Trump Derangement Syndrome

Carlson recounted the event on Twitter last Sunday, writing:

Toward the end of the meal, my 19-year-old daughter went to the bathroom with a friend. On their way back through the bar, a middle aged man [Juan Manuel Granados] stopped my daughter and asked if she was sitting with Tucker Carlson,” Carlson wrote. “She answered, ‘That’s my dad,’ and pointed to me. The man responded, “Are you Tucker’s whore?” He then called her a “f***ing c**t.”

My daughter returned to the table in tears. … My son, who is also a student, went into the bar to confront the man. I followed. my son asked the man if he’d called his sister a “whore” and a “c**t.” The man admitted he had, and again [became] profane. … The club spent more than three weeks investigating the incident. Last week, they revoked the man’s membership and threw him out of the club.”

[2 cents: so a woman sitting at a table with Carlson makes her*********?]


The middle-aged individual is WAS on the board of directors of The Women’s Initiative, supposedly a women’s mental health group. The mission statement: THE MISSION OF THE WOMEN’S INITIATIVE IS TO PROVIDE WOMEN WITH EFFECTIVE COUNSELING, SOCIAL SUPPORT AND EDUCATION SO THEY CAN TRANSFORM LIFE CHALLENGES INTO POSITIVE CHANGE AND GROWTH.
I checked the website today, looking at the board of directors and I do not see the individual listed any longer.

Utilitarianism and Politics

From Sen. Warner: Potential Policy Proposals for Regulation of Social Media and Technology Firms

The 23 page long white paper is based on the premise of the devastating impact of Russia on the 2016 election (gotta keep the lie/story/narrative) going is well summarized here at Reason.

Allow me to mention a point of his paper/reasoning: “Make platforms liable for state-law torts (defamation, false light, public disclosure of private facts) for failure to take down deep fake or other manipulated audio/video content.” May I ask, who determines fake? Well of course the “truth researchers” hired by the organization either out rightly or contracted. What will they use the left version of the bible of course, Snopes and the Southern Poverty Law Center of course. It is already occurring. The truth is deemed fake and the fake/lie is deemed truth. The organizations who are trying to share the truth are given “strikes”, “time out” and eventually de-platformed which is the IT/internet version of capital punishment.

The link I created above to the Southern Poverty Law Center will take you to the “hate map”. Do yourself and our country a favor and look over the list of organizations identified as hate groups. You will probably be surprised. (if you know how to import data, use the excel/csv export for a much faster way to scan the 950+ on the list). Let me mention a few,
Here is “anti-immigrant” which btw uses false-labeling (see below):

The left is aggressively doing all that they can, legal and illegal, constitutional and unconstitutional to prevent TRUTH being accessible to anyone who is looking or stumbles across it. Truth of course in reference to the LIES of not only the DNC but that of the radicalized liberal propaganda industrial complex, the MSM.

Michelle Malkin commented back in April 2018, “Media Matters has been at the forefront of the speech squelchers, who are highly organized, incredibly disciplined and obviously deeply funded, not only by George Soros but by a number of left-wing foundations.”

In the article Seven Techniques Liberals Use to Silence Conservatives Mr. Hawkins identified the following: “libspaining”, violence, de-platforming, PC/safe spaces/microaggressions, liberal fakes, false labeling and the ventriloquist dummy. And may I add, doxxing.

De-platforming is the most devastating, that is, if congress, VP Pence & President Trump continue to allow these unconstitutional activities to occur.  The left is using a combination of de-platforming and then RADICALIZED LIBERAL ACTIVISTS in the tech industry to attack conservative organizations via server attacks & aggressive pressure put on companies who are providing crucial IT services to cease providing the services which the company is under financial and legal contract to perform.

So why the title Utilitarianism and Politics? Simply, the radicalized liberal (which is becoming a redundant expression!) seems to pursue “the ends justifies the means”. It would seem that one can lie, engage in unconstitutional activity, practice violence and other means that are not part of a healthy vibrant society in order to get their way; since they are sure that their way is the right way. Mind, if a conservative tries to engage in peaceful discussion the seven techniques go into play. For example, if one is known to be an effective communicator of conservative principles then the left must immediately engage in any activity possible so as to remove any platform/location that the conservative would be invited or allowed to use.

Please go here to see the maintained list of substantiated acts of harassment & violence against supporters of President Trump by the left.

 

Letter to Legal Department of Microsoft

Hello, I am writing because I noticed a phrase in your soon to be official Code of Conduct that I believe needs to be properly defined.

vii. Don’t engage in activity that is harmful to you, the Services, or others (e.g., transmitting viruses, stalking, posting terrorist content, communicating hate speech, or advocating violence against others)…
b. Enforcement. If you violate these Terms, we may stop providing Services to you or we may close your Microsoft account. We may also block delivery of a communication (like email, file sharing or instant message) to or from the Services in an effort to enforce these Terms or we may remove or refuse to publish Your Content for any reason. When investigating alleged violations of these Terms, Microsoft reserves the right to review Your Content in order to resolve the issue. However, we cannot monitor the entire Services and make no attempt to do so.

 

My question is simple, what do you/Microsoft define as “hate speech”?

 

Such a vague reference, especially in this politically charged environment, is “scary”.

 

Regards,
Mailing 4/12/18