Campus Free Speech

Drexel Professor Tweets 'All I Want for Christmas Is White Genocide'

University is 'taking this situation very seriously.' Why?

|

Drexel
Eric Berg

On the 24th day of December in the year of our Lord, two-thousand and sixteen, a Drexel University professor tweeted, "All I want for Christmas is white genocide."

It sounds like the professor, George Ciccariello-Maher, was probably joking. Indeed, he claims that he was. And Ciccariello-Maher has made similar remarks—with varying levels of seriousness—in the past.

Drexel administrators strongly condemned the tweet—probably because the professor, said "Christmas" instead of "non-specific holiday." (Kidding! See, that's a joke.) And conservatives on Twitter were predictably outraged. I think it's probably fair to say there's a double standard here: an alt-righter tweeting about black genocide would be more likely to face a Twitter ban. But then again, the alt-right person might not be joking. In any case, I don't really want people punished for saying stupid things on Twitter, though the social network is well within its rights to take whatever action it deems necessary.

There's a bigger issue: Drexel. According to the Associated Press, the university was not content to merely condemn the tweet. Drexel is "taking this situation very seriously"—which is a mistake—and has "contacted the professor to meet."

Drexel should not discourage a professor from expressing his mind on Twitter—if faculty members must worry that any stray thought can land them in hot water, then the university is failing to cultivate an environment of maximally free speech. Even if Ciccariello-Maher isn't formally disciplined, the experience of being called before the administration to answer for his tweet-crimes is a form of silencing.

University administrators everywhere should resolve to engage in fewer acts of petty censorship in 2017. As for everyone else:

May your days be merry, and bright

And may all your genocides be white

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

573 responses to “Drexel Professor Tweets 'All I Want for Christmas Is White Genocide'

  1. Can we start with him and just make it a genocide of 1?

    1. I have a solution…a FINAL solution, to solve the problems related to George Ciccariello-Maher’s continued existence.

      1. Robby beat you to it. Follow his own link to see that Robby lied about the University response. Shamefully.

        1. #Triggered

          1. You were? I am SO sorry.
            (Did you check the link?)

            1. No, only you autistically read the articles, Hihnarrhea.

              1. Now you brag about REFUSING to check the source??? Only autistics check sources? Being intentionally ignorant is a VIRTUE? If you say so ….

                (As he stalks me down the page, but is NOT a bully)

                1. “CYBERBULLIES DON’T SCARE ME I JUST HAVE A CONNIPTION FIT AND SHIT MY PANTS WHEN THEY RESPOND TO ME REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!”

                  (pirouettes away twirling colostomy bag)

                  1. Let’s compare.
                    I said, calmly

                    “Now you brag about REFUSING to check the source??? Only autistics check sources? Being intentionally ignorant is a VIRTUE? If you say so ….
                    (As he stalks me down the page, but is NOT a bully)

                    Okay, I ridiculed him, but a “conniption fit?” Here’s what he said:

                    CYBERBULLIES DON’T SCARE ME I JUST HAVE A CONNIPTION FIT AND SHIT MY PANTS WHEN THEY RESPOND TO ME REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!”
                    (pirouettes away twirling colostomy bag)

                    Is that bullying, hysteria or both? All because he was called put for REFUSING to check the link …. because ONLY autistics check facts before opening their yaps. Okay, this is ridicule too.
                    In response to aggression.

                    (the colostomy bag covers his mouth)
                    (walks away laughing, but still no conniption fit)

        2. “Drexel was not amused, condemning Ciccariello-Maher’s tweet and saying in a statement it was “taking this situation very seriously.”” (from the link)

          Where did Robby lie about their response?

          1. Where did Robby lie about their response?

            If you had troubled yourself to check the link, the university defended, quite explicitly, the professor’s right of free expression. If you’d merely looked.

            “While the University recognizes the right of its faculty to freely express their thoughts and opinions in public debate, …

            That’s IMMEDIATELY after what Robby quoted. Let he record show that you refused to even look.

  2. He probably was not joking. All leftists hate themselves. You can’t be a leftist if you don’t hate yourself. I mean unless you’re just incredibly narcissistic and hate everyone other than yourself, like Obama.

    I agree he should not be punished, and I encourage him and everyone else on the left to keep saying things like this, as often as possible, non-stop.

      1. Thanks for sharing that video. 🙂 Sargon of Akkad had posted another good vlog about another weirdo who seem to share the same views as that teacher, Tim Wise who isn’t very wise. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yN1WRBrsYoQ Video is 34 minutes long.

        And I spotted another vlog about that teacher. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xw4o66V0a1c

      2. It will be fascinating to hear if the professor has the courage of his convictions when called upon to defend them in public.

        I wouldn’t hold my breath, Sargon.

      3. Umm, the video says the opposite of what you imply. First, do you have the faintest clue what the Haitian Revolution was – about which he said killing whites was a good thing?

        Second, did you note the University DEFENDED the professor’s right to say what he did — which kinda demolishes the point of this Reason post, and about 75% of the comments here?

        1. I didn’t “imply” anything. You wouldn’t know the definition of “imply” if it dragged your tard ass behind a truck, or if a copy of Webster’s 1828 fell off the shelf and fucked you in the face.

          1. Your foul mouth confirms my point! What about this next part:

            “Second, did you note the University DEFENDED the professor’s right to say what he did — which kinda
            demolishes the point of this Reason post, and about 75% of the comments here?”

            Apparently missed that also. The link provided by Robby also reveals Robby’s deception and/or hysteria.

            1. Grown folks talkin’ here boy. Go play in a bathhouse.

              1. The link provided by Robby also reveals Robby’s deception and/or hysteria.

                Grown folks talkin’ here boy. Go play in a bathhouse.

                Here’s the proof, sonny. Follow Robby’s own link

                George Ciccariello-Maher, who is white and an associate professor of politics at the Philadelphia university, told The Associated Press by email Monday that his Christmas Eve message to nearly 11,000 Twitter followers – “All I Want for Christmas is White Genocide” – was meant to be satirical.

                Drexel was not amused, condemning Ciccariello-Maher’s tweet and saying in a statement it was “taking this situation very seriously.”

                While the University recognizes the right of its faculty to freely express their thoughts and opinions in public debate, Professor Ciccariello-Maher’s comments are utterly reprehensible, deeply disturbing, and do not in any way reflect the values of the University,” Drexel said.

                “Grown folks” don’t sit on their asses throwing their toys while drooling on their bib.

                1. Go away and don’t come back, even if you learn how to read, tard.

                  1. Cripple fight !

                    1. Cripple fight !

                      True. I would not normally kick a cripple in the nuts like that, but ….

                  2. This is what happens when you PROVE a foulmouth bully made a public fool of himself!

                    Galt: The link provided by Robby also reveals Robby’s deception and/or hysteria.

                    THUG: Grown folks talkin’ here boy. Go play in a bathhouse.

                    Galt: Here’s the proof, sonny. Follow Robby’s own link (Proof cited at link)

                    THUG: Go away and don’t come back, even if you learn how to read, tard.

                    BOOGA BOOGA

                    (He also lied through his teeth claiming it was done by a “real reporter.”)

                    (flush the thug)

                    1. Hihntarded!

                    2. Hihn, you were doing quite well, but just as the leopard can’t hid it’s spots, you can’t hide your method of “debate”…

                      And you are no John Galt. To be fair, neither am I.

                    3. So you assume only one person is a smarter debater than … YOU?

                    4. Hihn, if there were 2 people on the planet who “debated” in your manner, and they were to meet, the resulting explosion of logical inconsistency would likely wipe out the known universe.

                      I believe that any physicist who observed the method by which you “debate” would immediately admit that the multi-verse theory, the one that states that every possible outcome must exist in other universes, is definitely untrue because there is no possible way that another Hihn-like being could exist, regardless of how many universes there could possibly be.

                      Are you Hihn? Tell the truth now.

                    5. If I was Hihn, would that somehow justify your bullying, aggression and all around childish behavior?

                      Why do you object to saying somebody is full of shit, and documenting it with a link to the truth?

                      Are “supported arguments” that unusual in your cave? Compared with hissy fits and screeching in rage? And why don’t you know the difference between that and bullying?

                    6. Telling you are Hihn isn’t bullying, aggression, or childish.

                      Why do you object to saying somebody is full of shit

                      I don’t. I’m telling you who you are, in case you’ve forgotten. Or is it that people have learned not to listen to Hihn, so you tried to change your name but couldn’t change your behavior?

