Free Republic 3rd Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $49,406
56%  
Woo hoo!! And we're now over 56%!! Thank you all very much!!

Posts by walford

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • In this KC-area district, boys and girls will share gender-neutral restrooms

    08/16/2018 12:25:51 PM PDT · 8 of 35
    walford to lacrew

    “A more accurate title would describe this as a gender neutral sink area, with a bunch of single stall restrooms adjacent.”


    The only difference is that these stalls have locks on them — but the feet are still visible as would be the case in a same-sex restroom. Opposite sex people are still in the same room relieving themselves next to each other.

    It would be a “fake controversy” if each person had their own private restroom. There is a big difference between a wall and a partition.

  • In this KC-area district, boys and girls will share gender-neutral restrooms

    08/16/2018 12:01:52 PM PDT · 1 of 35
    walford
    It would be one thing if the children -- and their parents -- were given a choice whether then want to be relieving themselves next to those equipped with different genitalia by adding a third restroom. But there is no choice here.

    When are there going to be "gender-neutral" locker rooms as well?

  • Death by Entitlement

    08/12/2018 11:56:34 AM PDT · 42 of 42
    walford to Rummyfan

    “Far from being inspirational, theirs is a profoundly cautionary – and distinctly timely – tale that every American, parents especially, should take to heart.”


    It should also be cautionary for any Westerner who finds their leaders hell-bent upon bringing this sort of barbarism into their own homelands. As people on the European Continent already know, they need not deliberately go to places where it’s open season on Caucasians to be brutalized by savages. This can happen stepping out of their own front doors.

  • Hugs and sobs: Families separated in US return to Guatemala

    07/19/2018 9:53:03 AM PDT · 69 of 71
    walford to george76

    I join others commenting here in echoing the sentiment that this story only exemplifies the fact that the tragedy of family separation would not have happened if they did not sneak into this country in the first place. And the incentive the Democrats provide in offering them Driver’s Licenses, in-state Tuition, Taxpayer-Funded Benes...is ultimately cruel.

    But let me add this as someone who has actually been formally educated in Journalistic writing. I offer the opening paragraph:


    “Donelda Pulex stepped off the airplane into the sun, clutching her 5-year-old daughter’s hand and burst into heaving sobs. Fourteen-year-old Hermelindo Juarez hid his face as his father comforted him. Efildo Daniel Vasquez walked cautiously behind his 8-year-old son.”

    This is not a journalist; this is a frustrated novelist. It offers no information, preferring instead to paint an emotional picture of protagonists selected for us by the writer. We are spoon-fed fluff like this until information regarding cause-and-effect is offered well past the middle of the story — and it is never clear.

    [What is actually relevant: As Chief Executive, President Trump dutifully enforced the law as it was written and implemented for the past 20 years. Children were separated from the adults who illegally sneaked them into our country. After a backlash — and searching his own conscience — the President stopped the practice and kept the children with the adults when captured together. Then, predictably, the Democrats then started bleating about “internment” camps, tacitly summoning images of Japanese-Americans during WW2. So these illegal aliens were then deported in a timely manner. All of the rest of the story is irresponsible appeals to emotion and bleeding-heart pablum.]

    Proper news stories get to the point from the beginning, summarizing the most important aspects within a 22-word opening sentence. This is not some nit-picky criticism offered in the service of arbitrary rules that are of no importance to non-journalists.

    The Inverted Pyramid is designed to encourage clear, objective news-writing. A writer is not going to have room for “hugs and sobs” and accomplish actually informing the audience in a concise, bias-free manner.

    The abandonment of true journalistic writing in favor of novelizing is a symptom of everything that is wrong with the Establishment Media today.

  • What Is Democratic Socialism?

    07/19/2018 9:10:49 AM PDT · 44 of 45
    walford to Libloather
    Statism: The State is the people and the people are the State. The more power the State has, the more empowered are the people.

    Collectivism: Everything is generated by society, thus resources should be allocated by society via its agent, the State. The profit motive is replaced by the political motive. Supply-and-demand is replaced by political connection when determining wages, prices and the distribution of goods/services.

