Liberals eat their own...Post examples in this thread.

[Angel4Truth]

Caitlyn Jenner jokes about liberals while discussing baseball shooting — and liberals are enraged

Caitlyn Jenner was heavily criticized by liberals over the weekend after a video surfaced showing Jenner joking about them at a Republican conference in Washington D.C.

Jenner made the joke Friday evening at the annual College Republican National Committee’s conference during a discussion about last week’s shooting that targeted congressional Republicans practicing for the annual congressional baseball game.

“Nobody deserves what happened out there,” Jenner said, according to the Washington Examiner. “There’s no justification.”

“There are crazy people. We have to minimize that type of stuff,” Jenner added. “As far as the people that were injured, it’s an absolute shame. You just want them to recover.”

“Fortunately the guy was a really bad shot…liberals can’t even shoot straight,” the former Olympic champion quipped.

Jenner was referring to 66-year-old James Hodgkinson, the now-deceased man who ambushed a group of Republican congressmen last Wednesday morning while they practiced at a baseball field in Alexandria, Virginia. It was discovered through Hodgkinson’s social media channels that he was a devout progressive liberal who had a deep hatred for Republicans and President Donald Trump.

Though the motive of the attack will never truly be known, most believe Hodgkinson’s hatred of Republicans motivated him to carry out the attack.

Hodgkinson was able to critical injure House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.), a GOP congressional aide and two Capitol Police officers before he was shot and subdued by the Capitol Police officers, who were part of Scalise’s security detail.

More from the Washington Examiner:

Jenner’s remarks at the convention came in the form of a question and answer session where a moderator incorporated questions submitted by college students in the audience. Over the course of the dinner, Jenner spoke on a variety of topics, from Kanye West to the Paris climate agreement, which the track and field legend said was “just a way for the rest of the world to kind of ruin us economically.”

Video of Jenner’s remarks were originally uploaded to Facebook, but the video has since been deleted. Another video of Jenner’s remarks were later uploaded to YouTube.

Needless to say, liberals were angered by Jenner’s remarks:

Is Caitlyn Jenner privileged, tone deaf, and out of touch? 100%

But why is her gender the first attack people take? Even liberals?

— Chris Crocker (@ChrisCrocker) June 18, 2017

This comment is not ok, @Caitlyn_Jenner. Key trait American shooters share isnt political party, but history of domestic violence. https://t.co/HqD6YtW24h

— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) June 17, 2017

https://twitter.com/DearAuntCrabby/status/876475432115343364

And, that, my friends, is how Caitlyn Jenner became the least likeable trans person on Earth. https://t.co/BGgCTo85LK

— Harvey King of Shade (@bodysculptorokc) June 17, 2017

Caitlyn Jenner killed a person because she couldn't drive straight. https://t.co/YXMlydLHzB

— Denizcan James (@MrFilmkritik) June 17, 2017

It's sad watching @Caitlyn_Jenner defend a group that will NEVER EVER truly accept her while condemning those who fight for her rights

— Cyn Rosales (@Cynrosles83) June 18, 2017

Caitlyn Jenner is high key the worst…an angry white feminist who doesn't care about Trump's policies until they affect her

— Adrianne Ramsey (@adrianne_ramsey) June 12, 2017

remember that year or two when everyone had to pretend kanye west and caitlyn jenner were woke baes and not coke-addled simpletons

— Alex Nichols (@Lowenaffchen) June 17, 2017

Feel free to add articles to this thread, where they eat their own and attack those they embrace.

I guess Bruce in drag is no longer a hero, for pretending to be chick, since he said something they dont like. Go figure.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Progressives Eat One of Their Own in the Latest Campus Controversy

The logical endpoint of anti-speech academic radicalism seems clearer than ever. Every single time I think the academy has reached peak intolerance and peak insanity, it proves me wrong. There is no argument that is too stupid for academic radicals. There is no lie that these “scholars” aren’t willing to tell to advance their agenda.

