Monday, November 30, 2015

A.F. Branco - ISIS & Climate Change

Finally after a (too) long holiday break, A.F. Branco over at Legal Insurrection has posted another political cartoon:

Hah, that'll show them!  All Obama needs to do now is get them some jobs and they won't know what hit them!

Original post at Legal Insurrection: Branco Cartoon - This Time I Mean It

View other Branco cartoons I've posted this month here:

A.F. Branco - Jackass 

Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Pro-lifers, you don't owe the Left anything

Trigger Warning:
Frothy liberal rage incoming
The Left has a simple motto, articulated years ago by Chicago mayor Rahm Emmanuel.  Never let a crisis go to waste.  So when a crazy son of a bitch grabbed a gun and killed 3 people near a Planned Parenthood location in Colorado Springs on Friday, they wasted no time trying to pin it on all pro-lifers and right-wingers.  Hell Planned Parenthood themselves began using the incident as a fundraising tool just a few hours after the shooting was resolved.  The media got in on the act, too, with Chuck Todd doing his damndest to politicize the hell out of the Planned Parenthood location shooting.

Why is the Left trying to tie the Planned Parenthood shooting around the necks of every pro lifer?  Because alleged gunman Robert Lewis Dear apparently told investigators "no more baby parts."  Of course Dear made this statement in the midst of some disjointed ramblings.  In fact, law enforcement officials weren't even sure that his statement was enough to establish a motive.  Really nothing seems to be clear with this guy.  This is a man who, according to people who knew him, was a few cans shy of a six pack.  Robert Lewis Dear was actually registered to vote as a woman, and lived in a Unabomber-style shack in the woods.  The only thing we know for sure about this guy is he is a profoundly disturbed individual.

That's not going to stop the Left, though.  They will continue to demonize pro-life organizations and individuals over the coming days and weeks.  "How can you be pro life and against abortion, and not condemn this violence," they'll shriek, as if the two opinions are mutually exclusive.  Leftists everywhere will demand that you defend your pro life beliefs, especially in light of the heinous Planned Parenthood shooting.

I have three words of advice for all of you out there: don't do it.

The argument that Robert Lewis Dear represents all pro life organizations is ludicrous and stupid.  Pro life organizations definitely do not like Planned Parenthood.  In fact, I think it's safe to say that pro-lifers hate Planned Parenthood.  Very few of them would be unhappy if the entire Planned Parenthood operation went bankrupt and had to close its doors.  Pro lifers, however, are not picking up guns and shooting up Planned Parenthood clinics.  The most heated rhetoric pro life organizations have directed towards Planned Parenthood is to call for Congress to defund them.  Robert Lewis Dear does not represent the pro life movement.

So what should be the response to the Left's demands that you defend your pro-life beliefs?  Simply put, nothing.  Don't even bother to engage the conversation.  Leftists have already made up their minds that the entire pro-life movement is guilty as hell.  Anything that you say in your defense will be twisted and spun around to attack you again.  They will put words in your mouth.  The leftist will wail, gnash his teeth, and pull his hair.  Don't take his argument seriously, and don't engage him.  There's an old saying that you can't fix stupid, and you sure as hell can't argue with it.  Any attempts to do so will just result in endless frustration on your part.

Robert Lewis Dear does not represent the pro life movement.  Robert Lewis Dear represents absolute bat-shit insanity.  Be secure in that knowledge, and you'll be able to laugh in the face of the leftist when he attempts to link you to this monster.

 Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Sunday, November 29, 2015

Hey, Liberals, Answer This One Question...

Trigger Warning:
Get ready to put those thinking caps on!
Hey guys guess what?  We're all racist!  Well 53% of us at least.  "Oh, Jesus, what now?" I hear you groan in exasperation.  That 53% is the number of Americans who don't want the government bringing in un-vetted refugees from Syria.  That's according to a Bloomberg poll from last week.

Why is that, I wonder?  Could it be because several of the terrorists involved in the Paris attacks entered the country by pretending to be Syrian refugees?  Or is it the fact that 13% of Syrian refugees that were polled have a favorable view of ISIS?  Maybe it's the fact that ISIS has said it will use the Syrian refugee crisis to infiltrate the West.

The fact that we have no ability to adequately vet the Syrian refugees entering our country might also have something to do with the Bloomberg poll.  Even DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson and FBI Director James Comey have admitted that vetting Syrian refugees will be difficult at best.

Nope, Americans don't want Syrian refugees because we're horrible, xenophobic, racist people.  Of course liberals in the government and the media are absolutely fed up with all us unenlightened rubes.  Obama used his Thanksgiving address to shame Americans who don't want any Syrian refugees, and compared the refugees to the Pilgrims on the Mayflower.

The Washington Post ran an editorial arguing that Americans can't deny the plight of Syrian refugees, and took the GOP presidential candidates to task:
IN THE face of the horror in Paris — not to mention Beirut and Baghdad — an instinctual reaction is to attempt to close the United States to the world and, in effect, ignore the plight of people America might help. At best, this reaction is understandable but self-defeating. From the mouths of Republican presidential candidates, it has become downright ugly.
The Lost Angeles Times echoed the same sentiments in another editorial:
It's preposterous that a serious contender for the presidency of the U.S. would bar war refugee status based on someone's religion. And the suggestion by GOP candidate Ben Carson that the U.S. bar all Syrian refugees for fear that a "sleeper" terrorist might slip in is an emotional, and ill-conceived, overreaction, as are pledges by several Republican governors to resist efforts to resettle refugees in their states.
Rolling Stone didn't mince any words, flat out stating that people who didn't want Syrian refugees were racist, Nazi trolls:
Those were the open extremists, of course, the ones who put hashtags like #WhiteGenocide in their Twitter bios; I saw at least one Hitler photo as an avatar. But whether they were open with their Nazi sympathies or more subtle, one thing was clear: The white-rights crowd does not want Syrian refugees – refugees who are fleeing the very kind of terrorism we saw in Paris last week – to be allowed into the United States. They expressed, in no uncertain terms, that they oppose allowing foreign – and brown! – refugees to come to Europe and America, and they're using the fear of terrorism in the wake of the Paris attacks to spread their racist message.
  I do have a question for all of these liberals, though.  Actually two questions.  The first question is, knowing what we know, and seeing the death and destruction wrought in Paris, how is it racist to make sure we protect our citizens first?  The second question, if we do let in unfettered numbers of Syrian refugees and there is a terror attack perpetrated by one or more of them, who takes the blame for it?