    Socialism: a form of Statist Collectivism in which government owns the means of production, including the people themselves.

    Communism: a mythical goal of socialism in which society has evolved -- or been managed via social engineering, which includes torture, starvation, incarceration, periodic purges, execution -- toward the Nirvana of no government and people living according to From Each According to Ability, to Each According to Need. Communist Utopia is only one more five-year-plan away.

    Democratic Socialism: a form of Statist Collectivism in which private property is tolerated so long as it serves the "public interest" as determined by the State. Economic success is not possible w/o political influence and vice-versa. Cronyism is inevitable. AKA: National Socialism, fascism.

  • 8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

    07/19/2018 6:53:35 AM PDT · 4 of 5
    walford to Agatsu77

    “Pretty dry reading.”

    Well, it’s legalese. It is offered for reference when confronted with accusations from Leftists of racism. Now you have the specific law to search and quote in response. You’re welcome.


    “It seems to cover all the folks I don’t want as neighbors!”

    But it does cover the type of people whom the Democrats would like to force upon you as neighbors — and replacements. Meanwhile, they look down their noses at us with their armed guards in gated communities/secured buildings.

  • 8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

    07/19/2018 6:10:19 AM PDT · 1 of 5
    walford
    For Reference: The laws enacted by our elected representatives that the Left and their Party of Jim Crow do not want enforced.

    Prohibited: Disease-carriers, Criminals, Terrorists, Parasites, Returning Draft-Dodgers, Polygamists, Human traffickers - the Democrats ideal citizens.

  • Show Dogs, Don't Let Your Children Be Groomed, Use This to Teach Them

    05/22/2018 8:36:02 AM PDT · 17 of 21
    walford to FrogMom

    Yes, I saw that and others referring to the original, but decided to post the original article.

  • Show Dogs, Don't Let Your Children Be Groomed, Use This to Teach Them

    05/22/2018 8:34:18 AM PDT · 16 of 21
    walford to DugwayDuke

    It would be one thing if the movie depicted how dogs actually are about examining each other’s crotch areas. They are not squeamish at all about that — and do this in front of children. There is no need for parents to explain this so much, because it is clear that they are animals, which do a lot of things humans do not do.

    But to have anthropomorphized animals being shown as struggling with having their anal and genital areas being examined and being reassured — and even teased — about their squeamishness is quite another. Art is a depiction of a certain perspective. Hence one must wonder why the creators of this animated film found it necessary to include this.

    Whether the writers and directors have any experience with children is hard to say. They may not understand how a child is going to interpret what is being depicted on the screen. Was this movie presented to test-audiences first?

    Because more than one adult in this particular screening found this scene noteworthy. If there were any similar comments about it in the test-screenings, did the producers dismiss it as you did or did they get exactly the reaction they wanted — discomfort from the parents and acceptance from the children?

    Certainly the entertainment industry is normalizing other questionable behaviors. Meanwhile, how many positive portrayals are there of intact families — with the father and mother who made the children staying together to raise them — depicted in a positive light?

    So forgive some of us for being skeptical about a movie that targets children — and openly discussing what sort of effect these depictions they may have on them.

    By all means recommend the movie to those with children and have a hearty laugh at the genitalia examinations. But others might want to know what is going on in this movie and, based upon their understanding of how children might interpret this, make a different choice.

  • Show Dogs, Don't Let Your Children Be Groomed, Use This to Teach Them

    05/22/2018 8:09:05 AM PDT · 10 of 21
    walford to RedStateRocker

    There may or may not be an intended message, but after one of the children remarked that her favorite parts of the movie was how one of the characters reacted after having his “privates” touched, the parents felt compelled to take the children aside after having seen the movie to explain to them that “private parts are private” and that children can be pressured or bribed into tolerating inappropriate behavior.

    But by all means, criticize the parent for “histrionic pearl clutching” for being concerned about what children are going to take from something on the screen. Given the Cultural War that the Left has been waging for the past two generations, parents are right to be vigilant about what their children are being exposed to — and to warn each other about the latest entertainment product that they might find unhelpful at best.

