April is National Frog Month, and frogs are awesome – unless you happen to be a hyper-sensitive SJW snowflake, of course, because then you need to get all offended and join your fellow travelers in online bullying campaigns to censor the appearance of the innocent amphibians from invading your precious safe spaces.
A clothing company offered up on its website a denim skirt featuring cute sunglasses wearing frogs on it, and leftist lunatics lost their darned minds over it because they thought the frogs reminded them of Pepe the Frog of internet meme fame, and, because some Trump supporters enjoy having fun with Pepe themed things, social justice warriors got themselves all triggered and so they harassed the company selling the skirt (whose frogs do not resemble Pepe at all, BTW), screaming about raaaacism, until the company buckled under the pressure and removed the “offending” item from it’s catalog. So stupid.
This is Pepe:
This is the NOT Pepe frog skirt
As you can see, the skirt frogs ain’t Pepe, and even if they were (which they clearly are not), Pepe ain’t raaaaacist. Duh. But the vitriol directed at Zara (the skirt seller) was so thick that they evidently felt pressured to issue this statement:
“The skirt is part of the limited Oil-On-Denim collection which was created through collaborations with artists and is only available in selected markets,” the spokesperson said.
“The designer of the skirt is Mario de Santiago, known online as Yimeisgreat. Mario explores social interactions through his work and in his own words: ‘The idea came from a wall painting I drew with friends four years ago.’
“There is absolutely no link to the suggested theme.”
Ridiculous that they had to explain anything at all to those thin skinned harpies who can’t handle the appearance of a frog on a piece of cloth. What’s next? Is the tolerance mob gonna go after Jim Henson’s estate because the puppet named Kermit, a frog – OMG!, sang about being green? Will Michigan J. Frog be next on the SJW hit list?
Stupid, bigoted, ranidaphobes! If they can’t discern Pepe from NOT PEPE, they probably can’t distinguish a frog from a toad either, but I think with his mind control abilities, Hypnotoad is probably safe – for now.
We all know that once the left gains an inch they want five hundred more miles, so I don’t see this madness ending anytime soon but I’ll tell you this, they can take my Frogger game only after they pry it from my cold, dead, hands.
MJ Stevenson, AKA Zilla, is best known on the web as Zilla at MareZilla.com. She lives in a woodland shack near a creek, in one of those rural parts of New York State that nobody knows or cares about, with her family and a large pack of guardian companion animals – including Siberian Husky Dalmatian Lab Puppies and their parents.
O my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended Thee, and I detest all my sins because of Thy just punishments, but most of all because they offend Thee, my God, Who art all-good and deserving of all my love. I firmly resolve, with the help of Thy grace, to sin no more and to avoid the proximate occasions of sin.
Catholic act of Contrition said at the end of confession
Why, sir, because I like the taste of them, and when I discovered that to be the case I made up my mind at once to do without them altogether.
Stonewall Jackson on why he didn’t drink whiskey
What’s the easiest way to avoid sin, avoid the cause of temptations toward sin, and this is what the Vice President does:
What is Mike Pence’s alleged “medieval vision?” As Parker reported, “In 2002, Mike Pence told the Hill that he never eats alone with a woman other than his wife and that he won’t attend events featuring alcohol without her by his side, either.”
This isn’t just protecting against the sin of adultery but the sin of pride, the “Hey I’m cool or sexy or powerful enough to draw the attention of a beautiful woman.” That is an incredible temptation and remember of all the sins Pride is the first of all the deadly sins.
This is not only the right thing but the smart thing. There is nothing like power to make you look more attractive to women and there is nothing like being a person who makes decisions about the spending of million to cause major companies to provide such women.
Here’s Paul Waldman at the Washington Post arguing that Pence isn’t much different from Muslims who insist women wear a full body veil at all times in public:
Let’s take just a moment to consider this pair of rules Mike Pence has for himself. He obviously thinks that every interaction he has with a woman is so sexually charged that it’s only safe to be around them if there are other people there, too. Unless someone might be drinking, in which case even the presence of a crowd isn’t enough to prevent…something from happening. There’s little distance between that perspective and that of the ultra-orthodox Jews who refuse to sit next to a woman on an airplane, or the fundamentalist Muslims who demand that women be covered head to toe to contain the unstoppable sexual allure that renders men unable to control their urges.
