Robert Goldstein, a UCLA Law Professor, asked his upper level law students, "...to imagine that they are lawyers in the St. Louis County Attorney’s office..." and cited a report on Michael Brown's stepfather, Louis Head, who shouted, "Burn this bitch down!” after a grand jury decided not to indict Ferguson
Police Officer Darren Wilson in the death of Michael Brown. The students were then faced with the dilemma of deciding whether or not Head should be indicted for inciting a riot. The question read, "“[As] a recent hire in the office, you are asked to write a memo
discussing the relevant First Amendment issues in such a prosecution.
Write the memo.” Seems pretty straightforward and realistic, does it not? Seems like the sort of thing that a lawyer would be expected to do in the performance of his or her duties, right?
Enter the professional victims. In an article on Fox News (click here to read it), Maxiam Lott describes how some (it's not clear how few) of Goldstein's students complained, and a blogger by the name of Elie Mystal wrote that Goldstein's exam question was, "racially insensitive and divisive." Lott writes, "Mystal also incorrectly alleged that the question asked students to “advocate in favor of extremist racists in Ferguson.”
While race certainly motivated those that were demanding Officer Darren Wilson's head on a pike, Goldstein's exam question was completely devoid of racial factors; it was exactly the sort of requirement one could expect to face in the real world. Does UCLA not attempt to prepare their students for future employment in the real world, or do they expect them to spend the rest of their lives languishing in the artificial world of academia?
Goldstein attempted to defend his perfectly rational intentions by stating in an email to his students, "As with many of my exams in this upper-level elective class, questions
may be drawn from current legal issues in the news or from recent court
reports. This helps make the exam educational and relevant.” He goes on to cave in to pressure from the professional victims, and those that cater to them, by writing, "I clearly underestimated and misjudged the impact of this question on
you. I realize now that it was so fraught as to have made this an
unnecessarily difficult question to respond to at this time. I am sorry
for this,” Unnecessarily difficult? Don't lawyers in the real world have to face situations like this on a regular basis?
The professional victims and race baiters don't want the truth to be highlighted. They don't want to have to respond to tough questions, like, "What should be done about the looting, arson, riots and assaults that were incited by Head, Holder, Sharpton, and the like?" They just want us all to shut up, admit our white guilt, and do what they tell us to do (namely pay them). What a farce.
To Robert Goldstein I say, "Grow a spine." To his perpetually offended students and critics I say, "Grow up."
I find it odd that the left is up in arms over voter ID laws (RACIST!), yet they are the only ones that seem to get caught committing voter fraud, voter intimidation, and, well, just plain cheating. They insist that minorities are too stupid to obtain ID cards, but demand that law-abiding citizens provide ID for every other manner of official business. Between the black panthers (I refuse to capitalize that) and the illegal invaders, the left might sway some key election battles with illegal votes. Never mind that the democrat base consists of those that always vote for the biggest handout; what about the effects of illegal immigrants voting (illegally) in some of the closely contested races?
Breitbart has an interesting piece (click here to read it) that asks the tough questions, and posits that Al Franken (liberal douche-bag extraordinaire) might have won his recount as a result of illegal immigrant votes. How much of an effect do illegal immigrants actually have on our elections? I doubt that anyone can say with true certainty, but I believe that it's significant. Look at all of the left's efforts to cater to the illegal invaders; do you really believe that it's done out of kindness? That's a huge chunk of their voter base!
In the Breitbart piece, Joel Pollak states that an estimated 6.4 percent of non-citizens vote, and that 80% of those people vote democrat. I would have guessed a higher percentage on both counts, but his numbers are probably based only on those that answer surveys honestly. He goes on to report that voter ID laws are strikingly ineffective, since obtaining an "official" ID is disgustingly easy for illegal invaders. I believe that while voter ID laws are not as effective as we would like them to be, they are necessary and make sense, despite the left's baseless cries of racism.
The bottom line is that foreign invaders are voting in our elections, and their choices are predictable. Illegal invaders vote for the biggest handouts, which come by way of democrats taking from the producers and giving to the non-producers. Pointing that out is usually decried as racist, insensitive, or whatever other buzzword the left is enjoying this week.
"It's for the planet!"...or something. California Governor Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown signed SB270 into law, making it illegal for retailers to use single-use, plastic bags. Instead, stores will charge a ten cent per bag fee for paper bags.
The starry-eyed fools that supported this steaming pile of crap claim that "most plastic bags end up in the ocean or landfills." If that were true, why would it be so? I'll tell you why; it's because people are lazy. First of all, I don't believe the severity of their claims. Most people have jumped on the recycling bandwagon already, reusing plastic grocery bags for other things, not to mention the fact that "single use" grocery bags are typically made from recycled materials. The lazy minority that refuse to recycle are the cause of plastic making its way into landfills or the ocean. California's typically misguided solution to lazy people is to ban the bags and increase costs; let's also not forget the jobs lost and other economic impacts (see here) of the huge hit the plastic bag industry will take.
Additionally, a recent analysis undertaken by Reason Foundation found that "Lightweight plastic bags constitute less than 1 percent of visible litter, represent only 0.4 percent of all municipal solid waste, and are not a major cause of blocked storm drains. Banning them has practically no impact on the amount of litter generated, the amount Californians pay for waste disposal, or the risk of flooding." Reason's article goes on to discuss the real and measurable impact of alleged "reusable" bags.
Just when you think the discussion in California couldn't get any crazier, in an article from the San Diego UT (click here to read it) supporters of the new law claim that, "Producers are responsible for the end of life impact of their products." That's about the dumbest thing I've heard all week. That's like saying that Jack Daniels is responsible for what your abusive step dad does when he gets liquored up.
