Garbage In, Garbage Out
Message to Wendy Davis

OK, so lemme get this straight:

Your opponent or whoever wouldn’t answer a hypothetical question about his views on marriage 50 years ago and how he’d rule if he held office so all of a sudden he’s racist as well as homophobic (because of his views of same sex marriage).

Your argument would’ve been better had his wife been white and not Mexican which completely obliterates your argument. Even your supporters were like “girl…”

Also, how can someone outlaw something that the Supreme Court said was stone cold legal anyway 47 years ago? Yeah…not buying it, Mrs. Davis.

The Definition of Racism - Learn it.


There’s a fundamental misunderstanding in the Black (or sjw) community regarding the actual definition of racism.

Have you ever heard an absurd statement like, “You can’t be racist towards white people”?


It is usually followed by an explanation like, “To be racist you need to have some sort of power over a people” or something about oppression, etc.… Well, if you are on Tumblr, sooner or later you will be exposed to this pathetic mentality. 


There are basically two types of people that uncritically accept the notion:  Racist people of color (PoC) and ignorant people.  To simplify things I’ll refer to both groups as social justice warriors (sjw). 

Most sjw are stuck in a grievance bubble and tend to have major victim complexes.  They believe that racism = power + privilege. 

And, that is the problem. 

Here is the real, established and accepted definition of racism:

rac·ism noun \ˈrā-ˌsi-zəm also -ˌshi-\

: poor treatment of or violence against people because of their race

: the belief that some races of people are better than others

Racism, as defined by Merriam-Webster: : 1. a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race  2: racial prejudice or discrimination

Racism, as defined by Microsoft Encarta Dictionary: 1. prejudice or animosity against people who belong to other races.

If you check other dictionaries you’ll find similar definitions. Nowhere do those definitions mention a system or power over people. And, nowhere does the definition limit the concept to a specific race or races. If you judge people based on their race, you are by definition a racist.

Racism is not about oppression. They have a word for oppression and its called OPPRESSION. Now, maybe you could argue that non-whites are incapable of oppression and that would put you on somewhat firmer ground, but not by much.


Any sources that may claim a different definition of racism are fringe material used by the largely non-white, extremely racist social scientists. However, the vast majority of social scientists and the public at large agree with the dictionary definition of racism.

Sjw try to redefine words to suit some agenda; basically inventing a definition of racism that excludes PoC…based on race. It’s like using racism to defend a claim that PoC can’t be racist.  Using the racism = power + privilege definition is basically a formula to excuse racial minorities from accusations of racism.   How people can uncritically accept such inaccurate ideas is baffling.


So, please lets cut the BS that you can’t be racist toward white people.  We are not talking about some system of oppression at the institutional level or white privilege or any of that. 


We are talking about racism against whites on a personal level by PoC.  This hate is overpowering any messages of good and I can tell you it turns people away very quickly. 

Lets break it down (not that someone stuck in a grievance bubble will allow themselves to understand).

(the following info courtesy of endgaem):

"racism = power + privilege" was thought up by a critical race theorist named Pat Bidol in her book Developing New Perspectives on Race. Eventually radical black racist took this definition as the new “standard” for identifying racism and spread it about. Layman social justice warriors on tumblr use it to justify their own racism, etc… Obviously this is a horribly limited and obscure (not even to mention fundamentally incorrect) definition.

One source that addresses the absurdity of the definition can be found here:…/why-racism-prejudice-power… It’s fairly concise and very well written, so I would definitely recommend it.

One main argument I’ve seen for using the wrong definition, as opposed to the dictionary like any logical human being, is “the dictionary was created by white people, and therefore cannot be trusted”.


This is already a stupid statement in and of itself, but it gets even more hilariously absurd when you realize this:

Pat Bidol is white. 

Now you might be thinking “yeah but the woman who popularized it wasn’t whi—”

Nope. Judith H. Katz, the woman who popularized this definition, is also white. 

Both the creator and distributor of their definition of racism are apart of the racial group that they seem to detest so much, yet their rationale for upholding one definition over the other is that the one they disagree with was made by white people.  Amazing, right?

The notion that white people cannot experience racism because there is no system of oppression working against white people is total BS.  It’s a made up definition used to justify and mask racism against white people.


Wanna bet Mike’s family will do an MJ and do their own autopsy? The weed doesn’t explain his behavior that tragic night but it seems Mike thought he could fight fire with fire even without a handgun… sad.

Voter ID is just a huge issue with me.



There’s no reason not to require an ID to vote. Almost everyone has one already and those who don’t cam get one FREE at the dmv.
Letting people vote without an ID is stupid and the reason why people cheat and vote more than once under false names.

I could not think of anything that could possibly matter any less

As I get older, that rush to vote is really a dying trend despite all that media coverage… I have an ID now but I ain’t gonna waste three minutes going to some place down by the firehouse to put in a vote for X, Y and Z.


Ferguson Protest 



77% Favor Eliminate Mandatory Minimums for Nonviolent Offenders

The latest Reason-Rupe poll finds that 77 percent of Americans favor eliminating mandatory minimum prison sentences so that judges have the ability to make sentencing decisions on a case-by-case basis. Seventeen percent oppose this policy change, and 6 percent don’t have an opinion.

Support for eliminating mandatory minimums has increased 6 points since the poll first asked this question in December 2013.

Returning sentencing discretion to judges is popular across partisanship, race, age, income, and education. For instance, 81 percent of Democrats support eliminating mandatory minimums, as do 75 percent of independents and 73 percent of Republicans, including 69 percent of tea party supporters. Similarly, 77 percent of white Americans, 80 percent of African-Americans, and 73 percent of Hispanics favor eliminating mandatory minimum prison sentences for nonviolent offenders.