This pretty much consolidates much of the reaction from the left to this micro-story. Every bit of this seems written to intentionally misunderstand Pence’s views, to compress things that are in no way alike into a false similarity and to mock Pence without even pausing to think about the issues
They seem not to understand that such actions are not only good for a man like Pence but good for the women who work for him as explained here
but I suspect even though the MSM will avoid it like the plague it will spread all over social media.
But over the past few years, I’d say 4-5 that I noticed. Men…who were in some stage of transition and making every attempt to be a woman from mascara to heels. Transgenders who certainly felt comfortable in the women’s room and probably frightened to go into the men’s. At these times, I smiled…I peed…and life went on. But 2 weeks ago something very different happened.
I was at Disneyland with my son, my friend and her son. We were over in California Adventure in the food court area. We’d just finished eating and decided to pee before we headed out to The Little Mermaid. I went to the bathroom while she watched our boys in their strollers, and then I did the same. (For anyone who’s tried to fit a stroller in a bathroom stall, you get it).
I was off to the side waiting with the two boys, when I noticed a man walk into the restroom. My first thought was “Oh shit, he’s walked in the wrong restroom by mistake. lol” He took a few more steps, at which point he would’ve definitely noticed all the women lined up and still kept walking. My next thought was, “Maybe he’s looking for his wife…or child and they’ve been in here a while.” But he didn’t call out any names or look around. He just stood off to the side and leaned up against the wall. At this point I’m like, “WTF?
That first paragraph along with the planned parenthood ad at the bottom spoke volumes to me but what came afterward said even more.
I stayed silent. We all did. Every woman who exited a stall and immediately zeroed right in on him…said nothing. And why? B/c I and I’m sure all the others were scared of that “what if”. What if I say something and he says he “identifies as a woman” and then I come off as the intolerant asshole at the happiest place on earth? So we all stood there, shifting in our uncomfortableness…trading looks. I saw two women leave the line with their children. Still nothing was said. An older lady said to me out loud, “What is he doing in here?” I’m ashamed to admit I silently shrugged and mouthed, “I don’t know.” She immediately walked out, from a bathroom she had every right to use without fear.
From what I saw nobody said anything to the Disney people, likely because of the climate of fear described above and by Megan Fox at PJ Media:
Predators already capitalize and count on women’s reluctance to fight back or speak out. Now it’s even worse because if you do speak up, you will be labeled transphobic and predators know it. There is no doubt in my mind that the man in Disneyland was pushing boundaries and getting a thrill from the power he had to be somewhere he knew he shouldn’t be, but counted on no one saying anything. This is the climate political correctness has brought to women: fear and the inability to act.
Fox also point out how dangerous this story is for Disneyland too.
Disneyland should think very carefully about how to handle this in the future because the liability is a nightmare for them. The last thing they want is a “How I Was Raped on My Disney Vacation (and I Don’t Mean Financially)” story to pop up. It is outrageous that a man was able to walk into a ladies’ room in a place that should be crawling with security and cameras, since you can’t bring in any self-defense weapons or tools. How were there not three Disney security officers popping out of an underground lair to nab this guy before he got through the door? Has Disney just turned their backs on the safety of women and children in their parks? These are questions that need to be answered before anyone books their next trip to see the mouse.
But Disney and their related companies are much more afraid of the LGBT community and the activists there and if it means actual women are in danger, at least they don’t have to worry about SJW’s making trouble for them and celebs denouncing them.
Alas if only folks listened to Archbishop fulton sheen when he warned about False Compassion decades ago.
So here’s the question, what is the craziest thing you’ve seen or heard?
At first I thought it might be this story, which ace covered a month or three ago, about some confused and/or mentally ill British boys who like to put on dresses, pretend that they’re girls, and then are dismayed to discover that normal teenaged boys don’t want to get into relationships with them when they are found out that they’re boys wearing dresses.