  • Show Dogs, Don't Let Your Children Be Groomed, Use This to Teach Them

    05/22/2018 7:42:21 AM PDT · 1 of 21
    walford
    Animated family movie includes mentoring young ones into accepting the touching of private parts.
  • The Myth of Conservative Feminism [NYT Barf]

    05/20/2018 10:03:10 AM PDT · 15 of 16
    walford to DoughtyOne

    The Kate Steinle case perfectly exemplifies the Leftist attitude toward illegal aliens and how they should replace us.

    That pretty young woman of European descent represented everything that the Left hates. She was of child-bearing age, and therefore ‘threatened’ to bring more Caucasians into the world.

    Her murderer, on the otherhand, represents the Hope and Future for the Party of Jim Crow. Hence, Leftist officials repeatedly caught-and-released him until he fulfilled his Grand Purpose in assassinating Kate Steinle.

    He hails from a place in which corruption is the norm and questioning authority can be hazardous to one’s health. He did, therefore, a great service to the Hard Left in exterminating an entire bloodline in one fell swoop.

  • The Myth of Conservative Feminism [NYT Barf]

    05/19/2018 8:16:58 PM PDT · 6 of 16
    walford to DoughtyOne

    Yes, criminals are a constituency for the Left.

    They create jobs for social workers, lawyers, judges, community organizers, etc.

    That is one of the reasons they advocate unilateral disarmament for law-abiding citizens and become frothingly hysterical when a criminal is killed by his intended target.

    As you noted, criminals are considered by the Left to be victims of society. [Similar to how they consider Islamic terrorists to be victims of America.] Law-abiding citizens are supposed to be passive victims. It is especially hoped that a pretty young Caucasian female will be savaged by a perpetrator who was born into a Designated Victim group.

    Then we are supposed to wring our hands at what society must have done to make the perp do something so desperate. The publicity of a small young person with a bright future being subject to an horrible death at the hands of an ‘hopeless’ goon is supposed to motivate us to seek “root causes” and to find “positive alternatives” to robbing, raping and murdering.

    Having a criminal offed instead messes all of that up.

  • The Myth of Conservative Feminism [NYT Barf]

    05/19/2018 7:45:29 PM PDT · 1 of 16
    walford
    NYT unwittingly provides a clinic on why the Left is especially vicious toward Republican/conservative women.

    The author utilizes Straw Man in claiming that conservatives are co-opting "feminist language while actively curtailing women’s rights."

    What conservative claims to be a feminist or embraces feminist principles? We talk of and advocate empowerment. And let us guess what this singular "women's right" that is being alluded to. We do not consider #abortion to be a source of women's rights.

    From a secular sense, it dehumanizes the baby in the womb when referred to as a 'fetus' and classified by the #CultureOfDeath as a STD. It transforms a young woman from being a Vessel of Life to drainer of men's gonads. Directly because of abortion-on-demand, young women are expected to service men sexually in order to gain social acceptance and job-security. Because in the back of everyone's minds, the unwanted result of reproductive activity can be extinguised if deemed inconvenient. Remove the baby and she can go back to being, as Dr Laura so aptly described, a "warm place to put it."

    What is empowering about that?


    "...there is nothing feminist about a [newly appointed CIA Director #GinaHaspel] who oversaw a site where detainees were tortured."

    Whether #waterboarding is 'torture' is debatable. I'm torn on it and question whether it is effective. But advocating certain measures of obtaining information [from those who are hell-bent upon killing as many of us as possible and replacing our way of life with theirs] does not abdicate womanhood. Does it?

    The Left considers Islamic terrorism to be a product of grievance [rather than strict adherence to Islamic principles, including spreading Islam by any means]. So to kill their rank-and-file and interrogate their leaders only perpetuates the injustice. A female who does not share this view of appeasement and apology is no longer a real woman?


    "...there is nothing 'empowering' about [Fox News' Suzanne] Scott, a media executive who reportedly enforced a 'miniskirt rule' for female on-air talent, and who was cited in two lawsuits for contributing to a toxic work environment and retaliating against a sexual harassment victim."