I'd be interested in hearing the answers.
 Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Saturday, November 28, 2015

Trig Palin was shamed. Where was the media?

Trigger Warning:
You'll rage against the machine.
Oh my, it seems Donald Trump has once again offended, well, everyone.  Today he's in trouble for a campaign event Tuesday night where he seemed to mock a disabled reporter.  Let's take a look at the video:
Full disclosure, I chuckled a little bit at the joke.  Of course I've been accused of being a sick weirdo by many people.

You know who isn't laughing?  The Mainstream Media, and pretty much everyone on the left.  They are absolutely fit to be tied that the Donald would dare to criticize someone's physical appearance.  The New York Times issued a statement rebuking Donald Trump.  Frances Ryan, a disabled journalist over at the Guardian, penned an op-ed both decrying Trump and lamenting how bad treatment of the disabled has become common place.  CBS This Morning had a report on the whole incident:
Here's the thing, though.  I remember the 2008 election when an accomplished, yet unpolished governor from Alaska agreed to be John McCain's running mate.  This governor, Sarah Palin, has a son with Down Syndrome named Trig.  This child has been subject to merciless attacks on his disability simply because his mother is hated by the Left.  Andrew Sullivan, you may recall, questioned whether Trig was actually Palin's son.  Liberal website Wonkette published a particularly vile attack on Trig, and retracted it only when public outcry forced them to.  

And who could forget Louis C.K.'s disgusting comments:

Original video link here.

Louis C.K.'s show, Louie, is still going strong, by the way, and has been picked up for a sixth season.

Here's Bill Maher using Trig to score a dig at Fox News:

Original video link here.

Bill Maher, of course, is still just as strong as ever on his HBO show Real Time with Bill Maher.

Now I will give credit where credit is due.  I've taken the piss out of Salon before, but they did run a pretty exhaustive piece debunking Trig trutherism.

So now everyone's pissed off at Trump because he made fun of a disabled reporter.  I'd be very interested in knowing what these people thought about the whole Trig situation...

 Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Another Day, Another Star Wars: Episode 7 Trailer

Trigger Warning:
Only 21 days left!
Following on the heels of the last Episode 7 movie trailer, Disney has seen fit to give us yet another bit of Star Wars goodness.  This time we get to see more of the film's Big Bad Guy, Kylo Ren.  I have to say, it's freaking awesome, but then again I've said that about pretty much every Star Wars trailer.  Here it is:
I gotta say, Episode 7 is looking pretty bad ass.  I'm very excited for this movie, and I'm even more excited that Disney is planning to release one Star Wars movie per year until the end of time.  If anyone can breathe new life into an old franchise, it's Mickey Mouse.

Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Thursday, November 26, 2015

Happy Thanksgiving!

Trigger Warning:
All turkeys may want to leave now...
 It's that magical time of year again.  That time where we all gather around the table with friends and family.  It's time to reflect on everything that we're thankful for.  We laugh, we cry, we share memories, and our hopes and dreams for the future.  Once we've gotten all of that out of the way, we stuff ourselves to bursting, crawl onto the couch, and pass out.

From myself, and all of us here at Trigger Warning (so...just me), I hope everyone has a happy and safe Thanksgiving.  Don't eat too much, though, Black Friday is just a few hours away!

And don't forget to save some turkey for me.
 Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Wednesday, November 25, 2015

Facebook Memories: The Media & Ferguson

Trigger Warning:
A blast from the past...
In case you missed it, yesterday Chicago police officer Jason Van Dyke was charged with first-degree murder in the shooting death of Laquan McDonald last year.  Last night Chicago PD released the dash cam video showing the incident and the death of McDonald.  Of course this touched off protests in the streets over the shooting death.  While we haven't seen violence to the extent we did in Ferguson, the Chicago PD is warning officers to be wary of gang violence.  There were also several arrests, and protests at times shut down various interstates throughout the city.

One year ago I wrote a Facebook post about the role of the media in the Ferguson case.  My main point was that the mainstream media as a whole breathlessly covered the protests because they wanted to advance a narrative.  I think that still holds true today, although the coverage of Chicago seems more calm than Ferguson.  Did the media actually learn their lesson?  I wouldn't bet on it.

Here is my Facebook post in its entirety:

So today Ferguson, MO is burning down around its citizens ears, and all I'm seeing across my feed are endless variations of "how/why did this happen?" It's a seemingly complex question, but it has a very simple answer. This would have happened with or without an indictment. The media desperately wanted this. Let me explain.

It's no secret that much of the mainstream media is dominated by, at best, people that are left of center politically (or crazy and incoherent like Al Sharpton). As a result, we get media coverage that is skewed to the left. Now many of these same left-leaning people have been taught that the US is a horrible, rotten, but above all, racist country. We were founded by a bunch of old white slave owners, and the country was built on the blood of the native people and the backs of black slaves. Not only that, but the <insert minority community here> are due reparations for the crimes committed against them. They've been taught this since college at least (and probably before).