What makes it such a strong contender for the title is that it’s such a multi-layer cake of crazy:
1. British parents, schools, the medical profession are encouraging boys in their delusions rather than providing therapy. 2. The confused/mentally ill boys seem to be shocked at their lack of success with normal boys. 3. The BBC is actually making a series about all of this 4. …and portraying this festival of perversity as just another specie of teen angst. You know, like pimples, school pressures, or finding a prom date.
But crazy as that is, I actually managed to find something even crazier:
What kills me about this post is back in the days when the left was all about science and evolution the idea that evolution and natural selection would cause a man to want a spouse capable of passing on their genetic material, now such a move is considered racism by our “betters”
Two women were kicked out of a homeless shelter to make room for a man because he said he is a transgender woman, according to a Canadian news report. The women objected when they were told they would have to share a bedroom and live in the shelter with the man, and so “both were asked to leave the shelter for good,” said the TV reporter.
But remember for the left ideology trumps all else and if this means more women on the street and unsafe, well at least the shelter owners won’t be called bigots by Hollywood.
Item: Everyone will be Nazi’s for 15 minutes (via PJ Media):
Princeton University’s class of 2012 planned its five-year reunion party around a Star Wars theme, calling it “Revenge of the Fifth.” According to HeatStreet, the alumni planned to dress in costume and many purchased stormtrooper costumes for the event. In late February, however, the Reunion Committee sent an email banning this particular costume — because it might remind some people of Nazis.
Who knew that when you bought your kids those stormtrooper toys you were preparing them to be the next Hitler’s of the world. I guess George Lucas should be sued.
Juan Carlos Martínez, 40, provoked more than raised eyebrows when he joined the town’s carnival festivities last week and posed on a float dressed as the legendary lothario, complete with dressing gown, captain’s cap and cigar.
At his sides were two rather delectable companions: Two men decked in black leotards over stockings and a barely-there netting skirt and topped off with bunny ears over colourful wigs. Presumably they also had white cottontails pinned to their backsides.
In fairness Fr. Martínez story while a very public disgrace is less scandalous than this one
In the southern city of Naples, for example, a priest was recently suspended from the parish of Santa Maria degli Angeli over claims he held gay orgies and used Internet sites to recruit potential partners whom he paid for sex.
The allegations concerning the Rev. Mario D’Orlando were brought to the attention of the diocese when an anonymous letter was sent to a Naples bishop. D’Orlando denied the charges when he was summoned by the city’s archbishop, Cardinal Crescenzio Sepe, but is now facing a formal inquiry conducted by local church officials.
which at least didn’t involve alter boys and may I say the turning of the child sex scandals in the church which overwhelming involved homosexual acts from a “Gay Catholic Priest” scandal to just a “Catholic Priest” scandal is one of the great propaganda triumphs of the MSM/Left, in fact I still encounter people who argue that man wanting sex from boys has nothing to do with homosexuality.
Now I’ll grant that all of these stories advance my friend’s pessimism but I still prefer to remain optimistic and remember, the future belongs to those who show up.
If you like the work I have done at CPAC and wish to support it (along with paying for the ER & Surgery bills for DaWife’s illness that our insurance doesn’t anymore (thanks Democrats and Obamacare!) please consider hitting DaTipJar
Please consider Subscribing. You can be listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog for as little as $2 a week. If only 130 of the 209K+ unique visitors who came in 2016 .07% subscribed at the same levels as our current subscription base we would make our current annual goal with ease. If we could boost that number to 260 I could afford to cover major events in person all over the country.
Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.
Now that I have school-aged children, I spend more time every time we move analyzing school districts. A friend of mine that lives where we are moving to next sends both their kids to Catholic elementary school, to the tune of about 9,000 dollars. Although I choked when I heard the cost, it didn’t surprise me too much. In Georgia, we ended up sending our oldest kid to kindergarten at the local Baptist school, which cost 150/month, instead of the Catholic school, which would have cost 650/month.
Hate to say it, but the Baptists got it right.
Catholic schools are too expensive for most people in a one-earner family. So we face the choice of either having both parents work, living paycheck to paycheck, or sending our kids to public school. Public schools don’t have the best track record of being friendly to Catholics, which means the parent staying at home has to spend a considerable amount of time educating the kids in the faith.
