Tag: bankruptcy

Today’s blacklisted American: Georgetown University to hold segregated black-only events

5:02 pm

Blacks only event
Segregation returns to Georgetown University

“Segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever!” The Campus Ministry of Georgetown University has scheduled several upcoming events that are advertised as segregated and for blacks only, despite a claim on its website that such events “are accessible to students of all backgrounds.”

The announcement for one such event, which included the graphic to the right (with the relevant language circled in red), however proves that last claim is an outright lie:

The Cookout is an undergraduate retreat created for Black students by Black students to promote joy, inspire hope, and explore practices of self-love and care for Black students, drawing on the values and practices of Georgetown’s Ignatian heritage and other spiritual traditions. Sponsored by Campus Ministry, The Cookout acknowledges the marginalization Black students face in predominantly white institutions and aims to center Black experience, affirm the Blackness of all Black students, and facilitate a safe space for connection and reflection through bonding activities and talks by Black chaplains, faculty and staff. A cookout is a place for relaxation, laughter, and community—and we’re going to offer just that and more. So, to the Black students of Georgetown University: Welcome to The Cookout. [emphasis mine]

Of course, when questioned a university spokesperson said that while the event is meant for black students on campus, “all students are allowed to register.” It would really be interesting to see what would happen if some white students at Georgetown did exactly that, and then showed up. Would they be greeted with the university’s commitment to…
» Read more

9 comments

Scientists decide propaganda and commercials are better than good research results

10:47 am

The on-going dark age: In a new study scientists have discovered that — instead of depending on hard research that is repeatedly confirmed by others — if they simply use a trusted spokesman in commercials promoting their work they can get people to accept their conclusions, at face value.

This momentous discovery occurred when some researchers decided to find out if putting Trump in a 30-second commercial asking people to get the COVID jab would encourage them to do so. This is what the test learned:

A creative effort to use former President Donald Trump to persuade people to get a COVID-19 vaccine shot appears to have paid off. An online advertisement created by a team of political scientists and economists that featured Trump recommending COVID-19 shots led to increased uptake of the vaccines in U.S. counties that had low vaccination rates, concludes a new analysis.

“We were so thrilled,” says Marc Hetherington, a political scientist at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, who helped create the ad and co-authored the study. “How often do political scientists and economists do anything that helps the world? The answer is, like, 0% of the time.”

…The results highlight that “health communication needs to come from trusted messengers and to meet people where they are,” says behavioral scientist Katherine Milkman of the University of Pennsylvania, who was not involved in the study. [emphasis mine]

Hetherington’s highlighted quote was intended to imply that this research proved that political scientists and economists sometimes do do something that helps the world. I think it only proves that they never do.

Using advertising to sell a scientific conclusion is without doubt the most corrupt and idiotic method for selling a scientist’s work. It only proves the work itself, in this case the COVID shots, have questionable aspects that need propaganda to convince people of their value.

Other quotes from different scientists at the link also illustrate how divorced from actual research and data these scientists are. To their minds, the doubt that many people have of the COVID shots can only be attributed to an “antivaccine ecosystem” touting its own political agenda. The extensive research and data that suggests the shots carry risks while appearing possibly useless is either ignored by these scientists, or they are willfully ignorant of it.

11 comments

Today’s blacklisted American: Whites aggressively blocked from attending health dept meeting

1:14 pm

Jim Crow celebrated in Seattle!
The return of Jim Crow, this time celebrated in the north, in Seattle!

“Segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever!” Seattle health administrators purposely organized an employee Zoom training session for minorities only, then aggressively banned any white staffers from attending, and then lied repeatedly about their actions and the segregated and illegal nature of the session.

The subject of the session was in itself bigoted, as it made the claim that dieting is a white racist strategy to harm blacks.

The King County Department of Human Resources announced the remote workshop, “Anti-Blackness and Diet Culture,” in an all-staff email newsletter. It was part of the county’s Balanced You program, which focuses on staff wellness. Tacoma-based Liberating Jasper, which conducted the workshop, claims dieting is harmful to black people, and that “Western ideals of attractiveness and health are steeped in whiteness.” It even implies that obesity can be healthy.

