Legalizing Pedophilia II

Legalizing Pedophilia II

 

Look, they’ve succeeded in convincing many Americans that homosexuality is merely a variation on sexual norms and that men marrying men and women marrying women is no longer aberrational, so can inter-generational sex, a euphemism for pedophilia, be far behind in public acceptance?

Michael Savage, born Michael Alan Weiner, a fellow Bronx boy my age, thinks so and as much as I consider him a repulsive exemplar of conservatism, I think I have to agree.

This past Monday, July 7, I happened to catch a portion of Savage’s radio talk show on WABC770 when he devoted his three hours to pedophilia, its practitioners, and its advocates.  I only heard about 30 minutes but what he said was startling, to say the least, especially his allegation that academic elites were in the forefront of that advocacy.

Savage referred to a Cambridge University conference last July convened to examine the new normality of pedophilia. Expecting to find that Savage was engaging in his typical sensationalism, I conducted a little research into his claims and discovered he wasn’t exaggerating at all.

The conference discussed such topics as “Liberating the paedophile: a discursive analysis” and “Danger and difference: the stakes of hebephilia [adult sexual interest in pubescent individuals approximately 11-14 years old].”

During classic blame-the-victim/absolve-the-victimizer addresses, the academics lined up to promulgate their deepest convictions regarding the essential randiness of children and the fundamental innocence of adult sexual predators:

---Prof. Ken Plummer (University of Essex) preached: “Pedophiles are told they are the seducers and rapists of children; they know their experiences are often loving and tender ones. They are told that children are pure and innocent, devoid of sexuality; they know both from their own experiences of childhood and from the children they meet that this is not the case.”

—Prof. Philip Tromovitch (Doshisha University in Japan) shared his wisdom that the “majority of men are probably pedophiles and hebephiles” and that “pedophilic interest is normal and natural in human males”.

—Prof. Ray Blanchard (University of Toronto) seconded Tromovitch and added his own inconsequential factoid, that the American Psychiatric Association agrees that “the sexual preference for early pubertal children is normal.”

I don’t know whether Profs. Plummer, Tromovitch, Blanchard or any of their fellow university elitists actually fessed up to being child  molestors or cited the fact the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association only removed homosexuality from their listing of sexual perversions under pressure from threatening homosexual groups but somehow I doubt it.

I also don’t doubt the Cambridge conference was the exception rather than the rule in the ongoing effort to normalize and justify both homosexuality and pedophilia, as evidenced by recent revelations concerning merry, ol’ England.

Now, I’m admittedly no fan of the Brits chiefly because of their centuries-long, brutal occupation of Ireland but also due to their gleeful adoption of national and personal moral and political degradation over the past few decades. 

When I came across an article published in the UK’s Daily Telegraph, I lost any vague doubts as to how deeply into degradation the formerly Great Britain has fallen. . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=38001.)

The Death of America's Borders

The Death of America's Borders

 

In June, Chicago’s prestigious Newberry Library’s Dr. William Scholl Center for American History and Culture hosted a four-week  meeting billed as “Bridging National Borders in North America,” a “National Endowment for the Humanities Summer Seminar for College and University Faculty.”

The confab dealt with “the process of border-making” and “how nation-states claiming exclusive territorial sovereignty re-drew the continent’s map, the intersection and sometimes collision of these efforts with other ways of organizing space and people, the social and political consequences of the enforcement of national territoriality, how diverse peoples challenge national borders, or use or alter them for their own purposes, and, how does consideration of these topics recast our understanding of the national and intertwined histories of Mexico, the United States, and Canada.”

Disclaimer: Though that’s all patently, pretentiously drivel, I admit I wasn’t in attendance to hear it.  Nevertheless, I’m convinced it was simply more academia bullsh*t intended to rationalize with implausible reasoning the national and humanitarian debacle now going on down in America’s Southwest.

Considering the typically liberal-leftist nature of such get-togethers of America’s educational elite and of the National Endowment for the Humanities, a so-called “independent” agency of the United States government totally dependent on federal largesse for its existence, my presence was hardly necessary in order to know that a primary focus of their seminar had to have been the ongoing, unprecedented influx through our southwest border of hundreds of thousands of now-designated “undocumented immigrants.”

The extent of those violations of our laws, of our national sovereignty, of the brazen criminality being committed by the constitutionally-contemptuous constitutional scholar, Barack Hussein Obama, and his administration have been fully documented even if his captive mainstream media feigns obliviousness of the damage they have been inflicting on our country by their obsequious genuflections to a proven inept and un-American president.

I would refer readers to the rare exception to lib-left dominance of the news media, TheDrudgeReport.com, for objective articles covering what  America’s former community organizer, mostly-absent Illinois state senator, and overachieving United States senator Barack Hussein Obama has done to America during his five+ year tenure.