Given that too many parents don’t have a good understanding of the faith as it is, we’ve just setup a system that allows our kids to be plucked away from the Church.
I think we’re missing the mark on Catholic education. If we want a future generation, we should be educating our young parents in the faith. Poor understanding of the faith creates kids with a weak understanding of what they believe in, which sets them up to be lead astray in high school and college.
School choice is going to help as well. I think a large part of the negative reaction to Betsy DeVos is because she threatens to break the stranglehold of public elementary and middle schools, a stranglehold that has been contributing to an increasingly non-religious world.
Our future generation is caught in an education setup that is pushing them to leave the church. We would be wise to recognize that.
This is the 3rd and last of three guest posts I did for Ladd Ehlinger’s site back in late 2011. I’m reprinting them here (With Ladd’s permission) because I think the election of Donald Trump is a significant event in the culture wars and these posts (and the follow ups that I intend to write) serve to explain what happened to our friends on the left who are still pulling out their hair over the events of November. While Ladd’s old blog isn’t there you can find the original piece via the wayback machine.
“In the hands of a skillful indoctrinator, the average student not only thinks what the indoctrinator wants him to think . . . but is altogether positive that he has arrived at his position by independent intellectual exertion. This man is outraged by the suggestion that he is the flesh-and-blood tribute to the success of his indoctrinators.”-
William F. Buckley Jr. Up from Liberalism.
One of the most important aspects of the culture wars as fought via cinema is the concept of challenging the status quo with subtlety. One might make a statement with The Crying Game and be assured of critical acclaim, but in order to effect change to society in general, one has to be able to influence those who would not be caught dead watching that kind of movie. To win your case, you need to play on the other person’s field.
Oh, God is an interesting example of this. It is the last movie you would think of as part of a culture war fight and if you did, you would consider it a conservative movie.
Jerry Landers (John Denver) is an assistant Manager at a supermarket who gets a typewritten note announcing he has an interview with God. He laughs it off until the note he threw away keeps turning up. When he finds it during a visit by his district manager (David Ogden Stiers) under a leaf of romaine lettuce, he visits the interview location on the note. There he finds an empty room on the 27th floor of a building with only 17 floors and a voice on an intercom saying it is God. He tries to dismiss it, but finds the message repeated on his broken radio. After his wife (Teri Garr) notes he has not actually seen God, God (George Burns) visits in person while he is in the shower telling him he’s been chosen to deliver the message that he exists and everything in the world can work out, it’s all up to us.
When rejected by the LA Times religious reporter, (George Furth) God reappears and at Jerry’s request performs a small miracle by making it rain inside his car. Still wet, he returns at once to the Times, and they run a small story on the subject. He wife tries to deflect attention, but eventually it’s picked up by a local paper, then an ABC affiliate. When warned by a company executive, Mr. Summers, (William Daniels) to keep his mouth shut. he continues on, finally appearing on the Dinah Shore show. That draws all kind of cranks and fanatics to his house and creates a lot of trouble for him.
A telegram from the local university asking him to appear before a board of religious experts to hear about his claim seems like a chance to save his job. The panel, which represents Jewish, Catholic, Greek Orthodox and Protestant clergy, including a loud televangelist, Reverend Williams, (Paul Sorvino) finds insufficient evidence but as a control measure give him 50 questions (written in Aramaic) that they ask God to answer.
Landers agrees and is locked in his hotel room with no outside communication. God shows up as a busboy bringing Ketchup and remarking that $11 is a lot for a steak. He answers the questions and when finished tells Jerry to give them to Reverend Williams saying: “You take these answers and give them to Reverend big mouth and you say that tell him God says he’s a phony and also tell him if he wants to get rich, fine, tell him to sell earth shoes, but personally tell him I’d like him to shut up.”
The Reverend is delighted at the prospect that God sent Jerry to him, until he repeats what God said on a microphone. The scene immediately shifts to a courtroom where Williams’ attorney (Ralph Bellamy) demands damages. Jerry refuses both the Judge’s (Barnard Hughes) suggestion for council and his wife’s entreaties to apologize.
When he presents his case, Jerry calls God to the stand. When he doesn’t immediately appear, Jerry argues that there was a hesitation in the room. A possibility that God would appear exists, and he claims it is the benefit of the doubt he deserves. As the judge considers contempt charges, God appears, taking the stand.