Just ask liberal-feminist philosophy professor Rebecca Tuvel, the latest victim of the ritual “two minutes hate.” Her crime was serious: She had the audacity to write a paper exploring the arguments “for and against transracialism” and argued that “considerations that support transgenderism extend to transracialism.” In other words, she took the question that millions of Americans asked when Rachel Dolezal was exposed — if a man can “really” be a woman, why can’t a white person “really” be black? — and explored it through a liberal, feminist lens. Judging from the reaction, you would have thought she burned a cross in the quad. A fully woke University of Tennessee professor named Nora Berenstain fired the first shots. Her (now-private) Facebook post reads like an Onion parody of political correctness. It’s worth quoting at length:

Tuvel enacts violence and perpetuates harm in numerous ways throughout her essay. She deadnames a trans woman. She uses the term “transgenderism.” She talks about “biological sex” and uses phrases like “male genitalia.” She focuses enormously on surgery, which promotes the objectification of trans bodies. She refers to “a male-to- female (mtf) trans individual who could return to male privilege,” promoting the harmful transmisogynistic ideology that trans women have (at some point had) male privilege. In her discussion of “transracialism,” Tuvel doesn’t cite a single woman of color philosopher, nor does she substantively engage with any work by Black women, nor does she cite or engage with the work of any Black trans women who have written on this topic.

For those who don’t know, “deadnaming” is the practice of using a transgender person’s “old” name. In this case, she had the audacity to type the name “Bruce Jenner.” This, friends, is deemed to constitute actual violence. As is the notion that Bruce — when he was an Olympic champion and featured on cereal boxes from coast to coast — could have ever enjoyed male privilege. That’s violence. All of it. Perhaps now you can see why radicals riot. They’re not committing crimes, they’re engaging in acts of collective self-defense. Berenstain was hardly alone in her anger. Furious philosophers penned an open letter to Hypatia, the peer-reviewed journal that published Tuvel’s paper, accusing her, among other things, of using “vocabulary and frameworks not recognized, accepted, or adopted by the conventions of the relevant subfields,” mischaracterizing “various theories and practices related to religious identity and conversion,” and failing “to seek out and sufficiently engage with scholarly work by those who are most vulnerable to the intersection of racial and gender oppressions (women of color) in [her] discussion of ‘transracialism.’” These critiques — in addition to their typically intolerant intersectional incoherence — were plainly false, as New York Magazine’s Jesse Singal pointed out: “All in all, it’s remarkable how many basic facts this letter gets wrong about Tuvel’s paper. Either the authors simply lied about the article’s contents, or they didn’t read it at all.” The only word I’d quibble with here is “remarkable.” It’s entirely normal for radicals to either refuse to read work they purport to hate or to lie about its contents. Just ask Charles Murray. Rather than defend Tuvel, Hypatia’s board of associate editors responded with one of the most craven and cowardly statements in the history of craven academic cowardice. It begins:

We, the members of Hypatia’s Board of Associate Editors, extend our profound apology to our friends and colleagues in feminist philosophy, especially transfeminists, queer feminists, and feminists of color, for the harms that the publication of the article on transracialism has caused.

Harms”? Are “transfeminists, queer feminists, and feminists of color” really so delicate that they can’t withstand the publication of a paper they don’t even have to read? Apparently. But back to the letter, which gets better (or worse, depending on how you look at it):

In addition to the harms listed above imposed upon trans people and people of color, publishing the article risked exposing its author to heated critique that was both predictable and justifiable.

“Predictable,” yes, but “justifiable”? At this point, “scholars” are threatening Tuvel’s future in the profession, and she’s been deluged with hate mail and denunciations. How is any of that “justifiable”? Academic freedom cannot and will not flourish if its alleged defenders reserve their outrage only for when their ideological allies fall victim to the online mob. In all of this madness, there are — perhaps — some seeds of hope. There has been a backlash to the backlash. Singal’s excellent piece in New York unequivocally condemned the attacks on Tuvel as a “witch hunt.” Vanderbilt philosophy professor Kelly Oliver wrote a thoughtful essay calling for “critical debate and philosophical arguments instead of cyber-shaming and personal insults.” Other academics have weighed in on Twitter and elsewhere in Tuvel’s defense. But in reading these pieces, a troubling subtext becomes apparent: It seems that the outrage isn’t only the attack on free expression and academic freedom, it’s that it was directed at a liberal in good standing. For example, in a Chronicle of Higher Education piece called “Academe’s Poisonous Call-Out Culture,” writer Suzanna Danuta Walters begins with this:

We are in the midst of the Trumpian apocalypse. Actual bigoted provocateurs like Charles Murray and Ann Coulter throw flames in the academy. Hate crimes against trans people and people of color and Muslims are on the rise; women’s reproductive rights are on the line, as are just about every other aspect of bodily autonomy and gender justice. So what’s making scholars hyperventilate in outrage? A feminist academic whose body of work is clearly on the side of progressive social justice.

