University of Missouri President Tim Wolfe wimps out If you are unwilling to fight for your job, you do deserve to lose it

For the Social Justice Warriors, the responsibility for any offensive act must be pushed up to the highest ranking normal white male1:

U. Missouri president resigns over handling of racial incidents

By Susan Svrluga | November 9 at 12:01 PM

University of Missouri president Tim Wolfe resigned on Nov. 9 following protests and strikes over his handling of racial incidents on the Columbia, Mo., campus. “Use my resignation to heal and start talking again,” he said. (University of Missouri System)

The president of the University of Missouri resigned Monday amid escalating protests over racist incidents on campus and how he had responded to students’ concerns.

Tim Wolfe announced Monday morning at a special meeting called by the Board of Curators, the university system’s governing body, that he would step down immediately.

“My motivation in making this decision comes from love,” Wolfe said. “I love MU, Columbia, where I grew up, the state of Missouri.” But after thinking greatly over the situation he concluded resigning “is the right thing to do.”

Tensions were high on campus Monday — with a student on a hunger strike, others camped out in solidarity, faculty members canceling classes and members of the football team threatening to boycott the rest of the season. In the morning, the MU undergraduate student government association formally called for the removal of the university’s president.

There’s much more at the link.

So, what happened that has cost Dr Wolfe his job?

Was Dr Wolfe a decent President for the University? I really don’t know, but his job performance wasn’t bad enough for the Board of Curators to have met about it prior to the “strike” by the black players on the Missouri football team; that got some attention. How Dr Wolfe was supposed to be responsible for the actions of some people, who may or may not have even been Missouri students, in a red pickup2 is beyond me. but, for the SJWs, apparently he is. How Dr Wolfe is in any way responsible for the death of Michael Brown, 116 miles away, or would have any knowledge about the events beyond what the rest of us can read in the media, escapes me completely.

But, he’s apparently a heterosexual3 white male, and that makes him responsible for the acts of other people who are not under his authority, and thus he had to go! Considering that he was unwilling to fight for his position, perhaps he really should have resigned.

Nevertheless, this incident shows just how poorly American colleges are preparing students for the real world. Payton Head, the Student Government president who had been called the horrible “n” word, will eventually be graduated and have to leave Mizzou to begin a career in the business world, and there won’t be any university president to blame when the next red pickup drives past and someone yells offensive stuff to him.4 He’ll have to just man up5 and get on with his life.6 When he finds himself competing with other people to move up the corporate ladder, to get that next promotion, if he is unable to simply disregard insults, if he gets all flustered and upset, he won’t be able to compete to the best of his ability,7 and he will fall behind. That’s life in the real world! Whining and bitching and complaining does not get you ahead; in the end, it gets you left behind.

  1. Note that this formulation excludes President Barack Hussein Obama from any responsibility whatsoever.
  2. It must have been a Chevy or a Dodge; General Motors and Chrysler make pickups, but Ford builds trucks!
  3. He has a wife named Molly, and two children.
  4. Mr Head has apparently been called names for being homosexual as well, but the article is unclear as to whether he is actually homosexual.
  5. Apparently, telling someone to “man up” is offensive at the nearby University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
  6. If an actual threat is made against him, he would have the basis for a complaint to the police, and action could be taken against someone who threatened him, but simple name-calling, regardless of how offensive, is not a crime.
  7. Making complaints to Human Resources that someone is being mean to you might work one time, but it tells the top management that you are an employee who needs to go away.

Rule 5 Blogging: American soldiers!

It’s the weekend and time, once again, for THE FIRST STREET JOURNAL’S version of Rule 5 Blogging. Robert Stacey Stacy McCain described Rule 5 as posting photos of pretty women somewhat déshabillé, but, on this site, our Rule 5 Blogging doesn’t put up pictures of Katy Perry in her summer clothes, but women, in full military gear, serving their countries in the armed forces. The terribly sexist authors on this site celebrate strong women, women who can take care of themselves and take care of others, women who have been willing to put their lives on the line in some not-so-friendly places, women who truly do have the “We can do it!” attitude. This week: American soldiers protecting our county.