Despite claims to the contrary, the workshop intentionally excluded white people. Indeed, the event was promoted both publicly and privately for “BIPOC employees only.”

For those not educated in the left’s alphabet lexicon of races and genders, BIPOC stands for blacks, indigenous people, and people of color. It is designed to create a group of favored minorities while excluding the sexual perverse, which in other contexts the left will gladly celebrate.

What makes the story especially offensive is not this bigoted session and the desire to ban any whites from attending, but the extent in which government officials repeatedly lied about their intentions to discriminate against whites. This story was revealed by Seattle radio host Jason Rantz. Over and over again his office would challenge officials, who would make some absurd claim, and over and over again Rantz would prove this an outright lie, using internal emails obtained by Rantz’s investigation.

For example, one white attendee was specifically removed from the Zoom meeting because of his race.
» Read more

10 comments

Pushback: Musk — offended by Twitter censorship — becomes its biggest shareholder

1:19 pm

Twitter's censorship a target of Elon Musk
Twitter’s censorship a target of Elon Musk

Defeating the censors: On March 25th Elon Musk — opposed to the censorship of conservatives on the social media outlet Twitter — had conducted a poll on Twitter that asked:

Free speech is essential to a functioning democracy. Do you believe Twitter rigorously adheres to this principle?

The poll results were unequivocal: by 70.4% to 29.6% the respondents declared that the present management at Twitter is hostile to free speech.

In the next two days Musk then tweeted “Is a new platform needed?” followed by “Seize the memes of production!” The rumors all suggested that Musk would start his own competing social media platform.

Musk fooled everyone. Instead, as revealed today he proceeded to buy 9.2% of Twitter’s shares, making him the company’s largest individual shareholder.

What Musk will do with this new power is of course not yet known. » Read more

29 comments

Today’s blacklisted American: Biden’s Labor Board attempts to silence conservative news outlet for making bad Twitter joke

11:50 am

Ben Domenech and The Federalist, blacklisted
Ben Domenech and The Federalist, censored by the federal government’s
National Labor Relations Board

Blacklists are back and the Democrats have got ’em: The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is attempting to silence the conservative news site The Federalist for “unfair labor practice” because its publisher Ben Domenech sent out a bad Twitter joke in 2019 about unions, and two lawyers who had nothing to do with the company complained to the NLRB.

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has ordered Ben Domenech—publisher of the conservative website The Federalist…—to take down a June 2019 tweet in which he joked about sending employees who wanted to unionize to work in “the salt mines.” Domenech has refused, and the case is now making its way through the courts.

Domenech’s tweet came in response to news that employees of Vox Media Inc. walked off the job in support of unionization. No one at The Federalist had publicly expressed any interest in unionizing, and two of the website’s six employees filed affidavits attesting that they viewed the tweet as a joke. As far as I know, Domenech doesn’t own any salt mines.

The complainants, leftist lawyers Matt Bruenig (a former NLRB attorney) and Joel Fleming, have never worked for or been personally harmed by the Federalist and were clearly acting to silence their political opponents by taking advantage of NLRB’s overly broad regulations, which allow total strangers to file complaints against businesses they don’t like. The NLRB then moves to harass those businesses.
» Read more

7 comments

Pushback: University’s blacklisting of a student quickly ends when confronted by lawyers

1:08 pm


Boris Badenov: The school administrators at
Southern Illinois University

Today’s blacklist story came and went so quickly that no one in the press really ever had a chance to cover it. I however want to highlight it today because it tells us a great deal about today’s bankrupt academic culture, and its paper tiger nature if challenged.

On February 10, 2022, Jamie Ball, the director for Equal Opportunity, Access and Title IX Coordination at Southern Illinois University in Edwardsville, sent notices to Maggie DeJong, a student in the school’s Art Therapy Counseling Program, telling DeJong that she was forthwith forbidden to interact in any way with three other students.

Because DeJong attended classes and also worked at the same facility as these three students, the orders essentially blacklisted her from school through the end of the ’22 semester.