Just look at how the Michael Brown shooting was reported. Immediately we were subjected to the narrative of the Gentle Giant (TM) walking home innocently down the street. A WHITE police officer accosted this young black child for no reason, and when the unarmed Gentle Giant ran, he was ruthlessly gunned down. To be sure we heard about how this little boy had just graduated high school. He was excited to be heading off to college in the fall, probably more excited than anyone had ever been in the history of the world. We saw the pictures of a (very) young Michael Brown having fun with his family. And yes, the media made very sure to let us know every chance they got that this was an UNARMED young black child that was gunned down in the prime of his life.

What we DIDN'T hear about was Officer Wilson's side of the story. We didn't hear about how this Gentle Giant had grabbed for Wilson's gun. We didn't hear about how, after having already been shot, the Gentle Giant charged the officer. We didn't hear about how this young man was likely high, and had robbed and assaulted a convenience store clerk just minutes before. We didn't hear about how Officer Wilson was injured in the fight. We didn't hear about this because it didn't fit the narrative.

There were protests after this incident. There would be protests no matter where something like this occurred. But with the peaceful protestors came the thugs, the agitators, and the demagogues. These people treated the Ferguson protests as an excuse to cause mayhem...and the media celebrated these people. They propped them up as revolutionaries. The thugs were crusaders fighting for justice for Michael Brown. Yes their methods were messy, but only because they were fighting a corrupt, racist justice system that served only to protect the white establishment. They were heroes, you see.

Need further proof? Look at the media coverage from last night leading up to the grand jury ruling. The media went from being objective reporters to active participants. In fact they were egging the rioters on. One CNN reporter referred to the possibility of no indictment as the grand jury's "Nuclear Option". Is it any wonder that the situation in Ferguson spiraled out of control the way it did?

The media wanted this. They wanted this more than they ever wanted anything.

 Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Tuesday, November 24, 2015

Mike Rowe Weighs in on #Mizzou

Trigger Warning:
It's gonna get dirty.
Yesterday that bastion of reason, hard worker (oops, sorry Melissa Harris-Perry, I know that offends you), and all around Good Guy Mike Rowe was asked by a fan to weigh in on the controversy surrounding the Mizzou protests.  The question posed by the fan was "any thoughts on the madness at Mizzou?  Is there any hope for the youth of today?"  Of course Mike Rowe's response was classically Mike Rowe-esque:
There’s always hope, and I’ll prove it in a moment. But first, let me agree - it's madness to demand free speech, even as we demand silence from those who say things we don’t agree with. This kind of hypocrisy is unique to phonies and bullies everywhere, and while it’s disturbing to see it unfold at colleges and universities, it’s not uncommon, and certainly not unprecedented. However, this business at Smith is worse than Mizzou, and worth talking about.
In a nutshell, students at Smith College are barring journalists from covering their activities unless said journalists first pledge their loyalty to “the cause.” The administration appears to be supportive.

Like you Fran, many people are wondering why anyone would pay $60,000 in annual tuition to an institution with so little regard for the First Amendment. Others have wondered aloud why we should tolerate this level of dissimulation in our institutions of higher learning. The answer is easy - because we must. This is the great paradox of our democracy. In order to honor the flag, we must be free to burn it. Likewise, the freedom to educate our kids the best way we can must be accompanied by the freedom to brainwash them in the worst way possible. But of course, that doesn’t mean we should all have to pay for the brainwashing in question. That’s gotta stop, pronto.
Is the Smith College situation worse than the situation at Mizzou?  It is true that the Smith protesters barred the media from their protests and demanded statements of solidarity as a condition of being able to cover it.  It is also true that the administration seemed to be okay with that.  Smith, however, is a private institution.  If they want to bar the media from their campus that's their prerogative.  Mizzou, by contrast, is a public institution.  The media should be allowed to report what goes on at a public institution without obstruction, and yet the same thing is happening at Mizzou.  Worse, in fact, because reporters covering the Mizzou protests have been threatened with physical violence, sometimes by professors.  Who could forget this paragon of progressive values calling for "muscle" to remove reporters from a "safe space:"
Personally I would argue that the Mizzou situation is worse based on this fact alone.  For the sake of argument, however, I think we can agree that both situations are equally bad.

Mike also makes the point that we have to tolerate this sort of situation, mainly because our interpretation of freedom of speech in the US says we must.  He states "in order to honor the flag, we must be free to burn it."  You know what?  He's absolutely right.  Our first amendment guarantees that everyone can say whatever they feel like in whatever kind of forum they want, regardless of how stupid or insane their speech is.  If we want to be free to tell the world how great our country is, we have to tolerate those who say how horrible we are.  Similarly, we have to tolerate the protesters calling our institutions of higher learning racist cesspools of oppression.  Of course that doesn't mean we have to agree with them.  It also doesn't mean we can't mock, deride, and in general laugh at their ridiculous demands.  After all, the antidote to bad speech is always more and better speech.

What we don't have to tolerate, however, is violence directed against those exercising their first amendment rights.  It would be unacceptable if a counter-protest went into Mizzou, Smith, Yale, or any other university and started knocking some sense into the heads of the protesters.  Such an incident would be rightly condemned by most everyone in media and government.  There should be similar condemnations from everyone when the protesters engage in violence against members of the media.  That there hasn't been should be a cause for great concern.

By the way, Mike's proof of hope?  A letter from the parents of Evan, a student who received a scholarship from the Mike Rowe Works Foundation to become a diesel technician.  The young man ended up getting a nice, cushy job in Savannah, GA.  

Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Monday, November 23, 2015

A.F. Branco - Spring Forward

Another Monday, another political cartoon from Legal Insurrection's A.F. Branco:
He either looks completely surprised or like a kid that got his hand caught in the cookie jar.  I can't decide.

Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Saturday, November 21, 2015

Social Justice Warrior "Teacher" Won't Let Boys Play

Trigger Warning:
Play time for me, but not for thee...
Imagine you're a teacher.  You're young, fresh out of college, and full of dreams of changing the world one student at a time.  Maybe you've watched Stand and Deliver a few too many times.  Regardless you're excited about being able to make a difference in your student's lives.