                      And why don’t you know the difference between that and bullying?

                      You do realize that I’m not even involved (in any way) in the argument(s) you were having, right? I just made an observation, that you are Hihn.

                      I never said I was, sport.

                      No, you just called yourself John Galt II or Jr, which is much the same.

                      Still confused? Still a stalker?

                      I want to thank you for failing to change. Thus far, you’ve claimed I was a bully, a stalker, childish, and an aggressor.

                      Now go back to the drawing board and try a new name, and perhaps learn some self-control. Perhaps then you can get people to listen to you when you try to convince them of… whatever it is you’re trying to do.

                      Good luck!

                    7. If I was Hihn, would that somehow justify your bullying, aggression and all around childish behavior?

                      Why do you object to saying somebody is full of shit, and documenting it with a link to the truth?

                      Are “supported arguments” that unusual in your cave? Compared with hissy fits and screeching in rage? And why don’t you know the difference between that and bullying?

                    8. Telling you are Hihn isn’t bullying, aggression, or childish

                      Merely a lie. The childish bullying is here, chump

                      Hihn, if there were 2 people on the planet who “debated” in your manner, and they were to meet, the resulting explosion of logical inconsistency would likely wipe out the known universe.

                      I believe that any physicist who observed the method by which you “debate” would immediately admit that the multi-verse theory, the one that states that every possible outcome must exist in other universes, is definitely untrue because there is no possible way that another Hihn-like being could exist, regardless of how many universes there could possibly be.

                      (laughing)

                      One more time for the aggressor:
                      Why do you object to saying somebody is full of shit, and documenting it with a link to the truth?

                      Are “supported arguments” that unusual in your cave? Compared with hissy fits and screeching in rage? And why don’t you know the difference between that and bullying?

                    9. Why do you object to saying somebody is full of shit, and documenting it with a link to the truth?

                      I already answered that, but just like *someone*, you simply can’t see what doesn’t fit within your worldview. Try reading my post again.

                      Are “supported arguments” that unusual in your cave? Compared with hissy fits and screeching in rage?

                      Never change, “Jr”, never change. The more you post, the more any reader recognizes your complete lack of self awareness and knows to avoid your thought-process at all costs.

                      “Jr”: The childish bullying is here, chump….

                      ME: Hihn, if there were 2 people on the planet who “debated” in your manner, and they were to meet, the resulting explosion of logical inconsistency would likely wipe out the known universe.

                      I believe that any physicist who observed the method by which you “debate” would immediately admit that the multi-verse theory, the one that states that every possible outcome must exist in other universes, is definitely untrue because there is no possible way that another Hihn-like being could exist, regardless of how many universes there could possibly be.

                      That’s just a predicted observation given the best science mankind yet has. Would you like to test the hypothesis (it shouldn’t be true if it’s “childish bullying”)? All you need to do is go find this other commenter at this site named “Hihn” and shake hands.

                      Unless you are one and the same…

                    10. it’s “childish bullying”)? All you need to do is go find this other commenter at this site named “Hihn” and shake hands.

                      Could YOU find him, dumbfuck?

                      One more time for the aggressor:
                      Why do you object to saying somebody is full of shit, and documenting it with a link to the truth?

                      Are “supported arguments” that unusual in your cave? Compared with hissy fits and screeching in rage? And why don’t you know the difference between that and bullying?

                    11. Could YOU find him, dumbfuck?

                      And needless cursing. Also, I don’t live in his body.

                      Here’s the lie again

                      GALT: Why do you object to saying somebody is full of shit

                      PSYCHO I don’t.

                      I don’t object to that. I’m telling you who you are. I object to your unnecessary deception, “Jr”.

                      Bingo, John! (Or whoever you are) He’s exactly like Trump.

                      And there’s the “lie”, you’re replying to a post from 4 days ago. Also, I voted Johnson, as I’m guessing you and the other one of your multiple personalities did.

                      Stalking me for months because I publicly humiliated him.

                      Someone should have been humiliated, yes, but you seem to be completely immune to humiliation, at least if it is related to logical consistency.

                      You were polite way too long. Now he’s stalking you. Just ignore him like everyone else does! He’s not confused; he’s an asshole.

                      The lack of self-awareness here is staggering…

                      I think I should also save this conversation for future reference, after all, you’ve replied to me using 3 (!) different handles!

                      Did you ever consider that if you need to change your name to get people to listen to you, because everyone learned not to pay any attention to you due to your previous behavior, that it is actually you who is the problem?

                      After all, I’ve been posting with this name for years…

                    12. Bingo, John! (Or whoever you are) He’s exactly like Trump

                      And there’s the “lie”, …. I voted Johnson

                      ANOTHER MASSIVE FUCKUP!!! EVEN CRAZIER!!!

                      HE QUOTED ME SAYING HE’S “lIke Trump” NOT THAT HE VOTED TRUMP ….then KERSPLAT falls on his own puss AGAIN … one more psycho denial …. and calls ME the liar …. “exactly like Trump.”

                      Humiliating himself AGAIN

                      Hihn says he’ll stalk me for months because he keeps humiliating himself….. attack, attack, attack … lie, lie, lie …. “exactly like Trump.” (sneer)

                      (My tone and boldface in defense of repeated aggression by a clearly psychotic thug)
                      NOBODY is here any more, so it’s PURE hatred.

                      (walks away peeing in pants from laughing so hard)

                    13. And there’s the “lie”, …. I voted Johnson

                      Wow, doesn’t understand proper use of the 4-dot ellipses. If you use it to make someone say something they didn’t (as you did here), you are giving up absolutely any claim to honesty. In fact, using the same tactic, I can get you to call yourself the crazy aggressor.

                      (walks away peeing in pants from laughing so hard)

                      …but apparently that’s not necessary…

                    14. You sure SOUND like Hihn.

                    15. CRAZY TIME

                      Could YOU find him, dumbfuck?

                      Also, I don’t live in his body.

                      ADMITS HIS “PROOF” IS AS PHONY AS HE IS!
                      Nobody could INVENT anyone THIS crazy.
                      Plus this ON THE SAME DAY!!! (OMG)

                      (My tone and boldface in self defense of repeated stalking and non-stop aggression
                      by an OBVIOUS retard)

                      And it FEELS like kicking a cripple. 🙁

                    16. Are you Hihn? We all know the truth, but you refuse to say it.

                      You’ve ruined your own name and have to resort to repeated handle changes in hopes that people will listen to you. You have failed because you can’t change.

                      I’m totally serious here, Hihn, if you haven’t yet done so, please seek professional help. This new shtick shows that you’re getting worse.

                    17. still a fucking liar (yawn)

                      GALT: Why do you object to saying somebody is full of shit, and documenting it with a link to the truth?

                      PSYCHO: I already answered that, but just like *someone*, you simply can’t see what doesn’t fit within your worldview. Try reading my post again.

                      (lol) Sure. Here’s the lie again

                      GALT: Why do you object to saying somebody is full of shit

                      PSYCHO I don’t. …..

                      And here’s what you objected to

                      Galt: The link provided by Robby also reveals Robby’s deception and/or hysteria.

                      THUG: Grown folks talkin’ here boy. Go play in a bathhouse.

                      Galt: Here’s the proof, sonny. Follow Robby’s own link (Proof cited at link)

                      THUG: Go away and don’t come back, even if you learn how to read, tard.

                      Trump ain’t the only psychopath liar. Two in this thread alone,
                      AGAIN: Why do you object to calling someone a liar, and proving it.
                      Why do you say only “Hihn” ever calls out and proves liars? First him. Now you.
                      Are you done stalking and bullying me?

                    18. Bingo, John! (Or whoever you are) He’s exactly like Trump. Stalking me for months because I publicly humiliated him. The authoritarian mind is ENRAGED by “backtalk.”

                      You were polite way too long. Now he’s stalking you. Just ignore him like everyone else does! He’s not confused; he’s an asshole.

                      Did you see Trump just praised Putin again? The two dictators have a budding bromance. In Trump’s mind, authoritarianism is “manly.” It goes with his tiny hands! He REALLY believes that’s the proper leadership role. Tyrants can succeed in business, where they employ wusses and lackeys. And real estate investment is not a “business.”

                      Obama ignored Putin. Trump sucks up to him. Two Presidents in a row humiliate America on the world stage.