He rebukes the Reverend’s Lawyer, noting that nobody had a problem believing in the devil after “that movie” (The Exorcist). He confirms all Jerry has said and offers a miracle to prove who he is by making a deck of cards appear and disappear, and finally making himself vanish during an exchange with the judge and those in the courtroom.
The tape recording, however, didn’t record God’s voice nor does the stenotype machine show any of his words. The judge rules given their common experience it’s understandable that he would consider his actions divinely commanded and drops the slander charge, but rules due to the lack of evidence that God did not appear in the courtroom.
Jerry loses his job, and on the drive home God tells him he did a good job saying “There are other cities and other supermarkets”. When Jerry asks if sometimes they can just talk God replies: “You talk I’ll listen,” and walks away into the sunset, disappearing.
It’s a feel good movie all around. The performances are excellent, John Denver is totally believable as Jerry Landers, helped by a good performance by Teri Garr as his wife and a cast chock full of some of the best character actors out there from William Daniels, to Jeff Corey and Ralph Bellamy. Add two actors who were yet to have their greatest impact–Paul Sorvino and David Ogden Stiers, punctuated of course by George Burns, who carries off the role with perfect timing and style. What’s there not to like about this movie? You have a nice conservative message about an unbeliever who hears the word of God and follows it, an affirmation of the importance of following God’s word no matter what, and the message that following God is not without cost.
If you look deeper, however, you will find some interesting messages hidden delivered with such skill that you might miss it, if you didn’t look.
First let’s contrast the “believers” and the “unbelievers”. At the very start, we have Landers established as a good man who gently corrects his staff and is too honest to “oil his cukes,” as the district rep. suggests to make the cucumber display more appealing to the eye. He opposition is a myriad of believers, from his wife “I believe in God, I just don’t think he exists” skeptical religious editors, a CEO who resents him speaking to God, a set of religious nuts, and finally a classic stereotype televangelist with sheep-like followers who doesn’t even believe in God when he sees him. Jerry has “the strength that comes from knowing” but none of them that have not seen are willing to believe. The message: “believers” are either nuts or phonies and so are you unless you’ve seen it for yourself.
The other believers are the religious panel and they are passed over. Other than Rev. Williams, we don’t see the rest of the panel’s reaction to the questions answered in Aramaic. It’s as if they don’t exist, because of course their reaction would not produce the cynicism required for the movie’s climax and would more likely be: “My Lord and my God.”
Let’s look at “God” in this film. In the very first encounter we establish a God “makes mistakes”, in his first physical appearance he proclaims that “shame” is wrong. He is not all knowing “I haven’t a clue” and his reaction to prayer is “I can’t help hearing.” It could as easily be: “Why are you bothering me?”
Now that we’ve abolished the concept of God as understood for centuries, what does he think about right and wrong? He objects to “killing”, pollution and making money in his name, but that’s about it. Take a look at the answer to the big question of the movie:
“Is Jesus Christ the son of God? Jesus was my son, Buddha was my son, Mohammad, Moses You the man who said there was no room at the inn was my son and so is the one who charges $11 dollars for a steak in this one.”
Now, I wouldn’t expect Carl Reiner to give an endorsement to Christianity, but note what he does. All religions are equal, all are valid, there is no “truth”, none of that “Thou shalt have no other Gods but me” stuff. The generic answers given by the “God” in this movie could be, and is given by new age gurus of today who makes the same kind of money that the Reverend Williams does.
No truth, no worship, you don’t need prayer, just know I’m here but I really don’t matter and have nothing to do about it, so unless you are the ’69 Mets, the last miracle God in the movie says he did, don’t bother asking. It’s so simple, the message of Oh, God becomes: “People don’t really don’t need a God”, but that message is delivered in a way so subtle and so discreet that unless someone points it out you can’t see yourself absorbing it.