Lance Corporal Kristi Baker, 21, US Marine with the FET (Female Engagement Team) 1st Battalion 8th Marines, Regimental Combat team II patrols with other Marines on Nov. 20, 2010 in Musa Qala, Afghanistan. (Paula Bronstein/ Getty Images) Click to enlarge.

Continue reading ‘Rule 5 Blogging: American soldiers!’ »

From Around the Blogroll Why Da'ish do not fear America edition

We’d expect this from Berkeley or Harvard, but the University of Nebraska?

Nebraska university tells students not to say ‘crazy,’ ‘ghetto’ and other bad words

By Deena Winter / November 4, 2015

The University of Nebraska-Lincoln has launched a campaign to get students to stop using certain words and phrases including “man up,” “no homo,” “retarded,” “ghetto,” “crazy” and “rape” (out of context).

In fact, students may notice one of 300 student volunteers wearing brightly colored T-shirts with the banned words emblazoned on the back. A pink shirt informs students that saying “man up” only “reinforces masculine stereotypes that are unhealthy for everyone.”

A purple shirt tells students saying “no homo” just “devalues love and sexual identities.”

A blue shirt says the word retarded “suggests disability and stupidity are interchangeable.”

A red shirt says the phrase “that’s so ghetto” only “misrepresents the experiences of others and negatively stereotypes minority groups.”

A green shirt informs others that saying “you’re crazy” just “minimizes human emotion and those affected by mental illness.”

And finally, orange shirts warn that saying rape out of context “ignores the reality of sexual assault.”

The campaign, launched Oct. 22, was organized by University Housing’s Multicultural and Diversity Education Committee to encourage students to “think before they speak.”

“We often hear students say things like, ‘That test raped me,’ or that something is ‘so ghetto,’” said Melissa Peters, assistant director of residence life for student leadership and diversity initiatives, in a university announcement. “The vast majority of students aren’t using these words to be malicious. But, intended or not, these are words that have impact and can hurt.”

It’s going to be tough on the students who are graduated from Nebraska when they are graduated, and have to leave their cozy campus and find jobs out in the real world.

There’s a lot more at the original, including documentation concerning similar programs at Michigan, Michigan State and Duke.

But this is why Da’ish do not fear the United States. It’s not just that they know that President Barack Hussein Obama is a pussy, or that we’re more probable than not to replace him with another ineffective weakling in Hillary Rodham Clinton, though those facts matter. The bigger picture is that the next generation of American leadership is being trained in “sensitivity” and weakness, and that means that the United States is going to continue down the path of weakness for as far as anyone can reasonably foresee.

And now, on to the blogroll!

Who knew that the Speaker of the House in Kentucky was as stupid as Amanda Marcotte?

Yesterday’s election results bothered the lovely Miss Marcotte no end!

These are not the only nuts: Tea Party governors and anti-LGBT statutes win when we stupidly stay home

How did conservatives crush a popular anti-discrimination ordinance in Houston? Urban legends and low voter turnout

By Amanda Marcotte | Wednesday, November 4, 2015 | 11:14 AM EST

While everyone—and I’m as guilty as the next political writer—was focusing heavily on the 2016 election, conservatives were able, yet again, to exploit the low voter turnout in off-year elections to keep racking up wins despite the general unpopularity for conservative policies. Nowhere was this more evident than in the city of Houston, which voted on Tuesday on the question of whether to repeal an anti-discrimination ordinance passed by the city council back in May.

The ordinance banned discrimination based on many things, including race, age, sexual orientation, and military service. But it was the ban on discriminating against people based on gender identity that opponents used as a wedge to attack the ordinance broadly, falsely claiming that by letting trans women use women’s restrooms, cis men would dress as women to rape women in public bathrooms.