Eventually you start to notice that there are differences in the way your students play.  The girls tend to gravitate to girly things like playing house, while the boys love building things with the Legos.  Worse, the kids are resisting your attempts to get them to expand their horizons.  This presents a problem for you.  What's the only obvious solution?  Why ban the boys from playing with the Legos of course!  From Fox News:
Karen Keller, who teaches at Blakely Elementary School, has been trying to get girls more interested in science and math and noticed that during the 30-minute “free-choice” time at the end of the school day, the boys frequently played with Legos. The girls did not.  Keller decided to bar the boys from the building materials so girls would not be intimidated to play with them.
In an interview with the Bainbridge Island Review, Keller said, “I always tell the boys, ‘you’re going to have a turn- and I’m like, ‘yeah, when hell freezes over’ in my head. I tell them, ‘You’ll have a turn’ because I don’t want them to feel bad.”
Keller supposedly cited some studies supporting her decision, and went to the Bainbridge School Foundation to get help purchasing brand-spanking-new Lego sets for her classroom.  Of course she didn't exactly tell them what she'd be doing with the new Legos:
She asked for funding to purchase LEGO Education Community Starter Kits for three Blakely classrooms, writing that “while it’s not necessary to board up the playhouse and adopt the babies out, concrete steps can be taken to ameliorate the gender gap in the kindergarten and present engaging ways to develop girls’ spatial skills.”
What she didn’t tell BSF, however, was that the boys wouldn’t get to play with the new 1,907-piece sets.
Parents were rightly pissed as hell when they heard what Keller had been doing.  Who wouldn't be?  Whether or not she can cite studies that back her up (and I'd question the legitimacy of these studies) what the hell kind of message is she sending to the boys in her class?  Keller's essentially telling them that they don't matter.  In the grand scheme of things the girls are more important than the boys are.  They don't need any encouragement, they need to step out of the way and let the girls have their turn.  How is that going to affect their self-esteem?

The really horrible thing about all of this is that it's coming from a freaking TEACHER.  Teachers are, aside from parents, probably the most important adults in a child's life.  Kids always remember their teachers, the good ones especially.  A teacher has the chance to make a profound difference in a child's life.  Teachers are supposed to be the ones who nurture and encourage all of their students.  Good teachers instill a lifelong love of learning in the kids they teach.  Years later kids will often come back to their favorite teachers, sometimes with kids of their own, and tell the teacher just how special they really were to them.

What Keller has done is the complete, exact opposite of this.  Instead of lifting up all of her students, she singled out only a few of them.  Keller told her students that only some of them are worth encouraging.  Only some of them actually matter in the grand scheme of things.  What's even worse is she seems to get some perverse sort of glee from what she's done.  Keller has completely abused the sacred trust that parents and kids place in their teachers.  And for what?  To bring about a change that SHE thinks needs to happen out of a misguided sense of social justice.

Karen Keller is not a teacher at Blakely Elementary School.  Karen Keller is a playground bully who doesn't deserve the respect due a proper teacher.

  Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Friday, November 20, 2015

Moar Star Wars Porn!

Trigger Warning:
Hah! Made you look!
Some people are counting down to Christmas.  The rest of us are counting down until the release of Star Wars Episode 7: The Force Awakens.  The powers that be have seen fit to drop a brand-new 30 second TV spot which has, well, pretty much everything.

One of the central heroes?  Check

Badass stormtrooper?  Check

Copious amounts of lightsaber play?  Check

Millennium Falcon?  Check

Han and Chewy?  Big fat fucking check

I don't want to oversell it, just watch it for yourself.

At this point we'll all have seen the movie by the time it releases, but you know what?  Screw it.

Original link for the video:

 Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Thursday, November 19, 2015

Charlie Hebdo & Free Speech

Trigger Warning:
Old post is old...
So this is an old Facebook post I made in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attacks.  Figured it was a good time to bring this out considering John Effing Kerry thinks the attack was "legitimate."

Americans love us some free speech. Right or left, black or white, male or female, alien or sentient potted plant, free speech is the one thing that everyone agrees makes this country great. We love the fact that we are free to say whatever we want, think whatever we want, and feel whatever we want to feel without having to worry about jackbooted thugs hauling us off to the gulag for offending Dear Leader.

So you want to publish a treatise on what economic policies you think the country should be following? Go for it. Disagree with something that the president/congress/The Man is doing? Head to the nearest social media platform and have at it. Have a mind to post a racist screed extolling your idea of the master race? Fire away, even though it makes you a mega-douche. Hate the TV show Firefly and everything associated with it? Speak your peace (and fuck you for breathing tyvm). Yes, free speech comes easy for us Americans.

Except...when it doesn't. We have it so easy here that we often forget that free speech comes at a price. People may disagree with you, and might challenge you. You may have to defend your beliefs in a public square. Your opinions may offend some folks that read them. Hell, they may offend most folks. You might make people angry, and some of these people may lash out at you. The attacks could come online or, God forbid, in person. You may, one day, have to decide whether or not you're ready to die for what you believe.

No one knew this better than the people at Charlie Hebdo.

By now most people know the details of the attack. Most people know that 12 employees of the magazine were killed by a group of Islamic terrorists. Most folks will also know that it was done in retaliation for the cartoons they had published insulting the prophet Mohammed. What most people may not know was this wasn't Charlie Hebdo's first run in with terrorism. In 2011 Charlie Hebdo's offices were firebombed after they published an issue that was "guest edited" by Mohammed. They responded to this attack not by pulling back and apologizing, but by continuing to publish what they had always published. Their editor, Stephane Charbonnier, stated that his magazine's cartoons would "shock those who will want to be shocked." He was one of the people killed yesterday.