I was shocked and revolted as I watched the rioting unfold on the UC Berkeley campus back on February 1st. Here is a link which consists of a collection of videos and tweets: Twitchy craziest protest. The sole purpose of this senseless violence was to prevent one individual, Milo Yiannopoulos, from speaking. This should not happen anywhere in this country, let alone at Berkeley, which was the birthplace of the free speech movement. It is true that only about 150 individuals, most likely outsiders, committed the violence and destruction, however a very large number of student protesters cheered on and gave the anarchists cover. What did Milo do to deserve such an unfriendly welcome? He is an outspoken, charismatic, and popular libertarian-conservative. Yes, he is outrageous and provocative, but that is no reason to silence him. There is no legitimate reason to silence anyone. Most disturbing of all is the reaction of the university. They did nothing to stop the rioting, they did nothing to protect Milo’s right to speak freely, and they did nothing to protect the rights of those who wanted to listen to him.
Freedom of speech is one of our most important God given natural rights. This right must include speech that others might find offensive. We are all unique individuals. What offends one person, others might enjoy. Some of the most fundamental truths may offend a very large portion of the population. Being offended is a purely emotional response. We are all supposed to be rational and intelligent beings, ruled by intellect rather than emotion. Only the most emotionally fragile of us need to shelter ourselves from everything that might possibly be offensive. Free exercise of speech and free expression are far more important than the emotional well being of fragile individuals. Unfortunately, political correctness has completely reversed this. Far too many people believe that their right to never be offended far outweighs everyone else’s right to freely express themselves as they wish. The right to not be offended does not exist. It interferes far too much with everyone else’s right of free speech, therefore it is not a valid right. If we have to refrain from possibly offending anyone we would never be able to speak.
Political correctness has always been a weapon used by the political left to try and silence those on the political right. Far too often, conservative principles and ideas are labeled offensive or hate speech, and then these labels are used as a justification, by colleges, to ban individuals from speaking . The latest buzzwords used as justification are white nationalist and alt-right. Before this last election, I never heard of the alt-right yet, according to the left. it is everywhere. I believe the white nationalist alt-right exists but it a very small fringe group. Mainstream conservative publications, such as the Breitbart family of websites, have been unjustly labeled white nationalist alt-right, along with Steve Bannon and Milo. These accusations, which have been loudly trumpeted by the media, were used as justification by the rioters at UC Berkeley. Milo discussed the complicity of the media in this interview: Media Legitimizes Violence on Conservatives. One of the organizers of the Berkeley riots spoke to Tucker Carlson. Here is a link to the interview. She used these accusations as justification for the riots.
Thanks to political correctness , conservative speech has become unwelcome on college campuses. Immediately when a conservative or a libertarian speaker is announced, the cries to ban them begin at once, and then the protests start. There absolutely nothing wrong with individuals peacefully protesting because they do not approve of the speaker. People have a right to peacefully protest for any reason. Blocking entrances, rushing stages, shouting down, and drowning out a speaker with your voice are not valid forms of protest. These tactics interfere with the rights of the speaker and those in the audience who want to listen to the speaker. Far too often speakers on the right are uninvited by the college the moment the protests start. This is a gross violation of free speech. Liberal speakers far outnumber conservative speakers. College campuses have become “safe spaces” where conservative ideals are not welcome and often labeled bias incidents. According to this article, seventy colleges now call authorities for bias incidents.
Thanks to decades of political correctness, more than half of all high school students believe the First Amendment goes too far when protecting free speech. This is not just a disgrace, it is a national tragedy. Here is a link to a survey on this subject.
Political correctness is predominantly a phenomenon on the political left, however those of us on the right have, at times, demonstrated our own bad habits when it comes to free speech. At times we try to force others to be “patriotically correct.” Everyone has a right to do and say things that are unpatriotic. No one should ever be punished for being unpatriotic in speech or behavior. We can criticize individuals for what they say if we do not agree with them because free speech is a two way street. No one has a right to silence anyone.
serve to explain what happened to our friends on the left who are still pulling out their hair over the events of November
If you look at that movie it’s the image of the Kindergarden of Eden I described yesterday.
At first the Captain (Lionel Barrymore) is willing to let Harvey’s attitude go and offers to make him part of the crew beside his son Dan (Mickey Rooney). He refuses to work, he starts ranting about sending the entire crew to jail unless they take him to New York, disrupting the ship.