                    19. And you are no John Galt.

                      I never said I was, sport.
                      But you say you’re an ace … when you’re obviously a joker.
                      Still confused? Still a stalker?

  3. You too can get clickbait with this one simple trick!

  4. All I want for Christmas is for Twitter to disappear. I can’t think of anything that the platform has improved and lots of things that it has made significantly worse.

    1. All I want for Christmas is for Twitter to disappear.

      FUCK FREE SPEECH!

      I can’t think of anything that the platform has improved and lots of things that it has made significantly worse

      But she’s not an authoritarian bigot!

    2. “I can’t think of anything that the platform has improved”

      Huh?

      Don’t you like a clear window into the innner workings of Trump’s brain? He is the most transparent Prez ever – if you can understand him. For that, read skim The Art of the Deal. His strategies are all there.

      1. Huh?

        Read what she said.

        Don’t you like a clear window into the innner workings of Trump’s brain?

        Her use of “platform” meant Twitter as a platform. Clearly.

        He is the most transparent Prez ever – if you can understand him. For that, read skim The Art of the Deal. His strategies are all there.

        Oh.
        Transparency has nothing to do with any of this thread either.

    3. Twitter is for photos of dogs (as Facebook is for photos of babies). Anything else is surplus.

      1. Diane would be ADORED by Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot and Donald Trump.

  5. It’s like watching the left devolve into a caricature of itself .

    1. When the Left hates, it’s righteous anger!

      1. Like yours here?

        1. You finished corpse fucking this thread?

          1. You’re still here, dumbfuck.

  6. Doesn’t drexel have some sort of code against disparaging the community on the basis of race? If not they are a private university and have the right to fire any employee so long as they can break his contract.

    1. Doesn’t drexel have some sort of code against disparaging the community on the basis of race?

      Well, not if it’s disparaging white people.

      1. 97% of scientists agree that only white people can be racist.

        1. And 99% of non-scientists are certain that if he ‘joked’ that “All I want for Christmas is niggas hanging from lampposts,” he would be collecting his his belongings in the streets as we speak, after security kicked his ass out.

          1. 99% of SJWs assume that anybody complaining about this guy actually make that joke over cocktails in the country club.

      2. Well, not if it’s disparaging white people.

        The professor is white. So all the raging hysteria here is kinda wacky.

    2. Some races are more equal than others at Drexel.

      1. Pull your head out of your ass.
        Smell the free air.

  7. “…It sounds like the professor, George Ciccariello-Maher, was probably joking. Indeed, he claims that he was…”

    Yes, when busted for proposing mass murder, lefty twits always claim they are joking.

    1. That wacky Joe Stalin-what a prankster.

      1. He was just joking when he killed all those kulaks and wreckers.

        1. He’d put flaming bags of dog poop at the front door to their huts and then, when they came out and stomped out the flames, he’d make them walk to Siberia to get the poop off their shoes.

          1. Funny:-P

      2. First, he never killed anyone.
        Second, they all deserved it.
        Third, shut up, racist!

          1. Minus “racist” part, applies to Rape of Nanking, Armenian Genocide or Srebrenica Massacre quite as well.

        1. The way this comment is formatted makes it look like a haiku, but it isn’t. 🙁

          1. pretty damn close, just need to tighten up the 1st line….”first, he never killed”?

      3. If you think he was a riot, you should have seen Mao!

        1. rectum? I didn’t even Mao ’em!

          #justkiddin

      4. Some of us tried to do something to stop him while others supplied him with money and arms to keep fighting. Who is the real bad guy?

        1. There doesn’t have to be just one.

    2. The joke was a tongue in cheek “here’s a pun on white Christmas” that includes killing white people. It’s a joke, if you are in on the joke that killing a bunch of white people isn’t going to happen, but it is a desirable outcome.

      Otherwise, it isn’t a joke.

      Kinda like a new year’s wish: “Here’s to Trump having a heart attack before the inauguration!”

      See how that joke works? It is only funny if you think it would be bad for Trump to take office and if you’d be happy for him to drop dead before that happened. You aren’t actually advocating violence or hoping to cause him harm. But the joke does express a specific set of desires.

      1. Unless that prof is a sort of right wing teabagger, it’s not a joke. Leftists do not have a sense of humor. Everything to them is some sort of injustice that the world is wrongfully imposing on them, because [insert boogeyman of choice here], and there’s nothing they love more than wallowing in their own self inflicted misery.

      2. Proper joke would have been “I’m dreaming of White Genocide/Just like the ones I used to know”, with link to his “To clarify, when the whites were massacred during the Haitian Revolution, that was a good thing indeed” tweet.

        I’m absolutely down with punishing blown punchlines, especially when setup is so easy.

        1. I suppose it depends on what we are comparing.

          Is it the genocidal tendencies of the “alt right” as a group, vs. the genocidal tendencies of the proggie extremists (including black nationalists, mother Gaia types, PETA, etc.)? Then I’ll take the proggie extremists in a walkover. You’ve got maybe a couple thousand real neo-nazi and Klan types in the US, probably less than 10% of the number that would call for killing whitey, or a global culling (starting with the rich nations) to save the earth, or banning animal experimentation even if it meant millions more dying of curable diseases.

          Again, I’ve met these folks. I’ve been confronted outside my lab by PETA people on a mission to prevent animal experimentation in the fight against AIDS. They truly had the consensus that we should all die, rather than develop an animal model. (in fairness, they also were convinced that we could just do all medical research in a computer model. And this was way back in 1990. They were unmoved when I told them they could become a billionaire in the morning if they could produce such a computer program)

          I’ve had several alt-left friends in the crystals and drum circles crowd who firmly believe that we need to reduce the human population by 90%. (never a well thought-out position)

          But if we are comparing one professor who is getting his jollies by trolling with all of the alt-right, then yeah, I suppose you’d be more likely to find a few murdery types in all of the alt-right.

          1. Clever squirrels relocated my post to a new post that didn’t even exist when I started replying.

            Sly little devils.

            1. Robby got to the squirrels. He provides one shiny hair for their nest every Michaelmas, and in return they annoy people who disagree with him.

              1. I don’t even disagree with him. I just disagree with the side-issues used to signal that “even though I’m saying something that sounds like I don’t agree with you progressives, I really am on your side”. Those asides are quite often wrong, and very often irrelevant.

                In writing class they talk about good writing having a density to it. All of the extraneous fluff cut out. This is why the side-punch to the alt-right doesn’t work in this context. It diverts from the main point, it pointlessly impugns a group that has nothing to do with this as being a bunch of genocidal racists and in the end it subverts the argument by giving everyone who should hear it an out….. either being offended or having a “that’s not us” fig leaf to hang on it.

                And if you’ve read my writings here, you’ll see that density isn’t really my thing either. I kind of specialize in the interesting but ultimately irrelevant aside.

      3. There are lots of good “white” Xmas puns, “all I want for Christmas” is supposed to end with “is my two front teeth”, so any puns would have to revolve around “two”, “front”, or “teeth”.

    3. Yes, when busted for proposing mass murder, lefty twits always claim they are joking.

      … as righty twits continue their century-plus of shitting all over the shameful concept we libertarians call …. free speech … based on another wacky assumption … while publicly displaying their profound retardation.

      For all the other braindead goobers here, the perfesser is WHITE! But Sevo “thinks” the perfesser was calling for “mass murder” of …. his own family and race. Have I stumbled into a Klavern??

      1. Hey, if Dave Chappelle can be a grand wizard of the Klan…

        1. Psst. That’s a joke too.

    4. Yes, when busted for proposing mass murder, lefty twits always claim they are joking.

      And righty twits .,.. equally bigoted … assume a white professor was calling for the mass killing of himself and his entire family. THINK? Never.

  8. We all know what he meant when he said (((white))).

    1. You know who else wanted (((white))) genocide?

        1. And her husband, what’s-his-name.

          1. OJ?

      1. The Sun?

        1. I believe in the death and destruction of white people. Each and every one of them.

          Kill all. Every last one of them. Don’t spare one.

      2. That subhuman Joseph Stalin?

      3. Ron “Chavo” Reyes?

    2. We all know what he meant when he said (((white))).

      And nobody has denied it!

  9. Professor: What I meant is, that white people, instead of dreaming of their white cracker Christmas, are dreaming of committing genocide. Because white people are literally Nazis.

    Board: Oh, that’s better.