    Fox News was already losing me early in the 2016 primary campaign when it became clear that it was a mouthpiece for the GOP Establishment -- at the expense of the rank-and-file in being openly hostile to Donald J. Trump. They were siding with the RINOs in wanting to ignore the expressed will of its voting base ram an Establishment candidate down our throats who would then have emulated Romney in losing gracefully to Hillary.

    But when Andrea Tantaros, Gretchen Carlson and others recounted Roger Ailes' boorish behavior, that was the last straw. I switched to One America News Network as my primary TV source of conservative news and commentary. But to allege that Suzanne Scott represents the archetypal female conservative news executive is a bit of a stretch.

    The case certainly could be made with respect to Leftist #Hollywood men who are in positions of authority. There seems to be a common attitude amongst them that they are some kind of untouchable royalty -- and are entitled to take what they want. And, as we have seen with Corey Feldman's stories of sexual predation of young boys, a certain class of abusers remain untouched because they belong to a protected class. Likely, then, this subset of of sexual victimization continues with impunity in the entertainment industry.


    "Conservatives appropriating feminist rhetoric despite their abysmal record on women’s rights is, in part, a product of the president’s notorious sexism."

    Trump said some boorish things in what he thought were private conversations long before he was PoTUS. Try as they might, the Left-biased Establishment Media has failed to find anything like Bill Clinton's actual serial sexual predation. Trump never abused his position of authority to get young women to service him sexually. All they could come up with was a former porn star claiming that she had consensual sex with a known germophobe. [More recently, she seems to be recanting.]

    Clinton raped at least one woman as Arkansas Attorney General. It was clear from her account that he was an experienced rapist. [You should put some ice on that."] Later, as Governor, he had State Troopers bring women to him so they could fellate him. This continued while he was PoTUS -- including imposing himself on a newly widowed aide.

    For her part, his wife Hillary was often the chief Fixer in containing Bubba's 'bimbo-eruptions' including gleefully persecuting any of his victims who dared open their mouths to do anything but accept his gentleman's relish. Yet, Hillary was lauded as an example of what women could attain in her failed attempt to ride her charismatic husband's coat-tails into office.

    And what were Feminists saying and doing when this could no longer be ignored by the #EstablishmentMedia? Being Leftists first, they actually said that 'powerful men have powerful urges' and even that they would gladly get on their knees for him if that's what it took to advance the Cause.

    Given this, what self-respecting conservative woman would try to co-opt the Feminist mantle -- as if it were some kind of badge of honor?


    "For years, those on the right called feminists 'man-haters' who were out to destroy the family, or argued that we were members of an irrelevant movement. Now that feminism is more culturally and politically powerful than it has been in decades, however, conservatives are eager to capitalize on its cachet. Or wield it as a cudgel."

    The evidence is clear on this that the Left has been working hard to destroy the family to replace it with government ["it takes a village"]. Fathers in the home participating in child-rearing were an early target. Prior to LBJ's War on Poverty and Great society, the majority of black children were raised in two-parent homes. Then it was deemed by Leftist social engineers that black fathers are best replaced by white female social workers who wear sensible shoes.

    The result of this has been nothing short of catastrophic. Since the '60s, every metric has been in the negative for black families. Increased are mental illness, poverty, crime victimization, underaged pregnancy, suicide, incarceration, truancy, dropping out -- and racial hatred borne of an inculcated sense of Victimhood and Entitlement.

    Look at our culture today with respect to all fathers as depicted in Feminist-influenced TV and movies. With the notable exceptions of "Roseanne" and "Last Man Standing," fathers are typically portrayed as fat, lazy, inconsiderate, stupid, ignorant, selfish buffoons who must be nullified by their wiser wives and daughters.


    "The conservative commentator Tomi Lahren, for example, has said that any woman who doesn’t support Ivanka Trump’s business because of her father’s policies isn’t 'really a feminist'...”

    The viciousness that greets #PoTUS' daughter is nothing short of breath-taking in its gratuitousness. By all accounts, Chelsea Clinton was a "spoiled brat" toward Secret Service agents whom were unfortunate to be assigned to protect her. Jimmy Carter's daughter, Amie was also described as petty and mean. There were whispers about this behavior then and since, but neither of them had to suffer the sort of open -- and fashionable -- vitriol that is directed at Ivanka Trump.