Remind you of any group of people protesting in the streets lately? Remind you of an entire generation of children who will have what they want when they want it from their $600 iPhones to the latest video games? Our film instructor is torn seeing a mirror and not liking the reflection, and that’s where one of the pivotal moments in the film takes place.
Captain Troop, with the good of the ship and the livelihood of the entire crew to worry about, notes he can’t risk months of fishing on a boy’s yarn. When Harvey still rants Troop finally concludes: “I guess there’s nothing left for it.” He rears back and gives Harvey a slap that knocks him flat.
Now I want to remind you I wrote those words in >December of 2011 at the time when Obama’s power was still at its height and the idea of Donald Trump being president was about as remote as the odds of a kid falling in the ocean being picked up by a fisherman before he drowns.
Yet here we are six years later and not only is the left still screaming but Donald Trump is smacking them by simply enforcing the law:
There’s evidence raids and/or detentions are occurring, as reports pop up throughout the country in at least eight states (California, Georgia, Texas, Arizona, Kansas, New York, Virginia, South and North Carolina.) ICE insists the raids are targeted and nothing new and denies social media reports that checkpoints were set up in communities. In California, ICE now says it rounded up 160 people, targeting those with felony records or who are fugitives and called reports of widespread raids “irresponsible” and false, The Orange County Register reported. The newspaper labeled the ICE actions in California a “surge.” In George and the Carolinas, ICE picked up 200 people, reported NBC News.
Some of the scenes are growing intense, with protests in California, New York, Texas, and Arizona. In at least one case, the Mesa deportation, the person detained had a deportation order that dated to the President Obama administration.
immigrant rights activists and Democrats are raising concerns this weekend about recent immigration enforcement actions — though immigration officials maintain that only routine actions targeting criminals were underway.
Fear is running high among immigrant communities since President Donald Trump’s inauguration — and after the recent publicized deportation of an undocumented Arizona mother of two after a routine visit with immigration officials, reports have been spreading of Immigration and Customs Enforcement stepping up its actions nationwide.
He said the operations targeted convicted criminals, gang members, individuals who re-entered the country after being deported and individuals who had final removal orders from immigration judges.
Those arrested included a citizen of El Salvador with a criminal conviction for assault with a dangerous weapon in aid of racketeering and self-admitted MS-13 gang member; a citizen of Jamaica with a criminal conviction for first degree sexual assault of a victim under the age of 11; a citizen of Mexico with a criminal convicted for first degree sexual assault of a victim under the age of 11.
More than 680 people were arrested in the raids across the country, officials say. Of those arrested, 75 percent were criminal aliens, convicted of crimes including homicide, aggravated sexual abuse, sexual assault of a minor, lewd and lascivious acts with a child, indecent liberties with a minor, drug trafficking, battery, assault, DUI and weapons charges.
Because nothing is going to win the American people over to the left’s point of view like freaking out over the deportation of people convicted of serious crimes.
Of course in Captains Courageous when Harvey gets knocked down by the Captain it begins the moment where he finally figures out what’s important in life and begins to grow, I really question if the left is capable of this.
But I’m a catholic and know that with God all things are possible
and the response from pro-life folks, particularly those who unlike Nancy Pelosi actually take that whole: Intrinsic Evil, Mortal Sin business in their religion seriously was not pleasant from their perspective:
Mark A Byers I regularly patronize Chilis in and around Pasco County, New Port Richey, Trinity, and Palm Harbor. NO MORE! I will not support anyone that contributes to abortions in any state, or country. ADIOS!
So I decided that it was time to get a statement from Chili’s and wrote them the following email:
I am working on a piece to be published this week on the reports that Chili’s restaurants in two states were holding promotions to support planned parenthood and have several questions.
1. Does the Chili’s chain support these fundraisers for Planned Parenthood at their restaurant, if so why, if not why not?
2. Given that Abortion is a very divisive issue why did Chili’s decide to jump in the middle of it and are any sanctions planned for the restaurants In question for putting Chili’s in a position where they are likely going to be forced to choose one part of their customer base over another?
3. Are there any plans to make a general statement on any such fundraisers in the future? Will there be guidance to locally owned franchises to avoid cultural war issues in the future?