    1. Well, I mean the world was in a state of peaceful harmony, and then came the white devils. /we freaking love science!

      1. + Noble Savage

        1. nobre vagabundo

        2. What’s a Nubian?

          1. Not much. What’s a nubian with you?

            1. Bitch, you almost made me laugh.

              1. “You see what I have to do to get respect around here”

          2. Fun sub category of porn?

    2. Professor: What I meant is, that white people, instead of dreaming of their white cracker Christmas, are dreaming of committing genocide. Because white people are literally Nazis.

      Brian: Nazis advocated killing themselves … for the same reason that white crackers calling for the genocide of … white crackers.

  10. Hey Robby…. an “alt-righter” might have meant something about black genocide. But I’d say the percentages are pretty low, depending on how you want to define “alt right”.

    On the other hand, the percentages of black nationalists and fellow travelers who would mean it when they said “white genocide” is actually pretty high. You should go out and meet them sometime. They are pretty easy to talk to. Unlike most white racists, they aren’t all that closeted in their views and are happy to share their disdain for all things white.

    Heck, I think it would probably be pretty easy to find a black nationalist… say from the Nation of Islam…. who would not only be in favor of a white genocide, he would probably tell you that there can never truly be a white genocide because white people have been the perpetrators of all the evil the world has ever seen, and as such killing white people could never be termed genocide.

    I know. I’ve traveled among them and faced down Klan members and bespectacled, bowtie-wearing true believers of the Nation of Islam. You have to dig pretty deep to find real, die-hard Klan types. You can find strident black nationalists out and proud on any college campus with a black population of more than 2 or 3%.

    So maybe stick the virtue-signalling tu-quoque equivalencies in the drawer unless they are really needed to make an argument. In this case you’ve said that there’s no way a black dude meant that, but white people would have meant it.

    1. “On the other hand, the percentages of black nationalists and fellow travelers who would mean it when they said “white genocide” is actually pretty high. You should go out and meet them sometime.”

      Robby has that app on his phone, the racist one that lets you avoid driving through the colored parts of town.

    2. For the record, his picture looks like it was pulled from an Onion article that starts with “White, socially conscious Area Man…”
      In fact, looking at his picture, I must change my mind and side with Robby – this is a con-man deliberately breaking various codes of conduct so he can claim Leftist Martyrdom (i.e. almost treated as badly as a non-leftie would in the same position).

      1. Marc Maron called – he wants his look back.

      2. The Ward Churchill School of How to Succeed in Academia Without Any Appreciable Scholarship.

    3. “On the other hand, the percentages of black nationalists …”

      It’s lower than you think. Black nationalists do not advocate white genocide. The Black Panthers, for example, had a slogan “Power to the people.” You are thinking of black supremacists.

      1. No, it’s HIGHER than you think.

        And it’s not NOI or Panthers, it’s rampant all through black churches. It’s common conversation.

        And they can say it without anyone batting an eye.

        I think most white people would shit themselves if they were actually aware of the seething bath of violent racism that they wallow in

        1. Spend some time in the armed forces and get to work under these assholes. They are a large group of people with serious racism in their hearts.

  11. You’re not going to get spoiled, rich, white liberals looking your school if you don’t advertise correctly. They should put him in charge of marketing via social media.

    1. Yeah, all the red-necks and crackers never noticed he was a lying piece of shit. Shame on those ‘obstructionists’ for stealing his pen and phone!

    2. I’m sure some Democrat will soon propose a bill letting Obama run for a 3rd term in 2020 and millions of useful idiots will send money in support of the idea, actually believing it can work. From now on, this tactic will be known as ‘The Jill Stein’.

      1. It’s Michelle’s turn. She has it all – woman, black, Obama (by marriage, but whatever), not openly corrupt to the degree Clinton was…

        1. And she can say ‘we’re giving everyone free college and it won’t cost one dime’, without looking as insane as Hillary is when she says it. Michelle will end up on the bottom of the Potomac in concrete boots if she dares defy the Hillary. Hillary will be the nominee in 2020.

          1. Hillary’s done, her health and age alone will probably kill any chance at another run, and eventually (especially if they get smacked down hard in 2018) the remnants of the party brass are going to direct blame to her when they desperately try to revitalize the party with some new up-and-comers. There’s a reason why they kept whining about ‘her turn’. It was her last chance at the office.

            1. 100% guaranteed she will run again if she’s even barely alive.

              1. Yeah, and when it’s concrete shoes on the line – I bet on Chicago.

              2. Hillary will announce her run by 2018 and they will be ferrying her putrid half corpse around in a van so she can screech and hiss at the yokels. ‘It was my turn hisssss screech hisss! And look what you’ve done! You let Donald *cough* *cough* *cough* *cough*, hisss, screech! Trump be president! I’ll get you my pretty, and your little dog too!’.

                1. She’ll be more machine than woman in her Vader pantsuit.

            2. Anyway, she has to run. I can’t get enough of her losing, I want more.

              1. Well good point, Hyp.

                No way she is running.
                I hope like Hell she does.

                1. So, she’ll look the same.

              1. “She’s sure the voters will beg her to get in the race and she says, ‘I’m going to run again in 2020.'”

                Good to see her delusions are still intact.

                1. She isn’t going to run.

                  Campaign donations and Foundation donations are the Clinton’s income.

                  1. She isn’t going to run.

                    Campaign donations and Foundation donations are the Clinton’s income.

                    This is why she must run. Or at least appear that she is going to run…. and win.

                    The half-trillion dollars that Bill has accrued to his ‘charitable’ foundation is directly due to the possibility, nee inevitability, of a Hillary presidency. You don’t buy influence from people who have no power. And the people who plopped most of that cash into their coffers are the sort who only buy influence, they don’t do charity. Things like dictatorships.


                    Here’s Glenn Greenwald on the topic.

                    Meanwhile, the Clinton foundation lists 7 donors who are in the “over $25 million” club. All seven are other charitable foundations, which I find strange. Also, two of those seven are set up by Frank Giustra, which I also find curious.

                    These lists of donors don’t include “pledges” that have yet to be fulfilled. So the “$300 million” for a Uranium deal isn’t on the list, since it was just pledges. The same goes for the Saudi’s donations, which dried up during the time Clinton was Secretary of State, right after they became a political liability.

              2. Not sure newsmax is proof fire anything. Just sayin.

                1. Sigh, proof for anything

            3. “… revitalize the party with some new up-and-comers…”

              Funniest thing I’ve read this week.

              Maybe this month.

              1. There’s a reason why “desperately” is in there. I mean you’ve got, what, Cory Booker I guess?

          2. Goody. I’ll have my “Crawl, Hillary, Crawl” bumper sticker ready.

            1. Mine will be on the front bumper.

      2. http://www.mediaite.com/online…..rm-limits/

        They’re way ahead of you already.

    3. “What I would argue is, is that the culture actually did shift, that the majority does buy into the notion of a one America that is tolerant and diverse and open and full of energy and dynamism,” Obama said.

      Uh… I think that was always the case, minus a few politicians and business owners across the south in post-reconstruction America.

      And I’d argue that Obama did quite a bit to move us away from being tolerant and full of energy and dynamism. 8 years of stagnant economic growth and flatlined employment numbers will kill a lot of energy and dynamism. And we certainly aren’t more tolerant for those who have different political beliefs.

      But we are more racially and ethnically diverse, thanks to birth rates and illegal immigration numbers. So there is that.

      1. ” minus a few politicians and business owners across the south in post-reconstruction America.”

        Also minus the northern union members who shot numerous upptiy Negros for trying to take their jobs.

        The north wasn’t overwhelmingly any less prejudice than the South. They just went about it in a different manner and patted themselves on the back while pointing fingers at the Southern Democrats.

    4. I saw that on the TV at the gym earlier she almost fell off the treadmill.

      1. And almost *

    5. She’s a multiple loser, she lost Obama in to 2008, and to Trump in 2016. She had her shot at the brass ring and she blew it.

      The last guy who lost in the general election and was given a second shot was Nixon. I doubt she’s going to embrace the comparison.

      The Cult of Hillary isn’t nearly as strong as the Hillary supporters like to believe.

      If someone like Bernie Sanders, Lieawatha, or another back bencher wins the nomination, then the celebs like Katy Perry will happily jump ship, and tell Hillary to piss off so younger people can inject fresh blood into the democratic party.

