3rd Republican Debate for 2016 (R) nomination.

Rated R for crude language.

Every other candidate is tearing the mainstream media (MSM) apart every chance they get.

Fuck you, yellow journalism.
Fuck you, The Entertainment Industry.
Fuck you, LA, SF, Chicago, NYC, Boston etc. leftists.
Fuck you, academia.
Fuck you, PC public schools.
Fuck you, activists judges.

Fuck you, GOP establishment, for being the "roadblock" to the "progressive" Democrats yet you can't effectively combat their policies and their yellow journalism.

And fuck crony capitalism and usury.

Oh, and fuck the moderators. Especially that douche Carl Quintanilla.

I apologize for my language, but that's how I feel.

There's a crying contest.

It's amusing when liberals indirectly admit that their feelings are hurt when they confess they've been called a "libtard" and/or "feminazi."

"How can you not support feminism?"
"Like I how I don't give two sh_ts about the polar bears. That's how."

Because "The Cause." It's all for "The Cause."

If You Only Had a Brain

If the GOP voters had a brain they'd see Trump mainly as these things when it comes to policy & media:

(1) Great at deflecting the BS that is thrown at non (D)s and non-'save-the-world-save-the-little-guy' types and

(2) Great at bringing up issues, particularly the less-than stellar economy and downright traitorous immigration policies held by many leftists/"progressives."

That's it.

Why anyone who is serious about the POTUS position would favor him over the others, besides Jeb Bush,  is not beyond my understanding, but beyond my respect. Yet several contributors at American Thinker and its combox members think otherwise. The site and the writers that make up the site haven't official said it, but their guy is Trump, and they have no problem painting and believing things that make Walker (now out of the race), Fiorina (I believe she'll drop out after the 3rd debate), Carson, Rubio and Cruz as establishment types or less-than trustworthy candidates. They'll snidely remark "cuckservative." This is proof of their lowly bottom and, as an ex-modern day liberal, I will admit shows why liberals/leftists/progs think The Right are unsophisticated rubes. In some ways they are.

And to the people within the RNC picking the candidate that gets their backing - this time it's Jeb - you people are losers who need to replaced. Careerist politicians whose better days are long behind them, whose eyes are cloudy with screeching brakes that don't know how to call it quits, or 40 yr olds who couldn't run a successful business so they, instead, run a major political organization. Yikes.

Going Back In Time ... To 2012.

For the POTUS election, Obama vs Romney.

This is what a Yale College Democrat wrote after the election.

Throughout the course of the 2012 Election Cycle, the pundits continued to predict that student turnout would be lower than the 2008 election. They claimed that students were less involved, less excited, running on empty.

But on November 6^th we proved them wrong. More than 1,500 Yale students turned out to the polls to vote, almost double the number of Yale students that voted in the 2010 midterm elections and even higher than the number of Yale students that voted in 2008.

While the pundits may not have been expecting those numbers, what they failed to realize was that students had a lot at stake in this election. In the wake of the destruction of Hurricane Sandy, students had a choice between a candidate who recognized the devastation as a real effect of climate change and a candidate who turned climate change into a punch line at the Republican National Convention. Students had a choice between a candidate who affirmed the right of every citizen in this country to love whomever they choose and a candidate who would deny that right to millions of Americans. Students had a choice between a candidate who would work to protect student loans and a candidate who would tell the 55% of Yale students on financial aid to just borrow college money from their parents.

With choices like these, it’s not surprising that students made their voices heard at the polls. But more than just showing up to vote, students had also worked tirelessly to get out the vote. From the beginning of this semester, the Yale College Democrats, the Democratic Town Committees, and Students Unite Now worked together to register more than 500 voters. We canvassed in New Haven together, and the Dems canvassed around the state and out of the state in New Hampshire and Massachusetts. The Dems even traveled to Pennsylvania over Fall Break.