Is she even aware of the irony? I suppose the “call-out culture” is only poisonous when directed at progressives. Otherwise, Charles Murray is fair game. Otherwise, hyperventilation is fine. After all, abortion and “just about every other aspect of bodily autonomy and gender justice are on the line.” Academic freedom cannot and will not flourish if its alleged defenders reserve their outrage only for when their ideological allies fall victim to the online mob. If progressives feel they have to torch conservative straw men before mustering up the courage to defend free inquiry, then academic freedom has a dark future indeed. Conservatives will be walled out entirely, and progressive discourse will be jammed into ever-tighter ideological spaces as a brave few liberals fight a desperate rear-guard action against the true radicals. One hopes that professor Tuvel’s ordeal will serve as yet another wake-up call, teaching professors that there is no safe space from social-justice warriors. But if the Left’s defense against the far-Left is limited to calls for unity against the true enemy (men such as Charles Murray, apparently), then it’s just disguised intolerance. “We should want academics to write about complicated, difficult, hot-button issues, including identity,” Singal wrote. “Online pile-ons cannot, however righteous they feel, dictate journals’ publication policies and how they treat their authors and articles.” One wonders how many campus progressives are likely to agree with his sentiment.

The nuttiness, knows no bounds anymore.

 

[drbrumley]

Progressives Eat One of Their Own in the Latest Campus Controversy



The nuttiness, knows no bounds anymore.

We truly live in Bizarro World..

 

[jgarden]

Liberals eat their own...Post examples in this thread.

Obviously the "OP" didn't read the memo, the Democrats traded Caitlyn Jenner to the Republicans in return for an invite to the Rose Garden!

Apparently "The Donald" likes "strong women!"

 

[Angel4Truth]

Liberals eat their own...Post examples in this thread.

Obviously the "OP" didn't read the memo, the Democrats traded Caitlyn Jenner to the Republicans in return for an invite to the Rose Garden!

Apparently "The Donald" likes "strong women!"

The liberals are who call it a hero.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Liberals eat their own...Post examples in this thread.

Obviously the "OP" didn't read the memo, the Democrats traded Caitlyn Jenner to the Republicans in return for an invite to the Rose Garden!

Apparently "The Donald" likes "strong women!"

The liberals are who call it a hero. Nothing heroic about being a pervert.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Another example of them eating their own:

Pride and prejudice? Race tinges LGBT celebrations

NEW YORK – Gay pride marches in New York City, San Francisco and in between this weekend will have plenty of participants — and also protests directed at them from other members of the LGBT community, speaking out against what they see as increasingly corporate celebrations that prioritize the experiences of gay white men and ignore issues facing black and brown LGBT people.

The protests disrupted other pride events earlier this month. In Washington, D.C., the No Justice No Pride group blocked the parade route. In Columbus, Ohio, four people were arrested after a group set out to protest violence against minority LGBT people and the recent acquittal of a police officer in the shooting death of Philando Castile, a black man, during a traffic stop.

"Nobody wants to feel dropped in a community that prides itself on diversity," said Mike Basillas, one of the organizers of the planned New York City protest action by No Justice No Pride.

In Minneapolis, organizers of Sunday's Twin Cities Pride Parade initially asked the police department to limit participation following the acquittal of police officer Jeronimo Yanez in the death of Castile. But organizers changed their minds after meeting Thursday with Janee Harteau, the city's openly gay police chief who called the decision divisive and hurtful to LGBT officers.

On Friday, the organizers apologized and said they had neglected to consider other alternatives. They said the officers are welcome to march after all.

In Philadelphia, where racial relations in the LGBT community are beginning to mend after a year of community protests, the introduction of a rainbow flag — the traditional symbol of LGBT unity and diversity — that added black and brown stripes to represent blacks and Latinos has spilled over into a national debate.

The recent flare-up of racial tensions comes as no surprise to Isaiah Wilson, director of external affairs for the National Black Justice Coalition, one of the few national groups focused specially on black LGBT rights.