      1. “If someone like Bernie Sanders, Lieawatha, or another back bencher wins the nomination, then the celebs like Katy Perry will happily jump ship, and tell Hillary to piss off so younger people can inject fresh blood into the democratic party.”

        Fresh blood??
        Bernie will be 79 and Lieawatha 71 in 2020.

        1. Exactly…..Fresh blood.

    6. 25. Only 25 more days until this worthless, lowlife piece of shit Osama Obama yo momma the llama mofo mofo mofoletta momma is finally gone forever.

  12. TDS shows no signs of ending soon:

    The Chron, as a truly sleazy example of yellow press, headlines it this way:
    “Trump’s pick for ambassador to Israel has all sides on edge”

    AP is a bit more ‘balanced’:
    “Trumps pick for ambassador to Israel sparks hot debate”
    http://www.sfgate.com/news/pol…..818915.php

    The question remains: Trump, threat or menace?!?!?!

    1. “Trump’s pick for ambassador to Israel has all sides on edge. Ivanka still scaring the hell out of women. Jill Stein leads movement to recall Trump, millions send money. News at 11”

    2. “Trump’s pick for ambassador to Israel has all sides on edge”

      Yup, I’m sure Netanyahu is calling a crisis meeting of his cabinet right now, with a single point of order:

      “he’s sending WHOM!? Third Temple is in danger!”

    3. “… prospects for peace with Palestinians…”

      Anyone who writes that cant be taken seriously.

      1. The Pals were offered 97% of their bargaining positions back when a Clinton was President and they turned it down.

        Yassar Arafat did not want peace.

        When he died his widow was a billionaire.

        His business model was low grade war and pocketing the international donations given to the poor poor Pals being mistreated by the Jews.

  13. Seems like the alt-right need better PR. Or journalistic cover. Is that the same thing?

  14. He wasn’t joking.

    That’s just the default of dumbass smart-alec leftists when caught and called on their bull shit and racism. Just like those moronic celebrities were ‘joking’ when they threatened to move to Canada if Trump was elected.

    They possess no principles. And in this dink’s case, they just have an irrational hatred of their own race. Nothing more; nothing less.

    It’s easy to sprout off all sorts of stupid things and then say ‘I was just joking. Nyeh, nyeh, nyeh!’ There are no consequences. Easy, see?

    1. Taking down the banner or flag was his first mistake. If anyone comes in there being abusive, he should throw them out and tell them if they come back, he’s pressing charges for harassment. Fuck these idiots, they should be dealt with like the whining imbeciles that they are.

      1. Exactly. I would have held firm.

        I’m starting to get to the point that a beating is the only language they’ll understand.

  15. Hyphenated name. Always a tipoff.

  16. To progressives I dedicate this song:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UWSTh2ogZA

  17. The problem here is, that even if the professor wasn’t serious, there are lots of people who ARE serious about advocating “white genocide”, and for a college professor to make such a comment, which might not be taken as a joke by everyone, can encourage such beliefs and incite some few to act on them. People in positions of respect or authority, when making extreme statements in public, even in jest, need to understand that not everyone in their audience is sane or rational. It’s like when fundamentalist preachers scream about how ABORTIONISTS ARE MURDERING BABIES! Most people will go home from church and go on with living a normal life, but such preaching is irresponsible because of the danger of a nut case in the congregation taking it seriously and shooting a doctor or bombing a clinic. People in a position to be widely listened to and taken seriously should leave sick joking in public to professional comedians, and should not talk like a violent extremist if they don’t mean business.

    1. What about libertarians commenting about putting people in woodchippers?

      1. Vote Woodchipper!

        The Tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

      2. We’re serious about that.

      3. It was meant in jest. If you really want to dispose of a body, you’re really going to need one of those industrial strength woodchippers. The ones you can rent from the hardware store are going to end up leaving you looking like the last bad guy at the end of Fargo.

        If you want to dispose of a body, feeding them to the pigs seems the way to go. Acid also kind of works if you know what you’re doing, and have the time.

        1. ONE WORD:quicklime…..

          1. It really doesn’t dissolve a body all that fast. I know it makes me come off a bit like a psycho, but I’m just somebody with a little bit of chemistry knowledge that knows that acid doesn’t really melt flesh all that quickly.

            Except for HF, If you want to dispose of a body, you should totally dump it in a vat of HF, just like on Breaking Bad. The truly important thing is that you buy the right kind of plastic tubs to melt the bodies in.

            1. You would have to be profoundly insane to mess around with that much HF. Splash some on your arm and you are a dead man.

              1. Quicklime is not so much intended to ‘dissolve’ the body as saponify enough of the fats that the odor of decomposition is minimized.

              2. That’s kind of the joke. Anybody using body disposal methods from Breaking Bad would quickly become Darwin Award winners.

          2. It really doesn’t dissolve a body all that fast. I know it makes me come off a bit like a psycho, but I’m just somebody with a little bit of chemistry knowledge that knows that acid doesn’t really melt flesh all that quickly.

            Except for HF, If you want to dispose of a body, you should totally dump it in a vat of HF, just like on Breaking Bad. The truly important thing is that you buy the right kind of plastic tubs to melt the bodies in.

        2. Can pigs eat the bones too? I didn’t think they had the crushing jaw power of a predator, but I’ve never been eaten by a pig so what do I know.

          1. Can pigs eat the bones too?

            Feral ones do. FTL:

            4. What is the power of their bite? What other animal can it be likened to in that regard?

            They have extremely strong jaws to crack open hard-shelled nuts such as hickory nuts and pecans. As they predate upon or scavenge animal carcasses, they can easily break bones and often consume the entire carcass, often leaving little if any sign behind.

            As to body disposal, and assuming no large body of water to dump the corpse within, my understanding is that Alkaline Hydrolysis is the way to go. Here’s a link discussing the activities of the Arellano-Felix and later Sinaloa Cartel “pozolero,” Santiago Meza Lopez. From that article:

            Q: Did you chop them?
            A: No, full bodies.
            Q: How did you do the “work”?
            A: I would just put them in an oil barrel and the acid dissolved them…
            …Q: How much time did it took you to get rid of a body?
            A: 24 hrs.
            Q: What did you do with the remains?
            A: I used to throw them in a pit.

            1. I’ve read other accounts that indicate that the body is placed with sodium hydroxide and water in a sealed vessel (usually made out of 2, 55-gallon drums welded together). A propane burner is then used to heat the vessel. It takes about 12-15 hours to turn someone into soup. No idea if the vessel is vented at any point in the process.

              The soup is then poured off into whatever isolated location is desired. I imagine the bones are not completely dissolved, but are spongy enough that treatment with a ghetto ball mill, like a converted concrete mixer, will suffice to pulverize any remains.

              I wouldn’t think that HF—contra Breaking Bad—would do much of anything. Then again, I’ve never used it. It’s used in car washes, of all things, as a wheel cleaner. Seems dangerous as hell to me, but what do I know?

  18. But then again, the alt-right person might not be joking.

    The Hair just can’t help himself. How about the alt-left racist asshole is probably not joking as well? Fucking douche, this is why I stopped my donations. At least, South Park – a friggin’ cartoon – is an equal opportunity heckler of society. The Hair can’t even reach the level of objectivity that a cartoon about elementary school kids manages.

    1. There’s always at least one WTF sentence like this in every piece Robby writes. He just can’t help himself.

      1. I think he also puts those sentences in his articles to troll the H&R readers.

    2. The difference is that the alt-right racist asshole lives in a shack in South Carolina, while the leftist* racist asshole is an Ivy League professor (I know Drexel isn’t Ivy League, but it fits plenty of others).

      *When an ideology is well-established in positions of privilege, you can’t claim it’s an alt-anything. The racists aren’t alt-left. It IS modern leftism.

      1. That alt-right racist doesnt live in SC, he lives in douchebag’s head.

        1. You are mostly correct, but you understand my larger point. There are probably a few actual white racists, but they are hidden. They aren’t spreading their evil in college classrooms (or in the Federal bureaucracy). The lefty racists are in the open in public. Hell, even in 1950, the KKK had to hide under white sheets.

        2. That alt-right racist doesnt live in SC, he lives in douchebag’s head. mommy’s basement in suburban Seattle and jerks off to hentai all day.

          FIFY

  19. Read the intro to George Ciccariello-Maher’s #DecolonizingDialectics, free online. @ciccmaher http://ow.ly/itsj306YVkm

    Read the first few pages of his introduction, and its pretty clear the professor is not “joking”.