Ball provided no facts or reasons for the “no-contact” orders, other than saying that any contact between DeJong and these three students “would not be welcome or appropriate at this time.” Ball’s order also admitted that no harassment or violation of school policy had occurred. Her order was simply “to prevent interactions that could be perceived by either party as unwelcome, retaliatory, intimidating, or harassing.”

In other words, Ball was punishing DeJong for something that might happen, likely based on secret accusations made by those three students.

On February 23rd, less than two weeks later, lawyers from the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) sent the school’s Chancellor, Randy Penbrook, a letter [pdf] outlining the illegality of this action, and demanding the no-contact orders be immediately rescinded.
» Read more

18 comments

Another update on the lie that was COVID

12:16 pm

How governments determined policy against COVID
How our governments continue to determine policy against COVID

One week ago I published a short essay listing a number of news stories that, as I wrote then, “illustrate starkly the foolishness and the over-reaction to COVID.”

It appears I might have to make this a weekly feature. In the last seven days I’ve collected a whole bunch of new articles, all of which provide further evidence of the lie that was COVID. Not only did our political and health leadership in government routinely lie to us, they often exhibited a remarkable ignorance about some basic science. Until there is reckoning that cleans house in these government agencies, Americans should never believe anything they say.

Most of the stories this past week document the overall failure of the COVID shots to do what these government officials promised: to prevent infection. To understand the significance of this fact, one must go back and review the claims made by government health officials when these shots were first developed. From the beginning these officials repeatedly claimed that the shots would prevent transmission of the virus, and protect people from any Wuhan flu infection if they got the jab. Just watch some of the videos here. Over and over again so-called experts claimed back in the spring of 2021 that the shots would “prevent transmission.”

NOT. » Read more

17 comments

Today’s blacklisted American: Vassar’s college newspaper retracts story because it quoted “too many whites”

1:30 pm

Vassar College: now run by clowns

The new dark age of silencing: The Miscellany News, the college newspaper at Vassar College, recently retracted an article not because it contained any errors of fact (which it did not) but because the article had simply interviewed too many white students in its reporting.

The article had been written to describe the controversy surrounding the school’s decision to have Jeh Johnson, Secretary of Homeland Security during the Obama administration, speak at the school, and his decision to withdraw because of the uproar from students demanding he be blacklisted. From the newspaper’s retraction announcement:

We would like to use this statement to both emphasize our values of diversity and inclusion, and delve deeply into our editorial process and the resulting article in question, especially since we understand that many people in the Vassar community are unaware of the article’s removal. … In this article, we attempted to include a variety of quotes from students describing why there was protest to the announcement of him as speaker in the first place, and the students’ reaction to his withdrawal.

In prioritizing urgency over thoroughness, we made misguided and insensitive oversights with whom we were representing in the article and failed to provide in-depth reporting of the issue at large. The majority of our quotations came from white students and therefore we reduced the positions of students of color to a singular, tokenized perspective. After this was brought to our attention, the paper decided to remove the article online in an attempt to prevent further harm among the communities we misrepresented. [emphasis mine]

» Read more

21 comments

Surprise! NASA’s ’23 budget request asks for more money!

11:13 am

In releasing its budget request this week to Congress for the 2023 fiscal year, NASA did what it routinely does each year, ask for more money, this time asking for an 8% increase from what Congress appropriated last year.

NASA’s FY2023 budget request is $25.974 billion versus the FY2022 appropriation of $24.041 billion. NASA had requested $24.802 billion in large part to pay for the Artemis program to return astronauts to the lunar surface, but Congress wasn’t willing to allocate that much. While supportive of Artemis and NASA’s many other science, aeronautics and technology programs, there is a limit as to how much Congress is willing to invest.

NASA is requesting not just another boost in FY2023, but in the “out years” thereafter, rising to $28 billion in FY2027, though much of that purchasing power likely will be lost to inflation.

…In essence, the agency wants more money for everything it is doing.

The budget request also asks again for Congress to terminate the SOFIA airborne telescope, which NASA contends is not producing enough science to justify its $80 million annual cost. Congress has repeatedly refused to do so in past years. As should be expected, Congress will likely not cancel SOFIA again, as it likes to spend money we don’t have.