Drudge has provided verifiable links to stories dealing with everything from protests against the massive alien intrusions to pro-amnesty supporters burning the American flag to our commander-in-chief’s opting to fund raise instead of actually visiting border invasion sites to our government threatening journalists and border patrol agents should they dare report the truth concerning the unprecedented mess.

While adequately linking to those articles, Drudge fails to devote sufficient attention to the three most serious implications of our southwestern disaster: disease, destabilization, and terrorism. . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=37923.)

Dinesh D'Souza Imagines a World Without America

Dinesh D'Souza Imagines a World Without America

 

The liberal-leftist reviews are in on Dinesh D’Souza’s political documentary, “America: Imagine a World Without Her” and, as expected, they’re not good.  TheWrap.com and John Rocchi were typical of the knee jerk reactions from the same people who got our great country into the sickening mess it is today.

Eager to pan D’Souza and his 103 minute film, The Wrap immediately got to its biased point in the title, “‘America’ Review: Another Dinesh D’Souza Doc That’s Easy to Mock” and reviewer Rocchi’s opening sentence, ”The deceptive evidence and straw-man arguments of this conservative ‘filmmaker’ would go down easier if the actual filmmaking wasn’t so inept,” only served to reinforce the venom in that malicious title.

Foolish me!  I thought film critics exercised at least a modicum of objectivity!

Reeking with sarcasm, Rocchi ripped not only D’Souza and “America” but also the writer-director-producer’s 2012 smash success, “2016: Obama’s America” which was widely acclaimed by audiences, if not by critics, and became the second most successful political documentary in American film history.

Rocchi writes, ”Author, filmmaker, and convicted felon Dinesh D’Souza returns to movies with ‘America,’ based on his best-seller of the same title, a follow-up to the screechy, slapdash “2016: Obama’s America.”  “America” is D’Sousa [sic] and co-director John Sullivan’s love letter to America–or rather, to their version of America, where superior conservative ideas and narratives America’s divinely-provided greatness are constantly under attack from what he calls a liberal ‘narrative of shame’ about this country.” 

Having just seen D’Souza’s new movie, I would have to agree with Rocchi that “America” is indeed tantamount to a “love letter” to D’Souza’s adopted nation and that it does display “superior conservative ideas and narratives” as well as the idea that our “divinely-provided greatness are constantly under attack” by a liberal ‘narrative of shame’ about this country.”

However, unlike Rocchi, I mean those comments sincerely and believe those who fail to concur are as guilty of ignorance as they are guilty of being traitorous ingrates who prefer Barack Hussein Obama’s shamefully negative and atheistic views of America to D’Souza’s hopeful and loving documentary. 

D’Souza sees our history through the prism of what America has accomplished and the immense benefits we have contributed to the world rather than focusing on the supposed shame and guilt we should feel for what we have accomplished and contributed.

That said, “America: Imagine a World Without Her” lacks the impact of “2016: Obama’s America” precisely because it is far too gentle toward the “liberal ‘narrative of shame” . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=37974.)

The Racism of "Opie and Anthony's" Anthony Cumia

The Racism of "Opie and Anthony's" Anthony Cumia

 

Be careful who you let assault you! 

Fifty-three year old Anthony Cumia, co-host with Gregg “Opie” Hughes of SiriusXM’s popular “Opie and Anthony” show, wasn’t at all careful when he chose the wrong attacker to beat on him last week in Times Square and lost his DJ job as a result. 

Cumia alleges he was merely taking photos last Tuesday when an unidentified African-American woman was accidentally snapped in one picture and objected since she didn’t want her photo taken.  As any reasonable black person would do nowadays, the woman then punched Cumia in his face, called him a “white motherf—er.” and, for good measure, landed five additional shots which were followed by other blacks giving him “sh*t!”

Or so he later contended.

Cumia says he managed to fend off the blows for the most part and, since there were no NYPD cops around, as usual in New York City, he failed to report the unprovoked incident, which failure may have been his undoing.

In any event, assuming the assault happened at all, Cumia should have known that, in the current Age of Obama , African-Americans are tacitly permitted to punch, maim, sometimes even kill whites with few repercussions.

(Witness the so-called epidemic of blacks supposedly playing their favorite outdoor sport of cold-cocking defenseless white people into unconsciousness which, if reported at all, are rarely if ever described by the president’s mainstream media as hate crimes meaning, obviously, that they probably never happened.)

Apparently ignorant of the prevailing rules and understandings during the Age of Obama and ignorant of the reality that white folk had damned well better have at least a dozen witnesses–preferably including a priest, a nun, or a rabbi– before they make outlandish charges against innocent black folk, . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=37940.)  