To those who said that we couldn’t or that we wouldn’t: we said “yes we can” and “yes we will.” To those who said we were less involved or less excited: the thousands of people who we talked to on the phone or at their doors would beg to differ. And to those who said we were running on empty: I can tell you that we are fired up and ready to go for four more years.

There's so much wrong in this that it's laughable. Yes, the writer is from Yale, one of the world's elite institutions for higher education, and this is what it produces. 

As least you didn't crap on the National Mall or piss in the Lincoln Memorial

THE INJUSTICE! THE SADNESS!

How about young, male blacks stop acting like thugs. Stop looking like thugs. Stop joining gangs. Easier said than done, of course.

Oh, and stop the whole  #BlackLivesMatter bullshit aka #VictimhoodMentality.

Your Friendly,
Non-White American

Academia's fetish, John Hopkins & Co. join "The War on Fracking."

Academia is a strange place. Whatever the The Right supports there will be a study or dissertation about it - not to support it, but to disprove the confidence of those that support it. Take for instance UPenn Religious Studies professor, Anthea Butler, who calls Ben Carson "coon of the year." Butler's UPenn profile reveals even more telling information about her research interests.

Professor Butler's forthcoming book, The Gospel According to Sarah: How Sarah Palin and the Tea Party are Galvanizing the Religious Right will be published by The New Press in 2014.

I also had a sociology professor whose interests included studying the "Christian Right." Granted, she was a lesbian, so it was to little wonder. Let's go back to UPenn. Sociology doctoral candidate Francis Prior. In his student biography he states the following -

His research interests include the sociology of crime and punishment, urban sociology, the sociology of race and ethnicity, and the sociology of social movements.  Currently, Francis is doing participant observation and interview research on service provision in prisoner reentry organizations and clients’ experience of release from incarceration.  For his master’s thesis, Francis did participant observation and interview research on organizers’ management of rank and file participants’ collective behavior in the Tea Party movement.  Before joining the sociology department, Francis received a BA in philosophy from Villanova University, with an emphasis on hermeneutic and critical approaches to historical and contemporary social and political thought.

I'll probably actually purchase his thesis in order to see what he writes about. I'm rather curious of his findings and his methodology since I feel he's approaching the Tea Party movement with post-modern lenses, painting the group as some extreme nutbags with highly questionable values. Too bad he didn't do an entire paper focusing solely on #BlackLivesMatter or Occupy Wall Streets (OWS). Oh no, that would be plain weird because such groups totally don't have questionable motives or backers. His personal website lists more information about his academic interests.

PUBLICATIONS

2014. “Quality Controlled: An Ethnographic Account of Tea Party Messaging and Action.” Sociological Forum 29(2).

UNDER REVIEW

"New American Populism: Tea Party and Occupy in Ethnographic and Rhetorical Comparison." with Shantee Rosado at Mobilization

ACADEMIC PRESENTATIONS

Panel at Eastern Sociological Society 2011: “The Tea Party Movement: Frames and Micromobilization”

But what about the semi-humans babies?

What's the tactic of leftists and liberals to slowly burrow their opponents into obscurity and to malign them? "Studies have shown ... "

This is all in the name of science, empirical evidence and "proof."

See here.

Expectant mothers have a lot to be concerned about, but those living near fracking sites have even more to fear, an expanding body of evidence shows. Most recently, a data review of more than 10,000 pregnancies has linked living in heavily fracked areas with a higher risk of premature births.

In the study, published Sept. 30 in the journal Epidemiology, scientists at Johns Hopkins University, Brown University and the University of California, Berkeley and San Francisco, analyzed data from the 10,496 pregnancies of 9,384 mothers in nearly 700 communities in Pennsylvania from 2009 to 2013. At the same time, they tracked shale gas drilling, fracturing and production in a 12.4-mile radius of each woman.

What they found was that mothers who had higher exposure to these operations and infrastructure -- in essence, those who had more drilling and fracking sites in the vicinity of their homes -- were 40 percent more likely to give birth to premature babies. They were also 30 percent more likely to have high-risk pregnancies, the researchers found.