How did the rest of the media respond to yesterday's violence? Self-censorship. Multiple major news outlets, from the AP to NBC, stated that they would not depict the offensive cartoons in any way. Fox News briefly showed one cartoon during their morning coverage, and then stated they had no plans to do so ever again. The Daily Mail even went as far as to blur out the cartoons in one photo.

Some outlets took it a step further. They took to the airwaves and print to state that maybe, just maybe, the people at Charlie Hebdo had it coming. They offended people, they insulted an entire religion. Violence was the inevitable result, they said, and Charlie Hebdo should have known they were playing with fire.

On the one hand, this reaction is understandable. It's rare that journalists are attacked so brazenly, and I'd wager many of them are shocked to their very core. To put it bluntly, they're running scared. They have every right to be.

However, they have caved to the terrorists by self-censoring. The media likes to pretend that they are unaffected by the will of thugs and tyrants. The vaunted 4th estate will defend the right to say what you want to say come hell or high water. Except...when that speech may require one to pay the ultimate price.

Freedom of speech isn't free. The employees of Charlie Hebdo are French, but they understand that statement better than any American.

 Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

A.F. Branco - This Means War

A new cartoon from Legal Insurrection's A.F. Branco:
Onward brave soldier!  Obama is the president we need, but not the president we deserve!

At least according to progressives...

Original Post over at Legal Insurrection: Branco Cartoon -  I Have Seen the Enemy

Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

The Lighter Side of Political Correctness

Trigger Warning:
Absolutely terrifying hilarity ahead!
Found this video stumbling around on YouTube last night.  It's an old one, but given everything going on in the world of higher education, I figured it was appropriate.  From the folks at CollegeHumor:
Social justice taken to its hilariously ridiculous conclusion.  I love it.

Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Wednesday, November 18, 2015

John Kerry Says Charlie Hebdo Attack "Legitimate"

Trigger Warning:
Picard's getting a workout this week...
Well folks, our illustrious Secretary of State John Fucking Kerry decided to offer some words of comfort and solace about Paris today.  Unfortunately for him he decided to plant his foot squarely in his mouth.  I really can't describe it to you, so let's go to the video:
So Charlie Hebdo "had a certain legitimacy" Mr. Kerry?  Something we could point to and say they're really mad about this?  I mean at least he called Paris senseless and an attack on civilization.  We've got to give him some credit at least.

The hilarious thing is you can tell right away that he knew what he said was absolutely fucking stupid.  Just about 5 seconds after he said it he tries to walk it back.  Unfortunately the walk back wasn't any better.

Terrorists, John Kerry wants you to know that he understands your pain.  He knows where you're coming from.  Secretary of State John Kerry knows that Charlie Hebdo was a logical expression of the rage you felt when that magazine made fun of Mohammed.  John Kerry's not like all of those unenlightened peasants out there; he's a smart, caring, compassionate man.  Really John Kerry's one of you.  Please don't saw his head off with a machete.

Fucking idiot is what he is.  That he represents America on the world stage is a fucking embarrassment to all of us.  
Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

University of Minnesota Student Association Nixes 9-11 Commemoration

Trigger Warning:
Suck it up, buttercup.
I meant to get to this story earlier last week, but what with the Paris attacks and the craziness that ensued I couldn't get to it until today.  It seems that the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities isn't too keen on having a 9-11 commemoration.  From the Minnesota Republic:
On Tuesday, November 10, the Minnesota Student Association (MSA)–the undergraduate student government at the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities (UMN)– rejected a resolution for a moment of recognition on future anniversaries of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.
Theo Menon, the student group representative to MSA for the College Republicans (CRs) at UMN, introduced the resolution; MSA’s forum voted against it 36-23 (with three abstentions). The proposed resolution pointed to the university’s lack of any sort of commemoration regarding the attacks on 9/11. It then called for a campus-wide moment of recognition on every September 11 from now on.
I wrote this resolution because I think we need to recognize the victims of this world-changing event,” said Menon, “The innocent men, women, and servicemen who died on that day deserve to be honored.”
Nathan Amundson serves as President of UMN’s Young Americans for Liberty chapter and student group representative for Write Things, a creative writing group. Amundson said debate on the resolution centered around whether enacting the moment of recognition might instill a more islamophobic sentiment on campus.
So the students voted against having any sort of commemoration for the victims of September 11th because of Islamophobia.  Sounds pretty much exactly like what we've come to expect from those special little flowers called college students.  In fact, some of the students specifically stated that a 9-11 commemoration would "make a space that is unsafe for students on campus even more unsafe."  After all, white people have done horrible things too.  We should have a moment of silence for all of those things, too!

Let me see if I can help these snowflakes out: commemorating a tragic event has absolutely nothing to do with Islamophobia, or racism, or anything else.  9-11 was an event that is still fresh in a lot of American's minds, even if you were three when it all went down.  Many people lost family and friends that day, and for them the pain of their loss is still fresh.  This isn't limited to white people, by the way.  People of all races, colors, and creeds were killed that day.  Jews, Muslims, Christians, blacks, Asians, it doesn't matter.  On that day all Americans suffered.