He said the broader LGBT-rights movement "has been whitewashed" — dominated to a large extent by white gay men.

"Black queer and trans folks have always been there, but our contributions have been devalued," Wilson said.

He said major LGBT-rights groups need to be frank in discussing the issue of racism, as well as recruiting and supporting nonwhite leaders.

"Until the mainstream LGBT groups address this, we're not going to move forward and you'll continue to see this pressure," Wilson said. "In my opinion, the pressure is good — it has us talking."

Shannon Minter, a white attorney who is the legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, said LGBT people of color were justified in challenging racist aspects of the LGBT-rights movement.

"The real test will be, can the LGBT movement own up to its historic legacy of racism and evolve to be more accountable and inclusive of people of color?" Minter, a transgender man, wondered. "If not, then it will cease to be a major political movement."

One reason for the tensions, according to some activists, is a racial divide when it comes to the LGBT-rights movement's agenda. For years, many national groups focused on legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide — a goal achieved in 2015. For many LGBT people of color, there continue to be more pressing issues, such as economic inequality, policing and incarceration.

"In a lot of places, we're just trying to survive," said Wilson.

That divide has led to controversy when attempts have been made to address race, as in Philadelphia. The city drew criticism last summer when activists raised concerns that the Gayborhood — the city's main gay enclave — discriminated against blacks. Gay blacks complained of dress codes banning Timberlands and sweatpants, of not being served in a timely manner at bars and of being stopped and asked for identification at clubs while white customers walked in unbothered.

In January, Philadelphia officials issued a report confirming longstanding racism in the Gayborhood and pledged to penalize businesses that did not make changes. Earlier this month, the city unveiled a new flag meant to be a more inclusive reflection of gay pride, with a black and brown stripe added to the existing rainbow motif. The flag's introduction stirred heated commentary from supporters as well as those who felt it was interjecting race unnecessarily.

Pride organizers around the country have taken steps to address the criticisms. In San Francisco, Sunday's pride event will be led by groups including the Bayard Rustin LGBT Club, SF Black Community Matters, African Human Rights, and Bay Area Queer People of Color. In New York City, the march organizers are putting a contingent of groups more focused on protest than celebration at the head of the event.

The LGBT community does need to confront these issues, said Michelle Meow, an Asian-American woman who is board president of San Francisco Pride, and "the pride celebration is a platform for that dialogue to happen."

New York City spokesman James Fallarino said if there are any disruptions or protests during the event, "We're going to make sure we do everything in our power to respect the people who are disrupting or protesting and to respect their message."

Just when you think the madness couldn't get any worse.

 

[patrick jane]

It's good to see the demonrats eating their own with Pelosi

 

[Nick M]

 

[Nick M]

Bizzaro world is not the words I would choose to describe the end of the world as we know it. Never forget your 80s' "rapture" lessons about 1 world government. Not when they all want open borders on the political left. It isn't a coincidence. And the homosness that is promoted.

 

[Nick M]

 

[glorydaz]

Liberals eat their own...Post examples in this thread.

Obviously the "OP" didn't read the memo, the Democrats traded Caitlyn Jenner to the Republicans in return for an invite to the Rose Garden!

Apparently "The Donald" likes "strong women!"

He's a President of the people.

 

[Nick M]

 

[Arthur Brain]

Bizzaro world is not the words I would choose to describe the end of the world as we know it. Never forget your 80s' "rapture" lessons about 1 world government. Not when they all want open borders on the political left. It isn't a coincidence. And they homosness.

"Homosness"?

:liberals:

 

[Nick M]

Wait until they toss Ben Afleck or some other Hollyfood fag supporter of the roof. They will still blame Bush.

 

[Arthur Brain]

He's a President of the people.

And he has all of your best little interests at heart...

:cloud9:

 

[glorydaz]

And he has all of your best little interests at heart...

:cloud9:

More than the last one, and more than the Washington establishment...that's for sure.

 

[patrick jane]

And he has all of your best little interests at heart...

:cloud9:

That's cute

 

[Nick M]

"Homosness"?

:liberals:

Sometimes it gets old judging you and your support of sodomy as moral and ok.

 

[jgarden]

The nuttiness, knows no bounds anymore.

The "nuttiness" is that conservatives are constantly twisting the facts and inventing threads whose sole to dump on liberals - get a life!