The claim stinks of an urban legend—public bathrooms have snakes in the toilets and dress-wearing rapists in the stalls!—and city-wide polling data showed that citizens weren’t buying it. A few weeks ago, polling showed that the ordinance was up 6 points over repeal, with 43 percent of voters supporting it and 37 percent of voters opposing it. But somehow, on Election Day, the ordinance went down in an election that wasn’t even close.

What happened? Simple: Bigots were able to turn out the vote while non-bigots mostly stayed at home, assuming that this was a “small” election in an off-year and therefore one they could sit out.

If Miss Marcotte can freely label her political opponents as bigots, I suppose I can call her what she is as well: an idiot.

To be clear, this election had higher voter turnout than usual for off-year elections in Houston, but that appears to be largely because opponents of the anti-discrimination policy were able to rally their own voters. Knowing that very few ordinary people who generally support non-discrimination laws would turn out to vote, the religious right could hammer their own people, who are notoriously gullible, with tall tales about fantastical rapes by men in dresses. Off-year elections are candy to conservatives, because they can have this kind of disproportionate influence on the ballot.

This election was high turnout for a municipal election, with 27 percent of registered voters turning out. That was nothing compared to the 59 percent voter turnout in the presidential election year of 2012.

It’s not unreasonable to think the larger Houston population is smarter about these issues that the people who showed up to vote. The mayor of the city, Annise Parker (who advocated heavily for this anti-discrimination law) is not just a Democrat but is openly lesbian. Texas may be a red state, but Houston is actually quite liberal. If voters actually show up to the polls, that is.

Or, perhaps, the opinion polls were wrong. Erick Erickson noted that the pre-election polls have been pretty notoriously wrong for a while now, and, for amusement, I checked the Lost Kos, a hard-left website which tracks elections pretty closely:


Morning Digest: Conservative pollster musters up a tie for Matt Bevin

by Daily Kos Elections for Daily Kos Elections

Just days ahead of Kentucky’s gubernatorial election, GOP pollster Vox Populi released the first survey since June—and just the second one all year—that does not show Republican Matt Bevin losing to Democrat Jack Conway. Vox’s poll has the two leading candidates tied at 44 apiece, with independent Drew Curtis at 6.

Election junkies know that there’s been precious little polling out of the Bluegrass State, but Conway’s led in the last six surveys in a row—including in Bevin’s own internal. The only time anyone’s actually found Bevin ahead came over four months ago, when PPP, interestingly, put him up 40-38. That was a long time ago, though, and until now, no one had put up any numbers to contradict this string of a half-dozen polls.

But the question is, could Vox be right? It’s certainly possible. Last year, as a brand-new firm, Vox performed well, predicting much more success for Republicans than most other outfits. However, was this because they accurately understood the nature of 2014’s GOP wave? Or did they naturally lean in the direction of their partisan inclinations and just get lucky? We’ll find out on Tuesday.

Matt Bevin won by eight percentage points, and all of the statewide Democratic candidates underperformed what the polls said they would do. The Lost Kos wrote as though it was only because Vox Populi is conservative in orientation that they came up with a tie for Mr Bevin, an underhanded way of saying that the results should be discounted.

And so we come to the Speaker of the Kentucky House, Greg Dumbo Stumbo:

Kentucky Democrat Claims Matt Bevin’s Win Was A Defeat For Christ

By: streiff (Diary)  | 

The Democrat Speaker of Kentucky’s House of Representatives, Greg Stumbo, was on a roll last night as it became obvious that Matt Bevin had not only won but had effectively curb-stomped the Democrat, Jack Conway. To hear him tell it, it was a rejection of God Himself.

“Let me tell you,” Stumbo said. “I am going to admit I have not read the holy book from front to finish like some of you probably have, but my reading of our Bible shows that the word Republican or Democrat isn’t used, and people sometimes ask me … ‘What would Jesus have been if he were alive? Would he have been a Democrat or a Republican?’