    (*unless, like me, you consider his very-very-serious academic-gibberish extremely funny)

    1. Click the Iowahawk link Robby provided, and…yeah. At best, a con-man deliberately violating terms of service so he can climb on a Leftist Cross (a five-point star?) and shill more books.
      And if he doesn’t get punished? Still great, he gets to poke conservatives in the eye and remind them that they’d have been punished for far, far less.

    2. It’s a joke … on the alumni donors to Drexel.

      But it’s not very funny.

  20. So, a Professor working at a college with an international reputation for Liberal Left idiocy, commits a classic piece of Liberal Left idiocy, and the administration decides to top him.

    What we are dealing with here is Overeducated White Trash.

    1. a college with an international reputation for Liberal Left idiocy

      [citation needed]

      Whenever I’ve heard Drexel mentioned, it’s been as a good but not spectacular engineering school. I’ve never really heard it described as being particularly ideological one way or the other.

      1. Agree, no liberal idiocy. But I’m sure I’m not the only alum who got a fund raising letter recently who will be waiting to see how Drexel handles this idiot before we write our checks. As someone said above, if this prof had viciously dissed Black Lives Matter or Planned Parenthood or LGBYQXYZ, he’d have already been shown the sidewalk at 33rd and Chestnut Sts.

  21. Pffft. Who cares what the fuck chop says. A communist is gonna commie.

    1. That was ’04? How stupid do you have to be to write that down and not know where Venezuela was going to end up?

    2. Too often, the Bolivarian Revolution currently underway in Venezuela is dismissed by its critics?on the right and left?as a fundamentally statist enterprise

      i had to wait to stop laughing before continuing.

      These perspectives are erroneous, since they cannot account for what have emerged as the central planks of the revolutionary process. I will focus on the most significant of these planks: the explosion of communal power.

      By viewing the process through the Leninist concept of “dual power”?that is, the construction of an autonomous, alternative power capable of challenging the existing state structure?we can see that the establishment of communal councils in Venezuela is clearly a positive step toward the development of fuller and deeper democracy…

      It gets funnier. (esp. his interview with a drunken ‘revolutionary’)

      I think the question here isn’t whether what georgie thinks about white people…

      …its, “Why would drexel hire someone this fucking dumb?”

      If the last 9 years haven’t changed his mind about his thesis, what would?

      1. “Why would drexel hire someone this fucking dumb?”

        Someone even amsoc can look down upon and laugh at is a precious, rare thing.

  22. Well I’m afraid that you’re on the naughty list for that, George Ciccariello-Maher, so no white genocide for you. Unfortunately, Santa isn’t giving out coal to naughty children this year. He’s giving their addresses to STEVE SMITH.

    1. STEVE SMITH LIKES RAPICIDE!

    2. Give him a lump of coal … or a kWh of coal-fired electricity.

  23. Drexel should not discourage a professor from expressing his mind on Twitter?if faculty members must worry that any stray thought can land them in hot water, then the university is failing to cultivate an environment of maximally free speech.

    Is there any line where a university would be justified in breaking ties with a professor? Suppose a math professor is teaching that 2+2=5. Does the university have an obligation to remove them and replace them with someone competent or do they have to just ignore them? If the students can’t trust the validity anything they learn at the university, is their any value in it?

    1. Who cares what 2+2 is? As long as kids know what gender fluid is by the time they’re 4, and that polar bears are drowning and it’s all grandma’s fault, it’s all good.

    2. Tenure is a pretty strong tool. One of the leaders in the “the collapse of the WTC on 9/11 was due to controlled demolitions” was a tenured prof of physics at BYU. The administration there decided (at least initially) to not move against him because he wasn’t propagating his ideas in the classroom.

      In your example (2+2=5 being taught), you might be able to get someone out of the job because it directly undermines the profession. But, if the same guy continued to teach 2+2=4 but advocated for 2+2=5 on social media he would probably keep his job.

  24. What would a ‘white genocide’ look like?

    http://amzn.to/2i8hXuU

    1. Zimbabwe

  25. here’s the thing =

    who cares if he’s “joking” or not. His defense of his silly statement is basically, “oh, i don’t really mean it.”

    Because he’s exactly the type of person who WANTS to be able to punish people for politically-incorrect statements. Its just that he thinks his own gibberish is the “OK” kind.

    saying “i’m kidding” is just his way of avoiding the sort of censure he himself would dole out.

    I think he should be able to say whatever the fuck he wants and reap what he sows. but i think what’s pathetic is that people like this don’t actually have the courage of their convictions.

    (*it seems like he at first *tried* to defend it as “well, the haitian revolution was cool”. Because why? because they murdered lots of those slaving white people? or because it lead to a wildly successful black-run nation-state in North America?…. I can only presume he means the former. His “clarification” seems to undermine his own defense of saying he’s ‘kidding’. And it makes robby look dumber for claiming its at all plausible)

    1. but i think what’s pathetic is that people like this don’t actually have the courage of their convictions.

      The guy seems to be quite the Chavista as well. Interesting he no longer teaches in Caracas where he could enjoy all the fruits of his efforts there working with the “revolutionaries”.

    2. I don’t think the guy was kidding.

      He is counting on the perpetrators of the genocide will recognize him as being woke while we all know they will more likely consider him a useful idiot.

    3. He is attempting the Ward Churchill defense, and hasn’t improved on it very much.

  26. Drexel University is a private institution, so they should be allowed to discipline their employees, especially if one does something that jeopardizes the university’s reputation. Now assuming the tweet was indeed a joke (I guess I’m missing the punchline), terminating his employment would probably be a bit of an overreaction. That being said, a brief conversation about how he should think before he tweets may well benefit all involved.

    1. It was a “joke” in the sense the Marxist professor never had any intention of directly participating in a real genocide. That kind of thing is too messy for an effete professor. He was just dreaming of a white genocide.

      For the record, a genocide that involves butchering infants and young children is reprehensible and barbaric regardless of whether it involves Israelites butchering Philistine three-year-olds, Nazis and Jews, Muslims and infidels, Catholics and Protestants, peasants and landowners, workers and bourgeoisie, US Army and Plains Indians, Japanese and Chinese, or Haitians and white colonists. And anybody who excuses or praises such an atrocity is an asshole.

      1. And anybody who excuses or praises such an atrocity is an asshole.

        Says the asshole who celebrates the atrocity of feeding humans into woodchippers! .

        For the record, that’s the reason (not a pun) so many Reasonoids use woodchipper in their username here, which caused popehat.com — a leading civil liberties website — to report on, “Reason.com, a leading libertarian website whose clever writing is eclipsed only by the blowhard stupidity of its commenting peanut gallery.”

        Like … on this page, alone, how many times is free speech attacked by snarling goobers?
        But they’re not authoritarian, right?

        1. nonsense, people refer to “chippers” as a metaphor to reflect on our “upbeat and optimistic” attitudes

          1. (laughing)

            1. cynicism is the defense mechanism of a cowardly intellect.

              1. (laughing harder) You referred to his raging screed of hatred as an “upbeat and optimistic” attitude? Calling somebody an “asshole” — based on bullshit — is upbeat and optimistic?

                Your own dishonesty is revealed by the ACTUAL source of woodshippers here, which confirms my quote about the Reason commentariat and the REAL source of woodchippers. popehat.com

                Anything else?

                1. Shut up Gilmore, Mike knows what he’s talking about. Did you know he served three months as an elected Libertarian official as alternate public pigeon feeder in Dickmunchville, Tennessee?

                2. I’m sorry i don’t understand your point anymore. I think if you have a problem with something someone says, you should explain what your specific objection is.

                  I think if people choose to be chipper, it is their prerogative.

                  1. I’m sorry i don’t understand your point anymore.

                    You never did.

                    I think if you have a problem with something someone says, you should explain what your specific objection is.

                    I did. (lol) In detail.

                    Calling somebody an “asshole” — based on bullshit — is upbeat and optimistic?

                    I think if people choose to be chipper, it is their prerogative.

                    (laughing harder)

                    1. I did. (lol) In detail.

                      I’m sorry that i missed that. Could you quote me what you’re referring to?

                    2. THIRD TIME

                      (laughing harder) You referred to his raging screed of hatred as an “upbeat and optimistic” attitude? Calling somebody an “asshole” — based on bullshit — is upbeat and optimistic?