Your feeble attempts to inject racial politics into the events surrounding 9-11 cheapens the lives that were lost that day.  By reducing 9-11 to a "whites only" thing you have effectively stated that none of the people that died actually matter.  Not only that, it's shown your university, and the world, just exactly the kind of horrible people you really are.  So on behalf of all Americans, let me say:
Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Tuesday, November 17, 2015

Salon Morons Don't Understand Paris

Trigger Warning:
God dammit you guys...
Another day, another tone-deaf, moronic article from the troglodytes over at Salon.  This time they're trying to make sense out of a seemingly senseless tragedy.  Why are the Paris attacks so much worse than any other attack in recent history?  Salon is pretty sure they've found the answer
One was the rise of social media, especially Twitter, which gives these sorts of events a real-time immediacy and amplification that leaves you feeling even more overwhelmed with the flow of information than if you were relying solely on the sonorous tones of Wolf Blitzer blaring from your old cathode-ray television to tell you what’s going on.
There are two other factors, both of which are related. They are the 2016 presidential election, and the GOP’s continuing devolution from a political party into a loose collection of screeching reactionary head cases animated almost solely by utter hatred of President Obama and progressivism in general, and lacking even the most tenuous grip on reality or basic humanity.
Those two strands came together this weekend as the Republican presidential candidates flopped all over themselves proclaiming themselves tougher and more ready to lead the fight against ISIS than the next. But their policies are both nonsensical and irrelevant, or already being pursued by the Obama administration. It was as if each of them spends all their downtime asleep in hyperbaric chambers, trucked from one appearance to the next, thawed out, shoved in front of a camera or a cheering crowd to spout nonsense fed through an earpiece by handlers, and then put back in stasis until the next event.
See that, guys, Paris wasn't anywhere near as bad as everyone thinks it was.  Sure it was a massive coordinated attack involving simultaneous operations throughout one of the most iconic metropolitan areas in the world...but it wasn't THAT bad.  It only seems  that way because of the evil, angry, hate-filled GOP candidates.  Oh, and Twitter.

You see, it's the GOP that's been whipping all of us into a frenzy.  The second Paris was attacked they all came out of the woodwork all fire and brimstone.  Ted Cruz, Trump, Jeb! all of them insist that we strike back at the terrorists.  None of them have any idea what they're talking about!
Oh it gets better...
 You see Obama's been dropping bombs on ISIS for months.  The Kurds were able to take back a city.  ISIS is contained, Obama said so himself.  The evil Rethuglicans aren't satisfied, though.  They want a full-scale war.  They want boots on the ground.  Our troops will be kicking down doors and terrorizing innocent jihadis.  What they don't realize is that none of that will work.  You can't beat your enemy by shooting them with guns and bullets.

Now I did promise that it gets better.  Here's the money quote from the article that shows just how idiotic the schlubs at Salon really are:
And certainly none of the candidates can explain why the Paris attacks, horrible as they are, differ in any significant way from any other jihadi attack of the past decade. Or the past half-century, for that matter. Fanatical terrorism is not new, nor is it an artifact exclusive to the Obama presidency.
Yup, Salon still doesn't understand why Paris was so horrible.  Maybe I can help them out here.  Paris was so bad because it was the first time since 9-11 that we've seen a major terror attack inside of a major western city.  It was tragic because of the reminder that just a few dedicated people with a lot of guns can kill so many innocents.  Paris was shocking because ISIS terrorists held over 100 people hostage, and executed them one by one while they begged for their lives on social media.  People are scared because Paris showed them that terror and horror can still strike any time, anywhere, and there's precious little authorities can do to stop it.

For Salon, though, it ain't no big thing.  They got their savior Obama to keep them safe.  The real danger is the GOP.
Yes they are, captain.  Yes they are.
  Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page. 

Monday, November 16, 2015

A.F. Branco - Safe Space

Okay, I'm taking bets to see just who the "woman" on the right is.  I think it's a special little snowflake from Yale.  Someone over at Legal Insurrection thinks it's Brucelyn Jenner.
Check out more Branco cartoons here:

Original post at Legal Insurrection: Branco Cartoon - Rock the Cradle

  Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Sunday, November 15, 2015

The Islamophobic Left

Trigger Warning:
Everything will go away if I stick my head in here...
 Just about everyone even a little involved in politics has heard the term "Islamophobia."  Usually defined to mean an irrational fear of Islam, the Left has taken to using the word much like they do racism - as a cudgel with which to beat opponents and stifle intellectual debate.  The implication is always that someone is Islamophobic because Muslims are brown, and therefore anyone who Islamophobic is racist.

Conservatives are frequently the target of Islamophobic accusations.  Want Syrian refugees background checked before they enter the country?  Islamophobe.  Think we should be profiling Middle Eastern men boarding planes?  Islamophobe.  Nevermind the fact that Middle Eastern Muslims are the only ones running around blowing up planes.  In fact, nearly every major terrorist event in the last few decades can be laid squarely at the feet of radical Islam.  The Paris attacks on Friday, the Charlie Hebdo attack, Benghazi, Fort Hood, Bali, 9-11, the USS Cole, the first WTC bombing; all of it was caused by radical Muslims.

What happens when there is a terror attack?  Conservatives are the first ones to call for action.  We pray, we share information, we demand the government take a stand.  Conservatives on Twitter and elsewhere were among the first demanding that our government aid France in any way possible.  Conservatives take a stand.

How do liberals respond to a terror attack?  They hide.  The liberal thrusts his head in the sand and says we shouldn't rush to judgement.  They question the motives of a terrorist shouting "Allah Akbar" as he guns down innocent civilians.  They mutter platitudes about how not all Muslims are terrorists.  A liberal will blame the victims before blaming the terrorists.  They will say that we must have caused this.  It is our fault that the Muslim world is lashing out violently.  If only we weren't so racist/colonialist/sexist/whatever everyone would be able to live in peace.  The liberal desperately repeats this over and over again, as if the terrorists will spare them.  What the liberal refuses to acknowledge, though, is that the jihadist will happily kick down their door and behead them in the middle of the night.

Let's look at this logically for a moment.  The conservative calls for more action to fight radical Islam, where ever it may be found.  The liberal says we need to understand the terrorist, and be more tolerant of their differing point of view.  Rather than acting out of fear, it is clear that conservatives operate out of strength.  A conservative recognizes the threat posed by radical Islam, and rides out to meet that threat.