Well, since the uninformed voters that seem to make up the majority of California have elected a bunch of crooks and idiots to their state legislature, garbage like SB270 has been the norm. Liberal control over the lives of the voting base continues to grow in California, where the state motto should be changed to, "If we can't tax it, ban it!"
There is currently widespread and rabid demands for Ray Rice's head on a pike over a video of him punching his (then) girlfriend in the face, knocking her out. Rice was arrested back in February for simple assault, but the demands for excessive punishment only began once the media hyped the incident. There is no shortage of players in the NFL that have been arrested for criminal acts (and I'm not talking about speeding tickets) and are still collecting that seven figure pay check.
I have to ask, where's the outrage over the rest of the dirtbags that the NFL employs? UT San Diego has a database of NFL player arrests (click here to see it), and you may be surprised to see the number and seriousness of the arrests. Why? Because you've likely never heard of them before, since the media didn't choose to hype them the way they did the Rice case.
On August 31st of this year, Ray McDonald of the San Francisco 49ers was arrested on suspicion of felony domestic violence. Where's the outrage? On July 20th, St Louis Rams linebacker Jo-Lonn Dunbar was arrested for battery and disorderly conduct. Where's the outrage? On July 19th, Eagles safety Keelan Johnson was arrested for assaulting a police officer. Where's the outrage?
I submit that the NFL only punishes those that the media demands they punish. Again, I ask, where's the outrage over the other criminal acts of NFL players? Why is the media silent on those counts? Why do those players get a free pass by the media and league? Rice did nothing worse than other players, but he doesn't rate to play football anymore, or something. If we're going to hold him to a certain standard, let's hold the other domestic abusers, dopers, drunk drivers, and cop beaters to the same standard.
In a move that can only be described as puzzling, the Huffington Post has hired former NFL player Donte Stallworth as a "fellow to cover national security." Let me go ahead and point out the 800 pound gorilla in the room: Stallworth is a nutjob, having demonstrated his loose grip on reality with his 9/11 truther tweets in 2009. Oh, and there's that pesky little manslaughter conviction to go along with his national security ignorance.
The Washington Post blathers on about how great Stallworth is in an article (click here to read it) that seems to focus more on his love of homosexuals than anything else. Huffpo's Washington Bureau Chief, Ryan Grim, can't offer anything relevant to Stallworth's national security expertise (or lack of it), but attempts to justify the hire by stating, "...his LGBT work brought him to our attention and impressed us." Well, that's just super.
Breitbart has a more focused piece (click here to read it) that points to Stallworth's insane tweets, while alluding to the obvious question: What in the hell are they smoking over at Huffpo?
Former President Jimmy Carter is scheduled to be the keynote speaker at an event held by the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). ISNA, according to the Justice Department, is one of the major funnels of money to Hamas, which is officially designated as a terrorist group. Looks like Carter is off his meds again.
Carter has long been considered the worst President in U.S. history and, of late, is popularly referred to as the second worst. Antics like this don't exactly help his image. Breitbart has an interesting piece on Carter's latest stupidity (click here to read it), in which they point out Carter's long-held belief that Israel is the bad guy, and Hamas is a peace-loving victim. The article references Carter's claim that Israel's actions are "...even worse instances of Apartheid than we witnessed in South Africa." What is Jimmy smoking?
Excuse the hell out of Israel for wanting to keep those who have vowed to destroy them on the outside of Israel (unlike us, with our wide open borders). Israel is the last shining example of how to treat the clearly stated threat that is islam. Carter, on the other hand, willingly aids our known enemies.
The Breitbart article points out that Carter's actions may very well be in direct violation of federal law. Since Jimmy is a democrat, he'll get a free pass by the MSM, as well as our blatantly corrupt Justice Department. Nothing to see here folks; move along.
An interesting article in the U.K.'s Daily Mail (click here to read it) shows some disturbing photos and tweets that were allegedly posted by ISIS terrorists from right here in the U.S. One photo was taken in Chicago, and the other in front of the White House. Their tweet said, "We are in your state," "We are in your cities," "We are in your streets."
The FBI has since sent warnings to police forces across the country to be on the lookout for terrorist activities based upon these tweets and other intelligence.
An old friend of mine, who is also a fellow Marine, states that while conducting training in the Arizona desert (near our wide open border with Mexico), he has come across ravines filled with garbage from the illegal immigrants that are invading our nation on a continuous basis. Among the garbage were korans, prayer rugs, and various documents with Arabic text. Muslims are sneaking into our country along with the other invaders.
It is not politically correct to point out that islam's stated goal is to convert or kill every non-muslim on the planet. Our nation is referred to as, "The great Satan," by most islamic groups. The liberal mindset is that all cultures are equal, and stating otherwise makes you a xenophobe, islamophobe, or some other sort of phobe (insert label du jour here). That mindset is incredibly dangerous on every level. Islam is not compatible with Western Civilization. We cannot continue to ignore the threat that islam represents to our very existence without dire consequences.
There very well might be "moderate" muslims out there that do not desire to destroy our way of life, but they are strangely silent. There is no shortage, however, of muslims that dance in the streets, celebrating acts of terrorism around the globe. It doesn't matter if we try to be "sensitive to their feelings," or some other such hogwash; they still want to kill us all. Our impotent government allows these cretins to practice their cult in our nation, and spew their hatred of all things Western. I'm sick of it, and I'm sick of our liberal politicians acting like they cannot see the obvious.
Make no mistake, we are at war with islam. To deny that, for the sake of not offending them, is foolish and dangerous.
*Note: Lack of capitalization is by design, as I lack any respect for the cult of islam.