73% of Americans Support Restoring Voting Rights

Americans also support restoring voting rights to nonviolent drug offenders who have served their sentences by a margin of 73 to 24 percent.

Restoring voting rights is also widely popular across demographic groups, although Democrats are more supportive. Eighty-one percent of Democrats favor allowing nonviolent drug offenders who have served their sentences to vote and 17 percent oppose. In contrast, 66 percent of non-partisan independents and 64 percent of Republicans agree; 28 and 32 percent oppose, respectively

Tis a good start


The sickening transformation of these United States into an authoritarian police state with an incarceration rate that would make Joseph Stalin blush, has been a key theme of my writing since well before the launch of Liberty Blitzkrieg. One of the posts that shocked and disturbed readers most, was published a little over a year ago titled: American Police Make an Arrest Every 2 Seconds in 2012. In the event you never read it, I suggest taking a look before tackling the rest of this piece.

Fast forward to fall 2014, and the Wall Street Journal has a powerful article about how children in schools systems across the U.S. are being arrested or turned over to police custody for doing things that children have always done since the beginning of time. Things such as wearing too much perfume, sharing a classmates’ chicken nuggets, throwing an eraser or chewing gum.

As a result of our insane societal obsession with authority and disproportionate punishment, the WSJ reports that “nearly one out of every three American adults are on file in the FBI’s master criminal database.” 


From the Wall Street Journal:

A generation ago, schoolchildren caught fighting in the corridors, sassing a teacher or skipping class might have ended up in detention. Today, there’s a good chance they will end up in police custody.

In Texas, a student got a misdemeanor ticket for wearing too much perfume. In Wisconsin, a teen was charged with theft after sharing the chicken nuggets from a classmate’s meal—the classmate was on lunch assistance and sharing it meant the teen had violated the law, authorities said. In Florida, a student conducted a science experiment before the authorization of her teacher; when it went awry she received a felony weapons charge.

Over the past 20 years, prompted by changing police tactics and a zero-tolerance attitude toward small crimes, authorities have made more than a quarter of a billion arrests, the Federal Bureau of Investigation estimates. Nearly one out of every three American adults are on file in the FBI’s master criminal database.

Did you catch that too? “Zero-tolerance attitude toward small crimes.” Indeed, the big criminals go to Wall Street, crash the economy and then receive trillions in taxpayer bailouts. Or they get a top job in the Obama Administration, such as Jedi-master of cronyism, Tim Geithner, being chosen as Treasury Secretary.

Back to the WSJ…

At school, talking back or disrupting class can be called disorderly conduct, and a fight can lead to assault and battery charges, said Judith Browne Dianis, executive director of the Advancement Project, a national civil-rights group examining discipline procedures around the country. 

If these rules were in place in my day, I would have been arrested about 150 times.

“We’re not talking about criminal behavior,” said Texas State Sen. John Whitmire, the Democratic chair of the senate’s Criminal Justice Committee, who helped pass a new law last year that limits how police officers can ticket students. “I’m talking about school disciplinary issues, throwing an eraser, chewing gum, too much perfume, unbelievable violations” that were resulting in misdemeanor charges.

According to the U.S. Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights, 260,000 students were reported, or “referred” in the official language, to law enforcement by schools in 2012, the most-recent available data. 

The number of school police officers rose 55% to about 19,000 in the 10 years to 2007, the last year for which numbers were available, according to a 2013 study from the Congressional Research Service.

The schools crackdown has had its intended effect. Victims’ surveys compiled by the Education Department show that there is a lower rate of violent crime committed in schools, falling to 52 incidents per 100,000 students in 2012 from 181 incidents per 100,000 in 1992.Supporters say that alone proves the worth of aggressive policing.

Well yeah, and pigs in a pen are easily controlled too, but are these the types of children we want to raise?

And what about the downside, such as:

Brushes with the criminal justice system go hand in hand with other negative factors. A study last year of Chicago public schools by a University of Texas and a Harvard researcher found the high-school graduation rate for children with arrest records was 26%, compared with 64% for those without. The study estimated about one-quarter of the juveniles arrested in Chicago annually were arrested in school.

A science experiment that went awry turned into a 17-month battle for Kiera Wilmot and her mother as they tried to clear the honor student’s arrest record. According to the police report, she was on school grounds outside the classroom trying out an experiment that hadn’t been authorized by her teacher. Ms. Wilmot, now 18, said she put a piece of aluminum inside a bottle with two ounces of toilet cleaner to see what would happen. The teen’s mother said she was trying to simulate a volcanic eruption.

“It popped,” blowing the top off the bottle, she said. She was handcuffed by the school-resource office, escorted out of the Bartow, Fla., school and taken to a juvenile facility where she was charged with possessing or discharging firearms or weapons at school and making, throwing, possessing, projecting, placing or discharging a destructive device.

Think about what sorts of lessons we are teaching talented students about experimenting and being creative. A modern Benjamin Franklin would most likely be rotting away in solitary right now.

So as we militarize the police, we police the schools. See the direction this is all headed in?

Keep chanting muppets.

As the number of US drone strikes in Pakistan hits 400, research by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism finds that fewer than 4% of the people killed have been identified by available records as named members of al Qaeda. This calls in to question US Secretary of State John Kerry’s claim last year that only “confirmed terrorist targets at the highest level” were fired at.

are any of the mods niggers?


While we do have mods of African American descent, none of us are “niggers.”