Ben Franklin, Tom Paine and the Fourth Of July

Ben Franklin, Tom Paine and the Fourth of July

 

On this, America’s 238th birthday, Old Ben Franklin’s famous observation that “Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one” is worth remembering today as are the words of Thomas Paine: “Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it” even though they are almost totally antithetical sentiments.

Franklin, the oldest member of the Continental Congress to sign the Declaration of Independence who is considered among the most brilliant of our Founding Fathers and Paine, the English-American author of the pamphlet “Common Sense” without which “the sword of Washington would have been raised in vain” (John Adams) were two of our nation’s greatest patriots yet they had much different views on precisely what the newly-born United States of America was and should become.

Franklin, along with Thomas Jefferson, was one of our greatest early diplomats despite his engagements in a rather randy sex life and Paine who later would viciously criticize Washington for reasons unrelated to the American Revolution and ended life as a bitter, old man is not regarded kindly by many liberal-leftists today.

Franklin has gained favor among that tribe in recent years primarily because of the above quotation . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=37929.)

Is Obama Really the Worst President in America's History?

Is Obama Really the Worst President in America's History?

 

When the average  man (or woman) in the street is asked to judge the relative success or failure of America’s forty-four presidents, the results are always influenced by any number of factors, including personal biases, historical knowledge and, yes, ignorance. 

For example, just try asking someone what they thought of Martin VanBuren or James K. Polk or Rutherford B. Hayes and see what responses you get.

More recently, since the end World War II, America has elected twelve Presidents: Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II and Obama, a much more wieldy number to evaluate but even then there are wide disparities of opinion.

For low-information voters and liberal-leftists, an overlapping category, GOP Presidents George W. Bush or Richard M. Nixon or Ronald W. Reagan usually rank far and away as the worst presidents in our history and Presidents William J. Clinton or John F. Kennedy or FDR are deemed to be the best.

However, a new Quinnipiac University nationwide, telephone survey of 1,446 registered voters conducted June 24-July 2 (margin of error: +/- 2.6%) showed remarkable changes over the past six years with Reagan considered the best (35%) while the current White House occupant, Barack Hussein Obama, finished just ahead of George W. Bush. 

Also, forty-five percent actually said that America would be better off had Mitt Romney won the last election and a whopping . . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=37912.)

Independence Day and Dinesh D'Souza

Independence Day and Dinesh D'Souza

 

For the non-Americans, un-Americans, and anti-Americans out there, a reminder: July 4, 2014 (Friday) marks the 238th anniversary of America’s Independence Day commemorating the adoption of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776 when 56 courageous men announced to the world that they rejected the onerous rule of Great Britain. 

They declared England’s colonies to be free and independent from mad King George III, writing, “with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”

Thomas Jefferson’s opening words in that declaration, ”We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” have inspired countless others to separate themselves from oppressive foreign powers.

Americans have been blessed, spared the worst of rebellious separatists in our midst like the Nation of Islam as well as the incredible devastation inflicted on Europe during two world wars.  That devastation accounts for Europeans’ current, foolish reliance on the Third-World dominated United Nations to save and protect them from future, inevitable, conflicts, a foolishness to which America’s president subscribes.

Unlike many Americans born on our soil, another courageous and patriotic man, Dinesh D’Souza, has also effectively pledged all he holds dear to his adopted country. 

The scholarly D’Souza fully appreciates and understands our independence and history and was persecuted by the Obama administration with a baseless law suit for his awareness–and for his literary and film efforts to share what he knows with the rest of America.

A Christian native of Mumbai, India, D’Souza emigrated here as an exchange student in 1978 and since then has become a prolific,  conservative writer and filmmaker.  Virtually all his writings and movies are at variance with the political and social philosophies of America’s liberal-leftists, notably with President Barack Hussein Obama, a fact that has gained him the vengeful enmity of Obamians.

D’Souza correctly believes his first political documentary, “2016: Obama’s America,” was largely ignored by the Obamians in the hopes that it would be ignored by moviegoers as well.

As he told WND.com, “You would almost not know ’2016′ existed if you just followed the leftist press and their Internet blogs.  It was only when the pied piper Obama came out yelling that everybody else on the left immediately jumped into line.” 

To the chagrin of the president, “2016″ turned out to be the second most popular political documentary in history and earned a robust $33 million at the box office, the highest grossing conservative political film ever produced in the United States.

“2016,” closely based on D’Souza’s best-selling 2010 book The Roots of Obama’s Rage, vividly substantiates the theory that Obama’s contempt for the nation he governs is rooted in his Marxist father’s hatred of colonialism and in a quest to achieve his dad’s dream of ending the power and authority of the imperialist Western world.

The film and book clearly got the panties of all president’s men and women in a tight wad but, if they bugged the president and his minions with all that ugly truth, D’Souza’s latest film should rock them to their rotten cores. . . (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=37883.)