“Democrat,” audience members said.

“I don’t know,” Stumbo said. “Nobody knows. The Bible doesn’t tell us that, does it? But I believe the Bible is a book of parables … I don’t know whether Jesus would have been a Democrat or Republican, and nobody else does, but I know this. He was a carpenter and a teacher, and I bet every carpenter and teacher I know are pretty good Democrats.

“And the other thing I know is that if in fact the Bible is a book of parables, like I believe it is, think about this: Mary did not ride an elephant into Bethlehem that night. So you go home and you go to your church and you tell people, I’m a Democrat, I’m a God-fearing Democrat. I’m a Democrat that believes in the principles of the Bible that become the principles of our party, that this wealth accumulation in America has to cease, that people have to have a right to have an equal education opportunity, that people have a right to have health care, that people have a right to enjoy the American Dream, and we will rebuild this party starting right here in Kentucky.”

I can only believe that either alcohol and/or narcotics were involved in this. The only other explanation is that [A typographical error keeps us from seeing that only other explanation, but I’d suggest outright stupidity.]

No one is deserving of humiliation more than anyone who would claim their political party embodies very essence of Christ. When your party makes a fetish of pissing on the Ten Commandments and the Gospels becomes offensive. Not to put too fine a point on it, the Democrats are the party of infanticide, they are the party of sodomy, they are the party of covetousness, they are the party of theft, the are the party of sexual licentiousness.  I’m not saying the GOP is holy by any stretch of the imagination but, Merciful Heaven, we haven’t accepted actively hostility to Christianity as one of our principles.

I’m trying to figure out if Our Lord would join the party which supports abortion up until natural birth . . . if not after.

Returning to Miss Marcotte, she stated that conservative ideas, that Republican principles, “are generally unpopular,” but that Republicans are still doing well at winning actual elections. Perhaps her view that conservative principles “are generally unpopular” is informed by the same polls which have gotten actual election results so wrong. Harry Enten wrote:

Just as in 2014, the polling underestimated Republican candidates in Kentucky in 2015, but did so in a fairly uniform fashion. On average, SurveyUSA and Western Kentucky University (WKU) missed the final margin by 13.4 and 11.1 percentage points, respectively, in the elections for agricultural commissioner, attorney general, auditor, governor, secretary of state and treasurer.

Agriculture commissioner -7.0 -7.0 -20.2 +13.2 +13.2
Attorney general +12.0 +6.0 +0.2 +11.8 +5.8
Auditor +8.0 +5.0 -3.9 +11.9 +8.9
Governor +5.0 +5.0 -8.7 +13.7 +13.7
Sec. of state +13.0 +11.0 +2.3 +10.7 +8.7
Treasurer -2.0 -5.0 -21.3 +19.3 +16.3
Average +13.4 +11.1

A look at the table above reveals that the polls and the results for the different races were highly correlated (0.96 for WKU and 0.97 for SurveyUSA). It’s as if the the electorate became about a dozen percentage points more Republican between when the polls were taken and Election Day.

It’s not yet clear whether pollsters simply projected that more Democratic voters would show up than actually did or whether undecided voters broke overwhelmingly for the Republican candidates. The former suggests an electorate modeling problem that could be a big problem during the presidential primaries, when turnout is low. On the other hand, trouble modeling the electorate would be less of an issue in the 2016 general election, when turnout is at its highest.

Even in the two statewide races that the Democrats won, the winners were scions of longtime Kentucky political families — Andy Beshear, son of the outgoing Governor, won the race for Attorney General, while Alison Lundergan Grimes held onto the Secretary of State’s job — and they won by much smaller margins than the polls had predicted.

I had previously noted the silliness of Brad Friedman, who has claimed for years that the pre-election polls were the true vote counts, and that the actual elections were fraudulent. It’s just too bad for the left that, as we have noted before: the only polls which actually mean anything are the ones conducted on election day.
Cross-posted on RedState.