                      Your own dishonesty is revealed by the ACTUAL source of woodshippers here, which confirms my quote about the Reason commentariat and the REAL source of woodchippers. popehat.com

                      Anything else?

                    3. That doesn’t explain what your problem was with the original comment. Was i not clear? i apologize.

                      e.g. Cato the chipper said

                      ” a genocide that involves butchering infants and young children is reprehensible and barbaric””

                      and you started screaming about your misinterpretation of what his name referred to. Do you actually have no disagreement about the point he was making?

                    4. Fourth Time

                      Why do you say that calling somebody an “asshole” — based on bullshit — is upbeat and optimistic

                      I linked to PROOF of woodchippers means here,

                      You provide NOTHING that it means “upbeat and optimistic” — to call somebody an asshole.

                    5. Really, John, it seems like you’re not reading my question.

                      Is the entirety of your complaint over the use of the term “Chipper”? I thought Cato’s point about Genocide was the actual subject of discussion. I think people who cheerlead genocide are bad. and even “assholes”. (pardon my french). It was my impression that you think otherwise?

                      I do think its a little silly to get upset by people’s internet-handles.

                    6. Really, John, it seems like you’re not reading my question.

                      You think this dude is arguing in good faith?

                      He’s intentionally misreading you and gibbering as he thinks he’s “disrupting” things.

                      Classic “flame war” trolling tactics that hail all the way back to Usenet.

                    7. FIFTH TIME

                      Why do you INSIST that calling somebody an “asshole” — based on bullshit — is “upbeat and optimistic?”

                      I do think its a little silly to get upset by people’s internet-handles.

                      Properly applying labels means getting upset?

                    8. The asshole prof cheered the white genocide during the Haitian Revolution. He’s an asshole.

                      There’s a big difference between killing slaveholders (and unjust, fascist judges) and killing three-year-olds. And, if you don’t get the distinction, well, that makes you an asshole and an idiot.

                    9. There’s a big difference between killing slaveholders (and unjust, fascist judges) and killing three-year-olds.

                      You just stabbed Gilmore in the back .,.. showing I was correct about the source of your chipper barbarity.

                      Even aside from the dumbfucks who swallowed the bullshit about white genocide in Haiti. It’s the only place on earth where slaves revolted themselvs into a free country.

              2. You’re talking to the deranged psychopath, Michael Hihn.

                1. You’re talking to the deranged psychopath, Michael Hihn.

                  Obviously that’s not the case.

                  If the person you refer to had changed their name to obscure their identity, it would suggest they were ashamed of their prior behavior. I doubt the person called “Hihn” had such high regard for the opinions of people here that they would bother with that sort of obfuscation.

                  1. JGII’s style of argumentation – personal attacks a la libertarian impurity – coupled with parentheticals like (laughing) just scream Hihn.

                    1. He qoutes the line about 91percent of libertarians rejecting the libertarian brand below. A definite Hihn callimg card.

                    2. He qoutes the line about 91percent of libertarians rejecting the libertarian brand below. A definite Hihn callimg card.

                      Ever hear of Cato? David Boaz?

                      Cato survey conducted by a top pollster

                      “In our Zogby survey we found that only 9 percent of voters with libertarian views identify themselves that way.” -David Boaz and David Kirby

                      Sorry, loser. But I did cite Cato, not Hihn. See the entire survey at the link.

                    3. Mr. Paulbotto|12.26.16 @ 7:00PM|#
                      He qoutes the line about 91percent of libertarians rejecting the libertarian brand below. A definite Hihn callimg card.

                      It’s a VERY well known and often cited survey, slick.
                      Ever hear of the Cato Institute, sluggo?
                      The same survey cited frequently by Johnson, Weld and countless other prominent libertarians for several years now.

                      The same survey that found 59% of Americans are libertarians. You never heard that EITHER?
                      Then you’ve made a total fool of yourself, publicly. You’d best stay at the kiddie table for a few more years.

                    4. personal attacks a la libertarian impurity

                      You’re a psycho, fucking liar. That’s not a personal attack, because you lied about me doing so. Just another cyber-thug. As I practice my right of self-defense against aggression. (yawn)

        2. “Reason.com, a leading libertarian website whose clever writing is eclipsed only by the blowhard stupidity of its commenting peanut gallery.”

          When I read this I swelled up. Like huge.

          1. All the goobers are proud of being thuggish authoritarians.
            They actually brag about it!

        3. With pride.

          1. Anyone surprised that he’s proud of possessing “blowhard stupidity”?
            Thereby proving popehat.com to be absolutely correct when they reported:

            “Reason.com, a leading libertarian website whose clever writing is eclipsed only by the blowhard stupidity of its commenting peanut gallery.”

            Thugs REVEL in their thuggery, for all of human history!
            Is this why the libertarian brand is rejected by 91% of libertarians? (per Cato Institute survey)

      2. He claims that it was sarcasm mocking a conspiracy theory many alt-righters have. Now I would argue that a more constructive response for him to have would be to apologize for anyone he accidentally offended and learn Twitter is not a place for inside jokes, rather than bash the “right wing trolls” who don’t follow the ins and outs of alt-right conspiracy theories closely enough to get the joke.

        1. He claims that it was sarcasm mocking a conspiracy theory many alt-righters have

          Says the psycho liar

    2. A poster on American Thinker nicknamed AF_Chief_Master_SGT posted the following then I quoted:
      “Can you imagine the uproar if any of the following were tweeted?
      -All I want for Christmas is black genocide.
      -All I want for Christmas is Asian genocide.
      -All I want for Christmas is homosexual genocide.
      -All I want for Christmas is (fill in the blank) genocide.
      Apparently, the only acceptable tweet is: “All I want for Christmas is white genocide.”

      Of course, amoeba1981 will be here shortly to explain the difference, and how the other tweets would be racist, but because of blah, blah, blah, the white genocide comment is appropriate. Soon to be designated as “Lib-splaining.” Defined as anytime a liberal comment has to be explained to someone with common sense.”

      1. And btw, that teacher should read that blog post from Aaron Clarey alias Captain Capitalism who posted a good rant about a world without white people and its unintended consequences.
        http://captaincapitalism.blogs…..eople.html
        In case if his blog post is deleted, it’s archived at https://archive.is/tCB28

        1. That professor is a Communist. For him, there are no unintended consequences, only capitalistic interference.

          1. Also totally ignorant on communism… a disgrace to REAL anarchists.
            Would you say the same about the Israeli Kibbutz? The Oneida Community? All the communes in colonial America?

      2. -All I want for Christmas is (fill in the blank) genocide.

        Isn’t this the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement?

      3. Apparently, the only acceptable tweet is: “All I want for Christmas is white genocide.”

        Umm. It was tweeted by a white guy.

        1. First, John you must have a lot of time in your parents basement since you are always commenting on this tread.

          But your whole argument is “He’s a white guy”. So what? So that mean’s he can’t want white genocide? In his mind, he wouldn’t be killed because he thinks the ‘right’ way. It would be all the other white people.

          Same as people who say “we have too many people on the planet, they should all die” yet, they themselves are people.

          Besides whining that he is white, you haven’t made one argument of why you think he’s joking. Not one.

          Go back to your trying to troll here.

          Wait, I know he’s white.

          1. First, John you must have a lot of time in your parents basement since you are always commenting on this tread.

            Do you have anything mature to add?

            But your whole argument is “He’s a white guy”. So what?

            It shows you as a dumb ass.

            So that mean’s he can’t want white genocide?

            Now an even bigger dumbass!

            In his mind, he wouldn’t be killed because he thinks the ‘right’ way. It would be all the other white people.

            Escalating further as a dumbass … now claims to be a mind reader.,

            Same as people who say “we have too many people on the planet, they should all die” yet, they themselves are people.

            Escalates further, from a dumbass to a dumbfuck.
            Clearly in desperation

            .Besides whining that he is white, you haven’t made one argument of why you think he’s joking. Not one.

            Now a RETARDED dumbfuck. It’s YOUR job to show that he wasn’t. You’ll learn about the stupidity of proving a negative when you get to the 7th grade.

            Go back to your trying to troll here.

            (snicker)

            Crazy dumbfuck retard claims people say everyone should be killed — including themselves — because of overpopulation. Demands I prove a negative. Just another braying bully

            (My tone and boldface in defense of aggression by a thug. )

  27. In any case, I don’t really want people punished for saying stupid things on Twitter

    If you really want to roll back the SJW tide, the best way may be to enforce their prohibitions equally. If it’s racism to criticize blacks, then it’s racism to criticize whites. If it’s misogyny to criticize women, then it’s misandry to criticize men.

