No commentary needed:
View this post on Instagram
Source: Larry Elder, via Instagram
Author: Marissa
bookmark_borderJeb Stuart Preservation Trust’s response to the despicable bill HB1699
The Jeb Stuart Preservation Trust, the organization that runs and maintains Jeb Stuart’s boyhood home, wrote an excellent letter to the Virginia governor regarding the despicable bill that bullies and bigots in the state legislature are attempting to pass.
Here is the most important passage from their letter:
HB1699… can be argued as viewpoint discrimination. In 1995 Virginia Supreme Court held viewpoint discrimination as an egregious free speech violation. In Rosenberger v. Rectors and Visitors of the University of Virginia (1995), the Supreme Court declared: ‘When the government targets not subject matter but particular views taken by speakers on a subject, the violation of the First Amendment is all the more blatant. Viewpoint discrimination is thus an egregious form of content discrimination. The government must abstain from regulating speech when the specific motivating ideology or the opinion or perspective of the speaker is the rationale for the restriction.’
(emphasis mine)
The concept of viewpoint discrimination really captures what is so deeply and fundamentally wrong with this disgraceful bill and the thought process behind it. Thank you, Jeb Stuart Preservation Trust, for putting this idea into words and providing legal citations to support it.
You can read the letter in its entirety here.
bookmark_borderNever forget…
bookmark_borderBarron Trump an “oddity on campus” – another example of the intolerance of the left
The third slide of this Instagram post really caught my attention. In it, Barron Trump is called an “oddity on campus” by fellow NYU students because “he goes to class, he goes home.”
Why the heck is it considered “odd” to go to class and then go home? Isn’t that exactly what a student is supposed to do? What is it, exactly, that Barron is expected to do in addition to attending his classes? What is required in order to qualify as “normal” in these people’s eyes?
This is a perfect example of the bigotry and intolerance of the progressive left. They proudly proclaim their support for queer people, trans people, single mothers, poor people, racial minorities, religious minorities… but find it “odd” that a student goes to class and then goes home. They criticize a young man for literally doing exactly what makes perfect sense for a person to do in his situation.
So in case this needs to be stated, which it shouldn’t, there is nothing odd about going to class and then home. It is exactly what makes sense for a student to do. I’m tired of this meanness, intolerance, and hypocrisy.
bookmark_border“Hey MAGAs, show me your best cognitive dissonance!”
I recently saw a post from one of my Facebook “friends” regarding the accidental leaking of military information by Department of Defense officials in a group chat.
The post read: “Hey MAGAs, show me your best cognitive dissonance! Best one wins a new red hat!… Go ahead, twist me a pretzel and tell me why this is all OK.”
This post, to be blunt, really pisses me off. And it does so for two reasons:
First, the double standards and logical inconsistency. This person expresses outrage about what is a relatively minor problem in the grand scheme of things, while completely failing to express any criticism of an obvious, pervasive, and blatant campaign of atrocity that is enormous in both its scope and its severity. He calls an accidental leak “a major fuck up” and “justification for heads to roll.” However, he expressed not even the mildest criticism of the statue genocide that began in 2020 and continues to this day, a series of deliberate and intentional acts of extreme cruelty targeting people who are different from the norm in an attempt to ensure their erasure from society. It makes no sense that someone would get so outraged at what is essentially an accident, while apparently feeling no outrage whatsoever at a deliberate and cruel campaign to inflict harm.
Second is the entire way that the argument is framed. This person purportedly invites others to discuss and debate, while simultaneously stating that anyone who expresses a differing opinion is demonstrating “cognitive dissonance” and “twisting a pretzel.” This way of framing the issue puts people who see things differently in a no-win position: we could either be silent and pretend that we agree when we don’t, or we could speak up and have our views automatically be labeled as “cognitive dissonance” and “twisting a pretzel.” Talk about intolerance for those who think and feel differently than you do. What is the point of inviting discussion when you have no openness to considering alternative perspectives? Why even ask people to contribute their views, when you admittedly have no intention of actually hearing or learning from those views, but intend rather to use those views as evidence of their authors’ twistedness and cognitive dissonance?
Personally, I support Trump and his administration because I’m on the autism spectrum and my special interest is history and statues, so the events involving statues that have taken place over the past 5 years have had a profound negative impact on me. The issue of military information being leaked just isn’t important to me in comparison, and therefore I do not share the outrage that this “friend” and so many other people are expressing. This isn’t cognitive dissonance, and it’s not twisting a pretzel. I simply have a different perspective because I’ve had different life experiences and my brain works differently.
bookmark_borderDon’t cry for the fired bureaucrats…
Very well-said:
View this post on Instagram
Source: Being Libertarian, via Instagram
Exactly! It’s the double standards and logical inconsistency that are so infuriating. It makes no sense for people to be outraged when government workers lose their jobs, but not when private sector workers lose their jobs. This is especially true when the private sector workers lost their jobs due to regulations that government workers created and implemented.
There are some great comments on the post which deserve to be quoted as well:
“Remember when Biden said people fired for not taking the vaccine could find another job? Well I’m sure the bureaucrats can find another job.”
“The fact that people I once called friends are boo-hooing about federal workers who held jobs which never should’ve existed and not the millions of people who lost jobs, homes, or businesses due to the actions of the regulatory agencies those workers worked for…sickens me.”
bookmark_border“You have a right to self-defense and the use of just force …”
Check out this post from the Firearms Policy Coalition:
View this post on Instagram
My reaction: So? Whether or not your abuser can get a gun is none of your business. Whether or not your abuser can carry a gun concealed is also none of your business. The only thing that is your business is that your abuser doesn’t harm you, and doesn’t contact you if you don’t want them to. And preventing these things is the whole purpose of a restraining order.
