilarious. How so? Well, for the past decade liberals have been going around the country (and Canada) in the name of protecting red people from the humiliation of being honored by sports teams and have been demanding their names be removed where found. Said differently, in the name of falsehood-based outrage, liberal whites are systematically wiping out any trace of Indians from our culture. //snicker snicker

If they are diligent, within a few years, there will be no traces left of the people who were here when whites showed up and VD'd them to death. Nice work, liberals.

Similarly, with this cultural appropriations crap, liberals are slowly making sure that non-European ideas will be ghetto-tized in minority communities far and away from mainstream culture.

Putting all of this together makes me wonder: are liberals intentionally trying to eradicate minority cultures or is this just a byproduct of their smugness? I'm kind of liking the idea that liberals are secretly (well, not so secretly actually) huge pushers of white power and cultural genocide. I mean, they are trying to keep non-European culture out, eliminate any cultural reference to brown people, scare blacks into segregation and economic doom, and encourage abortion in a way which has wiped out vastly more minorities than whites. Add the fact that their policies have only one logical conclusion: making whites and blacks turn on each other, and you have a game plan the KKK would be proud of... brought to you by the likes of AOC.

Fascinating times.

As an aside, I don't really care about Cleveland changing their name because baseball sucks and is dying a miserable death to which I am utterly indifferent. I just think it's funny that they are being used to wipe out "native Americans" for a second time.

Thoughts?

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

How Dare You Achieve, Sir!

I'm back. I went to Grenada the past two weeks. It was great to be in a land where people truly appreciate Ronald Reagan and what America stands for. Plus, it was a fantastic and well needed vacation. Anyways, a quick thought tonight on Jeff Bezos.

First, this is an exciting time for space science. For the first time in decades (since the first shuttle launch really) we are making giant strides forwards. This is how we get to the future - dreamers doing it themselves rather than relying on the government to get off its sclerotic rear.

Yet... the left is all up in arms. Apparently, Bezos is rich (as was Branson) and it's horrible that rich people get to do things "others" don't get to. Wah. Insert pro forma environmentalist and racist whine as well.

What a jealous, spiteful little group of sh*ts the left has become. So it isn't the achievement that matters to them... it must be the right person who achieves. And that person cannot be rich (unless we like them), and they better not be white and male and dating a woman in expensive clothes (uh why did this petty detail matter at all?) and anti-union. Oh no. Moreover, the achievement must be done in a "representative" way with all the right numbers of blacks and women and gays and God-knows-whats.

You know what? Go pound sand. The reason it was Bezos and not you, idiots, is because he's achieved things in life. You haven't. As you've whined into your keyboard about how unfair it is that other people have more things than you, he was remaking the world. When you were mis-educating yourselves, he was educating himself. When you were living on student loans and your parents, he was out there taking chances. As you've spent your days building awareness of lies and spewing malice, he's been helping millions build their futures. Have any of you ever produced anything? No. Have any of you ever hired anyone? Ha. Hardly. Have any of you ever sold millions of people the things they need at the best prices available? I didn't think so. And the reason he managed to do what he did -- what you could never do -- is that he hired good people who could pull this off rather than a rainbow of people like you whose only "skill" is being a pretend victim, and he dared to dream of the future. This was the future. You... you have no future.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...

More Liberal Dipsh*ttery

My brain hurts. The lies and delusion are killing me. To quote Dodgeball, watching liberals in the news these days is like watching a bunch of retards humping a doorknob.

● Humper number one is Scarlett Johansson. She's trying to sell the Black Widow movie as about "women's empowerment." Try not to laugh. To fully understand how utterly ridiculous this is, realize that Black Widow was created in the image of a jerk off fantasy. She's the Russian version of the Nazi dominatrix you saw from time to time in 1950s porn, or like Wonder Woman who was created by a bondage enthusiast. She's hyper-sexualized and uses sex as her primary weapon. In the films Johansson has worn sleazy leather catsuits, used sex as a weapon, surrounded herself with bondage imagery, spewed innuendo, and slept her way around the Avengers. People took note.

To counter this image, busty Scarlett and Marvel decided to do what Hollwood always does: lie. When word gets out that you are rock stupid (Swank, Silverstone), your agent starts planting stories of how brilliant you are. When word gets out that you're an abusive sh*t who mistreats waiters and makeup people (Hathaway), they plant stories about how kind you are. Don't give to charity (Hemsworth), stories appear praising your generosity. And so on. (Corporations do this too.)

So busty Scarlett started talking about how the character started that way, but she worked tirelessly to make sure it wasn't that. Having laid that groundwork (no pun intended), she's now claiming that this film isn't some jerk off fantasy, no, it's about women's empowerment. This is such crap. This is the same way the girlies in the Resident Evil franchise claimed their film was about presenting strong women... in fetish gear who found themselves in rape fantasies.

Let me help these "strong women", because they clearly don't get it. If you are dressed in a low-cut leather catsuit like you belong in a bondage magazine or a porno. If your weapon of choice involves something that looks like sex or uses sex to attract the bad guy. If your lines are meant to arouse. You aren't doing women's empowerment.

● Humper two: Julianne Moore claims that it's "totally sexist" to tell a woman that she's "aging gracefully." After all, she whines, “Is there an ungraceful way to age? We don’t have an option of course. No one has an option about aging, so it’s not a positive or a negative thing, it just is.” Well, girlfriend, yes... yes there are ways not to age gracefully. Take for example, that certain set of women, like in your profession, who try desperately to hold back time through plastic surgery and drinking their own urine. Talk to Gweneth Platrow about weird-ass sh*t to avoid looking old. Then there are women who age hypocritically, like Salma Hayek, who is upset that Hollywood favors sexy young things... she didn't complaint when it worked in her favor. Then there are those like Madonna, who act like sluts, which gets really gross(er) as you age. And of course, there are those who fall into the category of "bar fly." You know the type. There's nothing graceful about any of their aging.

As an aside, this term also gets use against men, so claiming it's sexist when used against women is frankly stupid. Stupidity is never graceful.

● Humper three: Fake-black singer Bebe Rhexa (she's actually Albanian and people aren't happy as they catch on) posted booty shots of herself and started screaming that she weighs 162 pounds and we need to "normalize" that so young girls know it's ok to be that fat. Only, 162 is not fat. It might be a little husky depending on your frame, but the only people who view 162 as fat are the liberal women and gay men of the fashion industry and Hollywood starlets. Everyone else kind of takes that as the normal range. Way to invent a cause that's not really a cause!

● Then we have this. People are upset that the producer of a lot of Disney kids shows snuck foot fetish moments into those shows. How dare he! The horror! Of course, it's cool when they include gay or trans messages, so I don't really see how they can judge this guy. How do we decide one version of perversion is cool and another isn't?

● Bill Cosby is free. How can a man who admitted raping a bunch of women be released from jail? A technicality. The same type of technicality that liberal woman have been demanding be part of the system since forever. Now it works against them and they are aghast. Ah, the liberal fantasy: the abuses of power I like will only be used against people I don't like.

[+] Read More...

[-] Collapse Post...