A liberal, on the other hand, clearly operates out of fear.  They project weakness because they think it will protect them from harm.  Nowhere is this better seen than in the Left's response to the Charlie Hebdo massacres.  Major liberal publications and networks refused to show even pictures of the offending cartoons lest they invite the wrath of Islamists upon themselves.  They even went as far to state that Charlie Hebdo brought the attack upon themselves.  The result was that Charlie Hebdo, alone in defending free speech, decided to pack it in.  Of course the attacks on Paris Friday show how effective the Left's outreach strategy was.

Taking this information into account, the question then becomes which side is truly Islamophobic?  Which side cowers in fear before the onslaught of the radical Muslim?

I think we all know the answer.

  Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Saturday, November 14, 2015

Salon: Evil Leftist SOBs

Trigger Warning:
This is the second time in 2 days I've used this...

Salon, the left wing rag so radical and insane it spawned its own parody Twitter account, has hit a brand-new low ladies and gentlemen.  On Friday night while most news outlets were covering the Paris terror attacks and praying for the victims, Salon was using them to push its own agenda.  What was that agenda?  America's conservatives are hateful and it needs to stop, because Paris:
In a still developing situation, the city of Paris, France, is under attack by terrorists armed with guns and explosives. Many dozens of people have been killed. A still undetermined number of people have been wounded. The terrorists took dozens of hostages in a concert hall. French police and military forces have been deployed. There is mayhem and blood in the streets of Paris.
President Obama has correctly described this day’s horrific events as “an attack on all of humanity and the universal values we share.”
Terrorism is politically motivated violence against a vulnerable population that is designed to intimidate, sow fear, create panic and alter public policy.
Terrorism is serious business that kills people, breaks bodies and alters lives.
It is not a game.
In the United States, the right-wing media and movement conservatives have for decades consistently used eliminationist and other violent rhetoric to describe liberals, progressives and other people with whom they disagree. As was seen in the recent attacks on a Charleston-area black church, and other violence by right-wing anti-government militias, such rhetoric does not float in the ether of the public discourse, harmless and unacknowledged. No, it does in fact lead to action.
 Notice the first few words in that very first paragraph?  "In a still developing situation."  This article was written, and published, while hundreds of Parisians were running for their lives.  This article was written while innocent men, women, and children were literally dodging bullets.  This article was written while suicide bombers were blowing themselves up on the streets of Paris.  This article was written while ISIS terrorists were executing hostages one by one in the Bataclan theater.

I could go through and refute the actual points in the article.  I could take it apart piece by piece, and explain why it's so ridiculous.  I'm not going to, though.  That would be giving Salon and its writers the kind of respect that they absolutely DO NOT deserve.  I don't throw the word "evil" around lightly, folks, but I'm going to use it here.  What kind of person is so evil that they will look at one of the worst terror attacks since 9-11 and think "I can use this to push my agenda"?  Who thinks it's acceptable to stand atop bodies that aren't even cold and say "see this, this proves whatever point I have"?

The answer is, of course, the type of person who writes for Salon.

Terrorism ABSOLUTELY Has a Religion - Islam

Trigger Warning:
Literally everywhere.
 On Friday November 13, 2015, terrorists attacked the city of parents.  A combination of suicide bombings and shootings at various locations killed 158 people at the time of this writing.  Many more were wounded, and it's likely that the death toll will continue to climb as the dust settles.  The absolute pieces of shit that perpetrated these heinous crimes were reportedly Syrian.  One coward who was arrested at a theater in Bataclan stated "I am from ISIS."  The terrorists reportedly shouted "allahu akbar" while they were murdering innocent people and taking hostages.

Yet before the dust had even settled the phrase "terrorism has no religion" was trending on Twitter.  Rather than mourning the dead, or showing solidarity with Parisians, the trend was a way for moronic leftist fucktards to assert that no one religion was responsible for terrorism.  People tweeted out such profound thoughts as:

That's just a small sample of the over 200,000 tweets under this trend.  Despite all evidence to the country, these leftists kept insisting that there was no religion associated with terrorism.  The terrorists from the ISLAMIC State who shouted "allahu akbar" as they were killing weren't doing it because of religion.  They were doing it because...I don't know, poverty or racism or something.

Sorry to disappoint you morons, but terrorism absolutely DOES have a religion.  That religion is radical Islam.  It's a religion that values death more than life.  It's a religion that teaches its followers from a young age that martyring yourself and killing infidels at the same time grants you entrance into paradise.  It's a religion that instructs adherents that infidels are not human, and anything you do to them is absolutely fine.  It's no coincidence that radical Islamists have been responsible for nearly every major terror act within the last few decades.

A friend of mine on Facebook asked me "will this shit ever end?"  I said yes it will end, but only after buckets of blood have been spilled.  The reason why is very simple: we are afraid to recognize our enemy and call it what it is.  Time and again we are faced with terror perpetrated by radical Islam, and time and again we make excuses for it.  We tell ourselves that it's our fault, really.  Muslims have been oppressed by colonialist policies for so many years that they have no other choice.  The murder of innocent men, women, and children becomes justified in the eyes of the Left because we have been so horrible.  Our chickens are coming home to roost, and we deserve it.  At least according to the Left.

It's all bullshit, of course.  Radical Islam at its core is a death cult.  It's followers aren't just unafraid of death, they desire it and look forward to it.  It's children actually dream of becoming suicide bombers one day.  Killing yourself for a radical Islamist is absolutely acceptable, provided you take as many people with you as possible.  Why?  All so that they can bring about the literal end of the world.

We will eventually recognize this fact.  Eventually we will take the fight to ISIS and send them to meet Allah in person.  Unfortunately, it's going to take a whole lot more death and destruction before the people wake up and realize that fact.

  Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Friday, November 13, 2015

Breaking News: Terror in Paris - 26 Dead, 60 Hostages Taken

No trigger warning for this post folks, sorry.  One of the rare serious posts from me.  Several major media outlets are reporting on a developing situation in Paris, France.  From Fox News:
At least 26 people were killed in multiple Paris terror attacks Friday, the Associated Press reported.
At the same time, up to 60 hostages were reported taken at Paris Bataclan concert hall.
The attacks involved a shootout in a Paris restaurant in the 10th arrondisement and an explosion in a bar near a Paris stadium. Simultaneous attacks are a trademark of terrorist operations.
Apparently there's no confirmation at this time as to whether or not the attacks are terror-related.  Seems a pretty safe bet at this point, although we don't want to make assumptions like the mainstream media.  Word is the French president was at the stadium and was evacuated.  I'll post updates as I get them.

Pray for France, folks.  Looks like this might get worse before it gets any better.

Several blogs are also covering this event:

Legal Insurrection - Multiple Fatalities After Public Shooting in Paris

HotAir - Breaking: Multiple deaths in Paris amid reports of shootings, explosion

FYI: for what it's worth Allahpundit at HotAir notes that apparently a witness at the concert hall said people were shouting "Allah Akbar" just before they opened fire.

Twitchy - Report: Injuries, fatalities following Paris shooting, explosion; Purported eyewitness tweets; Update: Photos, video added

Twitchy has several videos from the scene of the explosions.  According to their latest update the total dead is now 35, total hostages 100.

Update: Watching Shepard Smith on Fox News.  Just reported that apparently people are exiting the concert hall, some of them covered in blood.  Gunmen were unmasked, firing calmly into the crowd.  One apparently shouted "this is for Syria."

Shepard Smith also said they're getting reports that there are multiple other attacks taking place around the city.  Local news is apparently reporting that there's another attack underway in a mall.  Authorities haven't confirmed or denied this.

Update: Fox just reported attacks happening at six different locations around Paris.  Shep Smith cited "credible sources."  France's borders are closed and the military is being deployed around the city.  At least 40 dead and 60 wounded.

Update: Phone call from concert hall at Bataclan says hostages are being executed one by one while begging for help from authorities

Update: Police assault underway at concert hall.  Updated link to the story at Fox News.

Update: Obama condemns 'outrageous' Paris attacks, vows terrorists will face 'justice'.  A bit old by this point, but I felt it was still relevant.

Update: Still watching Shep Smith on Fox News.  Apparently one man was arrested at Bataclan, and said "I am Syrian, and I am from ISIS."

Update:  Apparently 12 people have been rescued from the concert hall at Bataclan.  Good news if it's true.

Update: Saw a few people on Twitter saying there were reports the Louvre was under attack.  Haven't been able to find confirmation, though, and there's nothing on Fox News about it. Updates happening over at Breitbart as well.

Update: Official death toll now 100.

Update: And the death toll keeps climbing.  Now stands at 140, but I expect it'll be higher before the night is over.

The Social Justice Warrior's Guide to Gifting

Trigger Warning:
Say you've got an obnoxious social justice sister (or brother, let's not be sexist here).  Let's also say that said sister has decided to reproduce, much to your chagrin.  Honestly you really don't think she should be breeding, but she's your sister and you love her, so you put up with her kids.  Plus you think it's hilarious to sugar the hell out of them and send them back to mom.
No, sis, there's no sugar in Pixie Sticks.  I swear!
Now of course shopping for presents for these kids is a pain in the ass.  Not because of the kids, of course.  Kids are kids, and they're happy with just about anything that makes lots of noise and annoys adults.  No, the real problem is your social justice sister.  Seems like everything you get them offends her delicate sensibilities in some way.  How can you possibly shop for something the kids will love, but that will leave your sister's sensibilities intact?

Worry not, dear reader, because Rebecca Ruiz over at Mashable has the perfect gift-buying guide for you:
Finding that balance is a challenge in itself, but gift-giving also increasingly means thinking outside of the (nicely wrapped) box so that you're not reinforcing messages about who should play with which toys. For instance, no matter how companies market their products, there's no reason boys can't play with dolls and girls can't play with building sets.
If that sounds too overwhelming, don't panic. There is a simple way to solve this problem: Consider your gift selection as a way to expand a child's universe.
This means not putting artificial limits on what you'd buy a child based on their gender.
"It’s our job as parents and caring adults to widen all of the choices for girls and boys," says Andrea Bastiani Archibald, chief girl expert for the Girl Scouts of the USA.
Okay, so we've got to expand a child's universe.  Fair enough.  I'm all for giving kids more choices to play with.  Except for the fact that kids tend to naturally gravitate towards gender-specific methods of play.  For example, I have some friends who have a daughter who's about 10 years old.  Now this kid is just about the girliest girl you could possibly imagine.  She loves make up, getting her nails done, and pink.  So much pink.  And zombies.  She's kind of a strange one.  The point is her parents didn't teach her any of that.  They didn't go out of their way to push her towards boy toys, but they didn't steer her to girl's toys either.  That's something she chose on her own.

It seems to me that we should be letting our kids choose what they want to play with rather than helping them choose toys that don't offend our sensibilities.  If a boy wants to play with dolls or a girl wants to play with tools that's fine.  Hell I had a few My Little Ponies when I was a little kid.  My G.I. Joes rode them into battle.  What we shouldn't do is push kids towards play choices that play into progressive sensibilities.  Yet that's what Ruiz spends the entire article doing.  It's not enough for the social justice warrior to let their kids make their own choices.  They have to make the right choices.

The funniest moment in the entire article?  The fact that it ends with probably the least self-aware quote of all time:
"The gift you give should not be a political statement," says Isaacs. "Ultimately, it’s about a child’s play and making the child happy."
It sure is, buddy.  It sure is.
 Share your thoughts and comments below.  Or follow me on Twitter @trigwarnblog, or check out my Facebook page.

Chuck Schumer Has Shown His Hatred Of Americans

We know, Chuck... Chuck Schumer took a stand for illegal aliens this weekend. Schumer and his ilk followed through on their threat to s...