    She has been nothing but gracious, but her father's unspecified "policies" make her fair game -- unworthy of recognition for a Wharton alumna who graduated with honors and has since been successful in the private sector.


    "When Sarah Palin was the vice-presidential nominee in 2008, conservatives suggested that feminists were hypocrites for not supporting her."

    Feminists were not only withholding support, they were actively participating in savaging her for her looks, the fact that she didn't kill her Down Syndrome baby, laughing when Bill Maher called her a Cee-U-Next-Tuesday -- anything but her political history of standing up to the Good Ole Boy network, nor her ideology and policies. The attacks upon her were particularly personal by the Left as noted in the 2009 essay, "The Wilding of Sarah Palin."

    We saw then, that if a woman dares to stray from the Hard-Left Democrat Plantation, she is fair game for the most vicious sexist vitriol.


    "You cannot be a feminist and support an immigration policy of taking children away from undocumented immigrant mothers."

    Pure propaganda. The immigration policy is that if you sneak into this country illegally, you're going to be sent back to your own homeland. If you want to keep your family intact, do not abandon them. The illegals are the ones choosing to leave their spouses and children behind as they keep trying to stay here and draw taxpayer-funded benes.


    "You cannot be a feminist and go along with the White House’s newly announced domestic gag rule, a mandate that would withhold funding from any health care center that helps patients find abortion services."

    Such health care centers are free to offer whatever services and advice they choose -- but not at taxpayers' expense. Those of us who object to abortion should not be forced to subsidize it.


    "Now we have a different task: protecting the movement against conservative appropriation. We’ve come too far to allow the right to water down a well-defined movement for its own cynical gains. Because if feminism means applauding 'anything a woman does' — even hurting other women — then it means nothing."

    All of these objections stem from the unreasoning dogmatic attitude that females who do not embrace unworkable Leftist orthodoxy are not real women at all.

    You know what, you can keep the Feminist mantle. Given its history, it is nothing a conservative should embrace -- and I strongly discourage any conservative woman from calling themselves feminists.

    Instead, they should talk of empowerment, universal principles, freedom and equality under the law -- things that the Left expressly abhors.

  • Terrorists, Soldiers – and Those In Between

    05/16/2018 4:28:50 PM PDT · 1 of 1
    walford
    Given the renewed debate on what defines terror, offered is an essay written for an IR class on the subject.
  • Gender and Sex: They Are NOT Interchangeable - Don't Allow Leftists to Define Terms

  • Gender and Sex: They Are NOT Interchangeable - Don't Allow Leftists to Define Terms

    05/08/2018 12:37:22 PM PDT · 1 of 28
    walford
    https://www.ef.edu/english-resources/english-grammar/noun-gender/
  • America Needs a New Iran Deal

    05/03/2018 9:50:43 AM PDT · 1 of 4
    walford
    The deal is this: Stop building nuclear weapons. Stop exporting Islamic terrorism. Stop funding/equipping Hezbollah. Otherwise, we seize your airspace and mine your harbors. Anything that crosses the border in or out will be blown away. You will be under siege until the regime falls.
  • At $75,560, housing a prisoner in California now costs more than a year at Harvard

    05/02/2018 2:42:37 PM PDT · 21 of 37
    walford to Extremely Extreme Extremist; Osage Orange

    “Your post was much better than the article”


    Thanks. Apparently some of us cannot grasp satire/lampooning, however.

  • At $75,560, housing a prisoner in California now costs more than a year at Harvard

    05/02/2018 2:33:01 PM PDT · 15 of 37
    walford to Osage Orange

    “...o rapists and robbers...and killer’s are all victims.”


    According to the Hard Left, that is correct. When a citizen is robbed, raped or murdered — especially by one born into a Designated Victim group — they are supposed to be passive. If the intended target fights back, there will be riots. Al Sharpton might show up.

    We are supposed to respond to violent crime by wringing our hands at what society must have done to make the perpetrator do something so desperate. The government can then search for “root causes” and find “positive alternatives” to committing violent crime.

    Creates a lot of jobs for social workers and lawyers. Shooting the perpetrator messes all of that up.