"Any form of energy extraction that harms the well-being of infants and pregnant women has no place in society," Sandra Steingraber, a biologist with the organization Americans Against Fracking, who was not involved in the study, said in response to the new findings. "These data show that a ban on fracking is good prenatal care."

Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is the process of injecting millions of gallons of sand and chemical-laced water into gas-rich shale below the earth to allow gas to be released from the rock. Those liquids are then brought back to the surface of the earth. Previous studies have linked living near fracking sites to infertility, miscarriages and birth defects. Researchers have blamed the increased risk of exposure to toxic chemicals and even radioactive materials.

More than 15 million people in the U.S. were living within one mile of a fracking well, Al Jazeera reported in 2014, as the practice has increased significantly in the U.S. in recent years. Advocates say fracking helps communities by creating jobs, while critics argue it can be detrimental for human health and to the environment.

Of course, if respectable institutions like John Hopkins, Brown, Berkely and U of SanFran say so, then we must not question their findings and must follow their warnings.

John Hopkins Hospital said no to transgender surgery yet the medical world and the LGBT activists and libertines gleefully ignored such warnings, but I bet this fracking news - accurate or not - will be picked up and used as ammo to both shutdown fracking and play the Big Oil card, in hopes to drive more money into solar energy.

ODing in Chicago.

Chicago experiences heroin deaths.

Chicago overdoses from heroin sent almost 72 people to the hospital from Tuesday through Friday afternoon. Some of the heroin overdose patients wound up at Mount Sinai Hospital with needles still stuck in their arms.

The heroin used in the Chicago overdoses may have been laced with fentanyl, a painkiller. Cook County health and law enforcement officials are currently investigating at least one death linked to the rash of heroin overdoses, MSN reports.

“We suspect what is happening is the same thing that happened in 2006 when people were getting heroin that was cut with fentanyl, which is a very strong narcotic,” Mount Sinai emergency room director and nurse, Diane Hincks, said. “That’s what we think is happening.”
Hincks added that some of the overdose patients collapsed immediately after injecting themselves with the heroin. She also said that the hospital typically sees only two or three drug overdoses per day.
 

Where theses cases happen also reveals something about the culture of those neighborhoods.

By Friday afternoon, Chicago area emergency rooms had responded to 74 heroin overdoses in 72 hours. The number of overdoses from the drug was more than double the amount experienced in the city from the same time span last year, according to fire department representative Larry Langford.

Chicago police officials have stated that the heroin prompting the overdoses appears to have primarily been sold in two specific locations on the city’s West Side. A sample of the heroin sold in the North Lawndale neighborhood is being tested for fentanyl contamination.
 

If you're familiar with the city of Chicago, the South Side (SS) is infamous for its gang wars - that's where most of the bad coverage comes from when it comes to national attention for homocides. The West Side is sometime the forgotten sibling which has its share of gang violence and negative press, though not as bad as the SS. Add the latest deaths of the junkies to its CV.

This disturbing news of heroin cause related deaths isn't new to Chicago. It has happened before.

Heroin overdose deaths have increased throughout Chicago and the rest of the state since 2011, Illinois Department of Public Health statistics indicate. In 2014, 633 heroin overdose deaths occurred in Illinois, up from 583 in 2013. Last year in Cook County, 283 people died from overdosing on heroin.

State lawmakers have begun to focus on the mounting number of heroin overdoses in Illinois. Multiple measures have been proposed to address the heroin problem and overdose hospitalizations and deaths.

The significant heroin overdose incident in Chicago happened between 2005 and 2007. There were more than 1,000 drug deaths during that time. Dozens of people in the greater Chicago area died of overdoses, including the ingestion or injection of drugs laced with fentanyl.

But don't worry, people want to legalize drugs and ban handguns, saying the 2nd amendment is no longer needed in this advanced, enlightened society.