As long as a person is not harming you or contacting you against your wishes, the things that they do are none of your business. The objects that another person owns and/or carries are none of your business.
You have a right not to be harmed or contacted; you don’t have a right to prevent others from owning or carrying any object that they might potentially use to harm you. If you demand control over the objects that other people are allowed to own and/or carry, you are now the one who is harming others, and you are now the abuser.
As the FPC correctly points out: “You have a right to self-defense and the use of just force against unjust force. Period.”
bookmark_borderWhy are young men the most conservative they’ve been in decades?
Excellent post from Charlie Kirk:
View this post on Instagram
“The left assumed young men would simply embrace being dispossessed and hated. They were wrong.”
bookmark_borderLydia O’Connor, a despicable bully and bigot
There are no words that can adequately express the cruelty, nastiness, and immorality demonstrated by the despicable lump of flesh and bone that calls itself Lydia O’Connor:
“Trump Signs Order To Restore Inclusive and Diverse Monuments, Remove ‘Anti-America’ Ideology.”
Or perhaps:
“Trump Signs Order To Restore Monuments Signifying That People Who Are Different Actually Have a Right To Exist, Remove ‘Anti-America’ Ideology.”
There, Lydia. I fixed it for you.
Needless to say, I did not read the entire article, because my mind and nervous system don’t have the resilience needed to handle such a traumatizing experience. Thanks to merely glimpsing the headline, my body is shaking with rage, my stomach is sick, and my chest feels like it’s being crushed in a vice.
This headline, and the accompanying article, are enormously harmful to me as an autistic person who has grown up being excluded, bullied, and different from the norm. The monuments that O’Connor sickeningly characterizes as “racist” are the monuments to people like me. They are monuments to people who are different. They are monuments to the entire concept of being different from the majority, resisting authority, rebelling against social norms, not fitting in, thinking for oneself. They are the monuments that enable a person like me to actually be accepted and included in society. They are the monuments that signify that I have a right to exist.
But yeah, this is clearly racist.
Obviously, allowing people who are different from the norm to exist, is racist.
It’s racist to honor a diverse range of viewpoints, stories, and perspectives, rather than only honoring those that conform to the dominant ideology.
It’s racist to accept and include people who are different.
Not.
This headline and article are completely unacceptable. And this is an understatement. In fact, anything negative that could possibly be said about this headline, article, and author would be an understatement, because no language has words adequate for the task of accurately describing such complete moral bankruptcy.
Racist monuments.
Yup. Because for me to actually have a life worth living is “racist.”
Because allowing me to exist as an autistic person is “racist.”
No.
Wrong, Lydia.
Allowing people who are different form the norm to exist, is not racist.
This is obvious. It should not even need to be stated. It is, in fact, bizarre that it needs to be stated. It is bizarre that over the past five years, I have had to state this again and again, because despite how obvious it objectively is, it is clearly not obvious to a large percentage of the population. Even after five years of living through this hell, it is still both shocking and sickening beyond belief that an ideology has taken over this country which believes that allowing a person like me to exist, allowing a person like me to be accepted and included in society, is racist.
I have a right to exist. My existing is not racist. Period. Full stop. End of story.
Thanks, Lydia, for completely destroying my morning. Just another attack on my very existence, one of hundreds, if not thousands, of such attacks that I’ve been subjected to for nearly five years now. I am so incredibly sick and tired of people thinking this way, speaking this way, writing this way. I am sick and tired of having to justify my existence again and again, of having to defend my very existence against claims that it is “racist.”
Lydia O’Connor is the epitome of a bigot and a bully with no mind, no soul, no capacity for independent thought, no empathy, and no tolerance for any perspectives other than her own. She and the Huffington Post have inflicted severe harm on me by writing and publishing this article and should be sued for the harm that they have caused.
I have a right to exist. Statues like these have a right to exist. We are not racist. Period. Full stop. End of story.
bookmark_borderThere’s nothing “weird” about being interested in art
I recently saw an article about President Trump’s appointment of several of his supporters to the board of directors of the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. The article’s headline read, “Trump’s weird obsession with the arts is right out of the fascist playbook.”
This headline is just another example of the intolerance and bigotry of the supporters of “woke” ideology. Why do these people consider art to be something that only those who share their ideology are allowed to take part in? Why do these people consider anyone who thinks differently than they do to be “weird” and “fascist”? It’s because they are bullies. It’s because they are intolerant bigots who value sameness and conformity above all else and believe that being different from the norm is intrinsically bad. In other words, they have values and beliefs that are the exact opposite of the values and beliefs that they claim to have. If this sounds completely hypocritical, logically inconsistent, and morally bankrupt, that’s because it is.
I consider myself to be both right-wing, and a Trump supporter, and I love art. Art is one of the most important things in my life, if not the most important. As someone whose ideological views are not shared or understood by the people around me, art is a crucial form of self-expression. It is because of my right-wing values and beliefs – not despite them – that I love art. Art is how I express my emotions, feelings, and thoughts. It’s how I honor the historical figures that I love. (If you are interested, you can see some of my artwork at my art website here.)
There is nothing “weird” about being interested in art, and there certainly isn’t anything “fascist” about it. Silly me, but I would argue that it is fascist to believe that only people who think like you are allowed to be interested in art. Unfortunately for the woke bullies, there is no law restricting art to only one ideology. People like me have just as much right to partake in art as they do.