Common sense and normality win in Houston

From the Pirate’s Cove:

Houston Voters Say No To Houston LGBT Ordinance

William Teach | November 4, 2015 – 7:26 am

A win for common sense and rationality:

(NY Times) A yearlong battle over gay and transgender rights that turned into a costly, ugly war of words between this city’s lesbian mayor and social conservatives ended Tuesday as voters repealed an anti-discrimination ordinance that had attracted attention from the White House, sports figures and Hollywood celebrities.

The City Council passed the measure in May, but it was in limbo after opponents succeeded, following a lengthy court fight, in putting the matter to a referendum.

The Times seems a bit upset that citizens would be allowed to vote on this.

Supporters said the ordinance was similar to those approved in 200 other cities and prohibited bias in housing, employment, city contracting and business services for 15 protected classes, including race, age, sexual orientation and gender identity. Opponents said the measure would allow men claiming to be women to enter women’s bathrooms and inflict harm, and that simple message — “No Men in Women’s Bathrooms” — was plastered on signs and emphasized in television and radio ads, turning the debate from one about equal rights to one about protecting women and girls from sexual predators.

In reality, this ordinance was all about pandering to the tiny LGBT community and the liberals who support them, and creating yet another class of people who are protected over others. There was nothing in this about equal protection. Strangely, the Times, like so many other news outlets, forgets to include the voting results. Let’s check the AP

There’s more at Mr Teach’s original.

The mayor of Houston, Annise Parker, is a lesbian, “married” to another woman,1 and the people of Houston were aware of that fact when they elected her on 2009; she has been re-elected twice now, so it’s obvious that the voters in Houston don’t have a problem with that. Yet, with 95% of the vote counted, the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance was defeated by a very wide margin, 61% to 39%. Perhaps HERO’s supporters ham-handed attempt to subpoena the sermons of Christian pastors opposed to it2 might have had something to do with the defeat.

But the most important component to the Houston vote was the attempt by the “progressives” to force normal people to comply with the demands of a mentally ill few. The ordinance would have allowed transsexual individuals to use the public restrooms of their choice, not of their biological sex, and the advertising campaign had images of adult males following little girls into the bathroom. Does this happen much? The supporters of HERO would tell you that no, it does not, but there have already been too many lawsuits by these mentally ill people to force normal people to go along with their delusions. And, as you would expect, the Obama Administration has sided not with the normal people, but the mentally ill ones, trying to force the public schools, where students, most of whom are minors, are legally compelled to attend, to allow transsexual students to use the restroom of their delusions rather than their sex. And Hillary Clinton tweeted her support for this junk:

The difference between Houston thrice electing a lesbian mayor and the landslide defeat of HERO is really pretty simple: Americans don’t really care than much about what other people do, as long as they keep it to themselves and don’t try to force it on others. But the homosexual/ transsexual rights movement is not, and will never be, happy with that distinction, and thus they feel the need to keep pushing, to try to force compliance by other people, to shove it down their throats. Had HERO exempted public restrooms, it might have even passed.

The problem with being nice, the problem with being understanding, of the left’s agenda, is that, given an inch, they will sue you for the mile, and demand that they can educate your children to agree to the next mile beyond that.
Cross-posted on RedState.

  1. Though Miss Parker and Kathy Hubbard went through a legal marriage ceremony in California, The First Street Journal does not accept the cockamamie notion that two people of the same sex can be married, regardless of what the law and the Supreme Court might say, and thus the quotation marks.
  2. Mayor Parker claimed to have been unaware of the subpoenas, and, of course I believe her!

Ben Carson surges to the lead The obvious question: will it last?

From The Wall Street Journal:

Ben Carson Vaults to Lead in Latest Journal/NBC Poll

Retired neurosurgeon overtakes Donald Trump for lead among Republican presidential candidates

By Patrick O’Connor | November 2, 2015 | 6:30 p.m. ET

Dr Ben Carson

Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson has overtaken businessman Donald Trump as the top pick of Republican primary voters to be the party’s presidential nominee, a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll finds.

