Skip to main content

Pride and Prejudice

So this may be Kriplekistan's most controversial blog to date, as it involves using clips from people's (who I don't know) social accounts without permission. This person's name and identity are concealed for ethical / potentially legal purposes, however it still feels risque, so here goes.

As can be seen from previous posts regarding the Trump election, I have lamented the left's obsession with race, and inaccurate insistence that their loss had to do with racial animus from "average" white Americans. Nevermind the fact that Trump won counties that twice voted for Obama, but that's another topic. I also pointed out, I believe rightly so, that the true animus lies with the left. We will begin with exhibit A below. This person is lamenting the National Policy Institute's meeting this week in Washington D.C. Attendance was roughly 250 people. This is her post decrying the group, which she has every right to, as it does indeed engage in rhetoric similar to that of members of the Nazi party. President elect Trump disavowed this group on Nov 22nd.

This person is well within her rights to sound alarm against a group that uses rhetoric like this. Then upon clicking on her profile, she has this as her background photo :

This is where a line needs to be drawn in American civil discourse, immediately. If we are to disavow small fringe groups above, and rightly so, then under what pretense do we find things like this acceptable? This point should be obvious to anyone reading, however I'll make it just the same. Imagine someone decrying the actions of Black Lives Matter, and their incendiary rhetoric against law enforcement across America, yet had that photo, and swap the adjectives white and brown. I would consider that person racially biased. Should that apply here? The answer is yes, it should, and it does. This is a direct example of what I have described before; this person is reinforcing her own racial bias and prejudice against another group of people because the left has created an atmosphere of victim-hood that perpetuates the very racial animus it claims to stand against.

Now lets take it to a national level. Vice President-elect Pence went to see the Broadway Musical Hamilton this week. He was summarily "called out" if you will by the cast members at the end of the show, imploring him to stand up for racial and sexual inclusion for all Americans. Seems reasonable enough. However, when looking into the history of the cast member, who's name I can't conceal because he is a stage performer, his past reveals social media posts such as these :

and

So, for those unfamiliar with his slang (I had to look it up myself), turning someone 2n/into a jump off is tantamount to making a woman a "ho" so to speak. How droll. So again, we have reached a double standard where someone of a different color can make disparaging comments about someone if the latter's skin color is lighter than the person delivering the comment. Is it ok because he didn't say he'd specifically grab them by the p***y? This is the moral elevation the left has taken our discourse. Misogyny and racism are acceptable if you're a member of one of the left's hyphenated classes, because they said so.

As I stated before, there is no point in bringing this up with liberals/the left, because it will do them no good. These aren't policy discussions, these are no longer just beliefs they hold, this type of thinking is now in their fabric, their very DNA. They will continue to lose, and they will continue to get nastier as a result. Tomorrow is Thanksgiving, and then the Christmas season is upon us. Merry (early) Christmas. We do not know how Jesus feels about Republicans vs Democrats, Trump, Obama, or the litany of issues we discuss on a daily basis, but we do know how he feels about hypocrites.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Deep State Blues

Late Monday evening, Deputy Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe announced he was leaving his position effective immediately, somewhat earlier than he had initially disclosed, as he was scheduled to leave sometime mid March. Although somewhat of a surprise, McCabe's departure from the FBI means different things to different people.  Democrats and proponents of the Russia collusion story are taking this as a sign that DJT has his new FBI director Christopher Wray are forcing McCabe out. However big of a stink the opposition can make, a President is within his legal right to put in his team into the Department of Justice, regardless the importance of the position, as it is part of the Executive branch.  That being said, it is important to note McCabe is not being fired, he is resigning from his post.  What makes this newsworthy is the timing.  Hours after McCabe announced he was leaving, the House Intelligence Committee voted along party lines to release an internal ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Biggest Drain on the Species (3rd Edition)

BDOTS is here ladies and gentlemen! Just to refresh anyone's memory who may have forgot exactly how BDOTS (Biggest Drain on the Species) works, the award is given to an individual who's actions/comments are so blatantly hypocritical and self serving, this person is no longer just a detriment to the overall societal fabric, but an obstruction to the advancement of all human kind, and do I have a good one for you today. So good, in fact, that I am going to write to our candidate directly in hopes he may yet read this. Howard Dean, you have been a great sound bite ever since the 2004 presidential campaign. After your colossal campaign collapse, the Democratic National Party liked what it saw in your "grass roots" style, in which you employed eager volunteers with some new invention called the internet, resulting in a fairly effective money raising machine, and gave you the nod as the new DNC leader. Evidently, the DNC must have also liked the complete ineffectiveness...
Post a Comment
Read more

Speaking of the Louse (Part 2)

This story just keeps getting better and better. Dec. 12, 2007: "On one occasion, in the fall of 2002, I was briefed on interrogation techniques the administration was considering using in the future. The administration advised that legal counsel for the both the CIA and the Department of Justice had concluded that the techniques were legal. I had no further briefings on the techniques...Jane Harman was briefed more extensively and advised the techniques had in fact been employed." Feb. 25, 2009: "No. No the fact is, they did not brief, well first of all, we're not allowed to talk about what happens there, but I can say they did not brief us with these enhanced interrogations that were taking place. They did not brief us. They were talking about an array of interrogations taht they might have at their disposal. But I can say flat out, they never told us that these enhacement interrogations were being used." April 23, 2009: "It is not appropriate f...
Post a Comment
Read more