Tag: self-righteous liberals

Lawsuit Challenges Anti-White Teachers’ Contract

Posted By: leeduigonPosted On:

Scenes from the frontlines of the Minneapolis teachers ...

“The Heart of the Community”… God forbid

Well, that didn’t take long, did it? Minneapolis signs a flagrantly racist teachers’ contract–white teachers fired first, re-hired last, “Educators of Color” get all the breaks–and now it’s going to court (https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/lawsuit-filed-minneapolis-teachers-union-contract-stipulating-white-teachers-laid-off-first/).

Why did the school board sign that contract? Because the “teachers” went on strike and wouldn’t come back to work unless the board caved in to their demands. Someday some school district ought to just let the teachers strike and be damned.

Now, if this policy is not boisterously, overtly, in-your-face racist, then what is? If the same thing were done in favor of white teachers, the libs and noozies would be screaming bloody murder and calling for prosecutions. But “Educators Of Color” have to be coddled and protected, don’tcha know.

Why? Well obviously to punish Whitey for things done by other people in the past. And to make white liberals feel righteous. Many people have to pay so that libs can look in a mirror and smirk.

Quick question: Do I still get fired first and re-hired last if I identify as an Educator Of Color? And if they refuse to Affirm my identity, that makes them Haters–right? And I get several million dollars–right? (What? You’ve hard all this before?)

This is probably on its way to the Supreme Court.

Dems: Color, not Content, is What Matters

Posted By: leeduigonPosted On:

See the source image

Do we honestly care about the skin color of whoever produced a cat video?

What kind of ninny can only enjoy a Youtube video if its creator has the right skin color, never mind the content of the video?

A Democrat, of course.

Democrat Congresswomen Sheila Jackson Lee and Karen Bass put the heat on a Google honcho recently–Google owns Youtube–for not taking steps to “promote creators of color” to achieve more “diversity.” Said Ms. Lee, Youtube has “not enough individuals of diversity” (https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/12/11/google-ceo/). Whatever that means.

So is it okay to produce boring, sloppy videos, as long as the producers are “individuals of diversity”? Sort of like, it’s okay if your rowboat leaks, as long as it was built by someone of the desired pigmentation? I mean, we watch a cat video because we want to watch a cat video–why should it matter who produced it?

One gets the impression that liberals have devoted themselves to crushing all the joy out of life–because that’s the only kind of joy they know. Makes ’em feel righteous.

Anyone, anywhere, who votes for any Democrat, ever, needs his head examined.

National Geographic’s Orgy of Guilt

Posted By: leeduigonPosted On:

See the source image

I dunno, it looks pretty exotic to me…

Sometimes you could just beat your head against the wall…

Nothing gets a leftid’s rocks off like loudly, publicly confessing all kinds of guilt and singing a freakin’ opera over it. In this way liberalism parodies some of the more exotic forms of religion. Or maybe a group therapy session that’s gotten out of hand.

The latest entry in the self-flagellation derby is National Geographic, a famous magazine first published in 1888, whose editor now confesses, “For decades, our coverage was racist” (http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/national-geographic-acknowledges-past-racist-coverage-53696173). She discovered this traumatic fact after an “investigation” (oh, please) by a collidge prefesser. Now she can’t say enough about her magazine’s guilt.

In fact, next month they’re going to public a Full Apology for Our Dastardly Racism issue.

Laments the editor, “People of color were not often surrounded [in our depiction of them] by technologies of automobiles, airplanes or trains or factories.” It couldn’t possibly be, could it, that very few people in the Congo or central New Guinea in, say, the early 1950s, actually had a lot of cars, planes, or trains? But sez the University of Virginia prefesser who done the *Investigation*, all them racists at NG portrayed the inhabitants of such places as “exotics, famously and frequently unclothed, happy hunter, noble savages–every type of cliche.” Boo. Hiss.

Dude, it’s “corporate headhunters” who wear the three-piece suits. Not the real headhunters.

A question springs to mind: does anyone in any of those faraway places care what National Geographic said about them in 1925?

Of course not. This is all about self-righteous liberals proclaiming how good they are now by carrying on and on about how bad they used to be. It’s all about them. Always. And again we’ve got the Diversity crowd trying to pretend there’s no such thing, blah-blah.

Growing up, it was fun to page through National Geographic and see photos of all sorts of exotic places. It gave me the idea that the world was a wide and wonderful place, full of infinite variety.

Maybe they’ll apologize for that, too. Liberal windbags.