The result marks the first time since June that the Journal/NBC News poll has found a Republican other than Mr. Trump to be leading the GOP field. Some 29% of GOP primary voters rank Mr. Carson as their top choice, while 23% favor Mr. Trump.

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz rank third and fourth as the top pick of 11% and 10% of Republican primary voters, respectively.

Some 8% prefer former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. No other Republican garners more than 3% support.

There’s more at the original. Unfortunately, my preferred candidate, Carly Fiorina, is stuck down at 3%; she built up her support following the first two debates, but was unable to maintain that enthusiasm, and a pedestrian performance in last week’s debate on CNBC hurt her. Where she was average, Senators Rubio and Cruz were better, a lot better.

The real news, however, is that Ben Carson is now outpolling Donald Trump. Is it an aberration, or has Mr Trump’s popularity really started to wane? Mr Trump’s performance in the CNBC debate was not that great either, but Mr Trump has the advantage of not needing campaign contributions; he can finance his campaign out of his own wealth, and has promised to do so.

The next debate is scheduled for November 10th on Fox Business Network. Jeb Bush tried to knock out Mario Rubio in the last debate, and it backfired on him; he’s got to make a top-flight performance next week, or he’s toast. Mrs Fiorina got her surge in the polls from the first and second debates; she needs to duplicate those performances next week, or she’ll be effectively out of the race. Mr Trump will be taking aim at Dr Carson — all of the candidates will be taking aim at Dr Carson — but he was doing that in the last debate, and it didn’t work for him.

Fifteen candidates is too many for the GOP going into the Iowa caucuses; the herd has to be thinned before January.

Apparently telling the truth is a “microaggression.” If we cannot call criminals criminals, can we at least label idiots idiots?

The rhetorical question that is so often used, “What part of illegal don’t you understand?” might not be as rhetorical as you might think. From the sanctuary city of San Francisco:

San Francisco neighbor says don’t call thieves ‘criminals’

A new extreme in political correctness?

Amy Graff | Updated 9:52 am, Saturday, October 31, 2015

Is it wrong to call someone who steals a “criminal”?

In a recent thread on NextDoor, a group of neighbors living in the Noe Valley-Glen Park area were engaged in a discussion around the city’s crime and debated whether labeling a person who commits petty theft as a “criminal” is offensive.

Malkia Cyril, poet, activist and idiot

In the site’s Crime and Safety area, where residents share strategies for fighting crime, Malkia Cyril of S.F. suggests that her neighbors stop using the label because it shows lack of empathy and understanding.Cyril pointed out that instead of calling the thief who took the bicycle from your garage a criminal, you could be more respectful and call him or her “the person who stole my bicycle.”

“I [suggest] that people who commit property crimes are human and deserved to be referred to in terms that acknowledge that,” Cyril, who’s the executive director of the Center for Media Justice in Oakland, writes in the thread.

“I think we should think twice before speaking in disparaging terms about ‘those criminals,'” she adds later in the thread.

Cyril started the thread because she wanted to shift the NextDoor conversations about security cameras, alarms and the police to more thoughtful discussions about strategies for addressing the cause of crime. In her posts, she blames our societal problems — gentrification, economic inequality, lack of affordable housing, the defunding of public schools — for pushing people into lives of crime.

You know, I grew up poor, but somehow, some way, that didn’t lead me into stealing someone’s bicycle, or anything else. Actually, I was devastated when someone stole my bicycle (some time between the fourth and sixth grades), a Schwinn Spitfire, off of our front porch; my mother couldn’t afford to replace it. I knew other poor kids as well, and I don’t recall ever knowing that any of them were thieves.