The goal of the increased funding for Artemis is also to continue the SLS program for many years to come. Expect Congress to also fund this in the coming few years, though the long term future of SLS remains in doubt, especially if SpaceX’s Starship begins flying. Artemis won’t be cancelled by our spendthrift Congress, but Congress will likely decide to shift that spending to Starship and other private rockets rather than SLS as those private rockets come on line.

All in all, expect Congress to give NASA more cash, but not as much as the agency requests.

8 comments

Today’s blacklisted American: TV reporter fired for covering protest objectively

12:16 pm

Johathan Choe, blacklisted for being a good reporter
Johathan Choe, blacklisted for being a good reporter

The new dark age of silencing: A television reporter for the ABC affiliate in Seattle, KOMO, Jonathan Choe, was fired after he had covered, as accurately as possible, a peaceful Proud Boys demonstration in Seattle, including a photo montage of the event.

Choe, a reporter of 20 years, created a photo montage with sound from the march to end his day. In the clips, he included music from the rally that included a song called “We’ll Have Our Home Again.” Although Choe was unfamiliar with the tune, it is allegedly played frequently at Proud Boys rallies and similar gatherings.

“I wanted to simply capture a moment in time, with authentic visuals and sounds. It was clearly misinterpreted by some on-line,” Choe wrote.

Because of the uproar, Choe said his news director told him to take down all his social media related to the Proud Boys rally. He did so, but was fired the following day, he said.

By his own response to his firing Choe reveals that he himself buys into the racist, anti-American propaganda of today’s left, focusing much of his commentary on his race (he is Asian-American) and noting that though he has been a successfully journalist “for more than 20 years,” he has somehow “faced years of discrimination for my race and ethnicity.” The willful blindness of these statements is astonishing. How could Choe get a great job for a major television affiliate reporting the news if he was living in such a terrible bigoted nation (which by the way has recently twice elected a black man as president)?

No matter. He tried to do his job well and fairly, and a Twitter mob immediately descended upon him. His boss then cowered in fear, forcing Choe to first censor his work, and then firing him because the only thing that will satisfy a lynch mob is a lynching.

Of course, the lynching is not enough. » Read more

13 comments

FAA again delays decision on environmental reassessment of SpaceX’s Boca Chica facility

1:32 pm

Surprise, surprise! According to an FAA email sent out today, the agency has once again, for the fifth time, delayed its decision on the environmental reassessment of SpaceX’s Boca Chica Starship launch site.

From the email:

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is updating the release date for the SpaceX Starship/Super Heavy Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) on the Federal Infrastructure Permitting Dashboard (Permitting Dashboard) and project website. The FAA plans to issue the Final PEA on April 29th. The planned April 29, 2022 release date will allow the FAA to review the Final PEA, including responses to comments, and complete consultation and coordination with agencies at the local, State, and Federal level. All consultations must be complete before the FAA can issue the Final PEA.

This date is now listed on the FAA’s SpaceX-Starship webpage. Nor is the decision a surprise. Expect the FAA to continue this charade month-to-month until after the November election, when the Biden administration will then feel free to block SpaceX’s effort in Boca Chica completely.

17 comments

Pushback: Lawsuit by teacher fired for his opinions to be heard by VA Supreme Court

11:49 am

Peter Vlaming, fired for his opinions
Peter Vlaming

Peter Vlaming was a successful French teacher in the West Point School District in Virgina in 2018, until he was fired for refusing to use male pronouns demanded by a female student.

In 2018, one of Peter’s female students decided to identify as male.

Peter went out of his way to accommodate this student. He said he would use the student’s preferred male-sounding name and avoid using pronouns.

But Peter simply could not use male pronouns for a female student because it would contradict his core beliefs. This was about more than just pronouns; it was about what pronouns mean. In speech, after all, pronouns identify us as either male or female.

Peter couldn’t in good conscience use male pronouns to identify a female student. At the same time, he made it clear that he wanted to work with the student by avoiding pronouns that may cause offense.

But that wasn’t good enough for the school district. It didn’t care about how Peter treated the student. It was on a crusade for conformity. It wanted to force Peter to speak words he disagreed with by using pronouns for the student—even when that student was not present. [emphasis in original]

» Read more

3 comments
1 … 110 111 112 113 114 … 239