4. The annual March for life is tomorrow, given the likely reaction of the participants to this news what message do you have to those marchers concerning this promotion?
5. Given that the Catholic Church (and other Christian denominations) consider abortion an intrinsic evil and cooperation[misspelled in original] with abortion a mortal sin what message do you have to believing Catholic / Christian customers who may be ethically required to avoid Chili’s over this promotion?
6. As funding Planned Parenthood is an issue on which the left has attacked President Trump what assurances can you give voters who supported the President that this promotion was not a slap in the face to him and his supporters?
7. Finally if Chili’s argues that it has no position on this issue and values customers who hold pro-life and pro-abortion opinions equally can you give an example of a fundraiser for a pro-life group held at a Chili’s in the past or will you do such a fundraiser to counter balance this one?
I will happily include any statement by Chili’s in my piece if it arrives before it is published, and/or will update or produce a follow up with said statement if it arrives after publication. Be aware that the piece will include the content of this email.
Thank you for your time
Peter “DaTechGuy” Ingemi
Featuring DaTechGuy’s Magnificent Seven
Have Fedora Will Travel
Chili’s responded at 1:28 PM, with the following:
Please find below a statement that can be attributed to Chili’s® Grill & Bar.
“At Chili’s, we have a longstanding history and take pride in giving back to unite our local communities together. We recognize every community is unique, and encourage our restaurant managers and franchise partners to support causes that help bring communities together and leave a positive impact on our valued Guests, neighbors, friends and families we serve.
Yesterday, we learned that an independent franchise partner of Chili’s in Indiana and Kentucky made the decision to host a Chili’s Give Back Event on behalf of Planned Parenthood Indiana and Kentucky. While our franchise partner had the best intentions; we have received growing feedback and concern from community members regarding the Give Back Event. This feedback does not reflect Chili’s focus on bringing communities together and the event was never intended to be viewed as a partisan event or political statement, therefore we, along with our franchise partner, have decided to cancel the event.
We will more clearly communicate the focus of Chili’s charitable giving efforts, so that our restaurant managers and franchise partners can feel empowered to support local organizations that bring communities together.”
No answers to my questions and a statement which reeks of moral equivalency. Not a big surprise by a company that doesn’t want to get involved. Their statement that “every community is unique” and the “best of intentions” suggests that they don’t have a problem with abortion itself, only that we who oppose it might object. It’s the type of statement I’d expect in 1817 if a Kentucky franchise owner held a fundraiser to help a local plantation owner whose slaves had escaped and they wanted to placate outraged abolitionists.
Clearly the only reason consider this a big deal is because of the backlash from Pro-Life potential customers, and I strongly suspect that the local franchises, fooled by the MSM coverage of the so called “March for Woman” thought that of COURSE this would not make any trouble nationwide given how everybody in the MSM was so behind it. So we get a statement attempting to placate pro-life diners without risking offending pro-abortion diners. It’s a statement that is neither hot nor cold, and as I recall there was a good commentary already written concerning those who are lukewarm which I’ll repeat here
I know your works; I know that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either cold or hot. So, because you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth. For you say, ‘I am rich and affluent and have no need of anything,’ and yet do not realize that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked.
I advise you to buy from me gold refined by fire so that you may be rich, and white garments to put on so that your shameful nakedness may not be exposed, and buy ointment to smear on your eyes so that you may see.
Those whom I love, I reprove and chastise. Be earnest, therefore, and repent. ” ‘”Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, (then) I will enter his house and dine with him, and he with me…
Did Chili’s have a 1st century franchise in Laodicea?
Alas for Chili’s, as much as they would put the genie back in the bottle it’s doesn’t work that way anymore the time has come to choose sides and their attempt to choose neither will likely satisfy nobody.
They have a franchise in Leominster just a few miles from my house which, given the proximity and quality of Happy Jacks I’ve not visited in a couple of years. Given their lukewarm statement I think I’ll follow the example of Mother Angelica who when a supplier tried to extort a kickback from her peanut company that her monastery used to support themselves in the 60’s closed it instead saying
“If I’m going to hell, it’s not going to be over peanuts”
There are plenty of other places where I can eat and I’ve only got one soul.