In a world of extreme political correctness, washing away words that have been deemed inappropriate is becoming commonplace. Many of these words are blatantly inappropriate, but with others, such as “criminal,” the offensive implication is subtle. These less obvious insults are often referred to as microggressions, which a recent article in the Atlantic Monthly explains are “small actions or word choices that seem on their face to have no malicious intent but that are thought of as a kind of violence nonetheless.”

Is referring to a person who steals as a “criminal” an example of a microaggression?

I would think that it is an example of telling the truth! Apparently telling the truth is a “microaggression.”

The San Francisco Chronicle captured some of the discourse:

Boo hoo. Poor people. Malkia you’re totally right. How dare I call the low life who last Wednesday stole my gym bag a “criminal”. After all he’s probably not even reading this, since he goes to fitness sf Castro like I do (did). No, he’s not a criminal, you’re right. He’s a f______ thief. And deserves to be caught and go to jail. But he likely won’t because this city is soft.

To which Miss Cyril responded:

Your gym bag was stolen? People’s lives are being stolen by poverty, over policing, and more. You can recover stolen property, and even if you can’t — you’re alright. But it does not compare to the primary drivers of crime. Addiction is not a selfish act, it is a medical crisis. People are not simply lazier than you, and there’s so much underpinning your assessments that it’s best I don’t respond to . . . .

And the Chronicle even agreed, writing:

Cyril pointed out that the man’s loss of his gym bag is a small inconvenience for someone of privilege.

Well, you know what, there actually are people lazier than the man who had his gym bag stolen. We don’t know much about the man who had his gym bag stolen, but we can assume that he had to spend his own money to buy it, and the money he spent on the gym bag was money he could not spend on something else. We don’t know the motivation of the criminal who stole the man’s gym bag, but I assume that Fitness SF Castro has a membership fee1; it’s a privately owned business.2 One would think that the thief had enough money to actually pay the fees at the gym, so he was (probably) not the poverty-stricken victim of society Miss Cyril assumed.

As for the City by the Bay looking the other way, not treating criminals like criminals, Kate Steinle was unavailable for comment.

People like Malkia Cyril are a huge problem in our society. Rather than insist on civility and order, they excuse and enable criminality; we can bet that if she knew who stole the gentleman’s gym bag, she wouldn’t turn him in. If San Francisco suffers from “over policing,” as she says, it is because too many ordinary citizens enable criminals, and allow them to be criminals, allow them to continue breaking the law and getting away with it.

Way back in 2007, we noted how the city of Philadelphia didn’t take crime seriously, and the result was a dead police officer. In 2008, it happened again, more than once. We also noted how San Francisco released an illegal immigrant and “alleged” gang member, refusing to turn him over for deportation, and he then murdered three people. But people like Miss Cyril don’t seem to have a problem with things like that, just as long as we don’t hurt the poor dears’ feelings by calling them criminals, by telling the truth, and by treating crime seriously.

If it’s wrong for me to call criminals criminals, is it at least acceptable for me to call Malkia Cyril an idiot?
Cross-posted on RedState.

  1. I searched, but was unable to find the fees online.
  2. Fitness SF Castro had to shut down the steam room because there was too much “hanky panky” going on. Gosh, what a surprise that is!

Rule 5 Blogging: The IDF

It’s the weekend and time, once again, for THE FIRST STREET JOURNAL’S version of Rule 5 Blogging. Robert Stacy McCain described Rule 5 as putting pictures of pretty women somewhat déshabillé, but, on this site, our Rule 5 Blogging doesn’t put up pictures of Esti Ginzberg in her summer clothes, but women, in full military gear, serving their countries in the armed forces. The terribly sexist authors on this site celebrate strong women, women who can take care of themselves and take care of others, women who have been willing to put their lives on the line in some not-so-friendly places, women who truly do have the “We can do it!” attitude. This week, the Israeli Defence Force again! Click on any photo to embiggen.

Continue reading ‘Rule 5 Blogging: The IDF’ »