    Far, far smaller jokes that offend the pet groups of the left have resulted in dismissal of non-leftists. If you want to stop that, a taste of their own medicine seems appropriate.

    1. Provided that tone deaf people continue to ignore proportion and history.

      Then again, tone deaf people don’t get the basics right. This is from eight years ago:
      http://blogs.chicagotribune.co…..ctual.html

      1. MarconiDarwin|12.26.16 @ 3:20PM|#
        “Provided that tone deaf people continue to ignore proportion and history.”

        And provided idiots like you continue to show up here providing ample proof of lefty mendacity.
        Fuck off.

    2. If you really want to roll back the SJW tide, the best way may be to enforce their prohibitions equally.

      Exactly. The #1 cause of progressive policy-failure? Is implementation.

      The thing that kills* progressives is giving them exactly what they ask for.

      (literally and figuratively)

      1. Not to mention “good and hard.”

      2. Which is exactly why California should secede.

        1. If they don’t secede in short order, can they be ejected?

    3. If you really want to roll back the SJW tide

      Umm, he defended Twitter’s rights but not the rights of a private university … which makes him a SJW. Likewise, it’s kinda wacky to deny PC on the political right.

      1. The “PC on the political right” is not a major force, the way it is on the left, so I am much less concerned about it.

        1. It’s not true that keeping your eyes closed changes a reality you refuse to accept.

        2. If being against genocide of all sorts makes for “PC on the political right”, then call me PC if you want.

          At least the rightwing PC types won’t be hashtagging “#whitegenocidesmatter”.

          Or, maybe they will, tongue in cheek, but they won’t call you racist if you retort that all genocides matter.

          1. If being against genocide of all sorts makes for “PC on the political right”,

            It doesn’t. But you’re thinking and/or reading ability is highly suspect.

            So … instead of prancing around in an illogical snit fit, do you have anything relevant to what was actually said?

            “Umm, he defended Twitter’s rights but not the rights of a private university … which makes him a SJW. Likewise, it’s kinda wacky to deny PC on the political right.”

            That would be an SJW against the university. And being an SJW is ……..

            Plus he (assuming Robby is a he) also lied about the university’s response, which stoked at least 75% of the comments here.

    4. If you really want to roll back the SJW tide, the best way may be to enforce their prohibitions equally.

      Winner.

      Fight back in kind, using all the weapons they have crafted.

      It’s the *initiation* of force that is wrong. Fighting back is a moral necessity.

      One way cease fire is surrender.

      1. Fight back in kind, using all the weapons they have crafted.
        It’s the *initiation* of force that is wrong. Fighting back is a moral necessity.

        And since you’re obviously not a militant hypocrite, that includes fighting back against Ron Paul, right?

  28. This is what the world looks like when hope is gone.

    1. +1 peaceful but incredibly tacky transition of power

    2. hope is gone

      But is the White House silverware still there?

  29. I think it’s probably fair to say there’s a double standard here
    The same that is on display when people say “Black Power” vs “White Power” and only the latter is considered racist, eh, Robby?

    1. And when Robby defends Twitter’s rights but not those of a private university.
      Perhaps Robby INTENDED to unleash all the smug bigots we see here???

      1. Drexel is a private university? Really? They don’t receive taxpayer funding?

        Oh wait, they do receive public funding. Guess what? That makes them a public university.

        1. Drexel is a private university? Really?

          Ummm, yes. http://drexel.edu

          Oh wait, they do receive public funding. Guess what? That makes them a public university.

          Only to your fellow leftwing fascists … any excuse to deny free speech to EVERYONE. Like your own public funding.

  30. All I want for christmas is dead niggers.

    That’s a joke. Isnt it funny? It’s hilarious, right? Everyone who read that is just laughing their ass off.

    “Drexel should not discourage a professor from expressing his mind on Twitter”

    I wouldn’t discourage him. I like to know who’s who. I would whip his ass though, and while he was crawling around his office floor trying to find his teeth I would throw all of his shit out the window.

    What the hell is wrong with you Robbie? Oh, and these alt-righters, do they have secret Nazi haircuts? Show us some twits from the alt-right where they are advocating murder or stfu. For all of their pervasiveness they sure are hard to nail down.

    I am a bit hung over from yesterday. Am I missing something here? I get up from a nap and find this? Maybe I should start drinking again.

    1. I wouldn’t discourage him. I like to know who’s who. I would whip his ass though, and while he was crawling around his office floor trying to find his teeth

      We already knew you as a hate-spewing authoritarian thug.
      And why so many of you on this page? Was it the topic?

      1. Oh great, another Tulpa sockpuppet.

        1. It’s Hihn this time. Of course, we’re all Tulpa so you’re not wrong.

          1. I thought Hihn was big on the silly names? Oh touche good sir.

          2. Wholly fuck! We’re all just various manifestations of Tulpa’s multiple personality disorder?

            That is fucking depressing.

        2. BULLLY!

        3. In the warped mind of psychotic reasonoids, this speech is praised by everyone except “Tulpa sockpuppets”

          .Papaya SF
          “I wouldn’t discourage him. I like to know who’s who. I would whip his ass though, and while he was crawling around his office floor trying to find his teeth”

          Just count how many goobers defend such extreme moral depravity (sigh)
          SEIG HEIL!

          1. You have added my handle to something I did not write. What’s your point?

            1. You have added my handle to something I did not write. What’s your point?

              You defended it. Remember?
              Which I said is typical of “psychotic reasonoids” Or are you defending brutal physical aggression again?

              1. Um, no, I actually did not defend “it,” if by that you mean the particular statement you added my handle to. You are in a world of your own, dude.

                1. PapayaSF|12.26.16 @ 9:04PM|#
                  Um, no, I actually did not defend “it,”

                  Liar.
                  https://reason.com/blog/2016/12…..nt_6640457

                  if by that you mean the particular statement you added my handle to.

                  Here’s what psycho attacked me for.

                  Suthenboy “I wouldn’t discourage him. I like to know who’s who. I would whip his ass though, and while he was crawling around his office floor trying to find his teeth”

                  GALT “We already knew you as a hate-spewing authoritarian thug. ”

                  PapayaBrain: “Oh great, another Tulpa sockpuppet.”

                  That means you AGREED WITH ME? (lol)
                  You defended the thug … being known as one yourself. Now the psychotic denial:

                  You are in a world of your own, dude.

                  You defended it. I provided the link and repeated the exchange. You are now proven to be as psycho a liar as Trump.

                  STOP STALKING ME, THUG.

                  1. Wow, you are totally wacky. Pointing out a sock puppet account is not a defense or endorsement of any other comment. This is basic logic.

                    1. This is basic logic.

                      (yawn) It’s another pathetic lie. Keep sinking lower and lower,

                    2. Another Hihnahrretic!

          2. “goobers”

            It’s Tulpa.

            PapayaSF said no such thing.

            1. Galt: Just count how many goobers defend such extreme moral depravity (sigh)

              OneOut: “goobers”
              It’s Tulpa.
              PapayaSF said no such thing.

              He defended it.
              That makes you a special class of goober!

              1. Shut up hihn nobody loves you.

                1. My name is Galt, and hatred by you is welcomed, since it confirms my moral and intellectual superiority.

      2. Who said his ass couldn’t be kicked? The guy is talking about genocide… isn’t an ass-kicking sort of soft?

        1. He’s white. Isn’t that obvious?

    2. Ummm, did it ever occur to you that the professor is WHITE?

      1. Well then, maybe he should kick his own ass…

        1. Well then, maybe he should kick his own ass…

          Yes, a great way to expose the stupidity of the mob here! Thanks.

  31. An alt-righter tweeting about black genocide would be more likely to face a Twitter ban. But then again, the alt-right person might not be joking.

    Robbie, do you have any examples of this hypothetical alt-tighter calling for genocide? Otherwise,we have no basis for whether he’d be joking or not. What we DO know is that this guy not only made the call, but emphasized it. That’s not usually a behavior one associates with humor. More to the point, I’m curious, do you really think we believe you’d be as supportive of a white professor calling for a genocide of white people?

    1. Do you really think we believe you’d be as supportive of a white professor calling for a genocide of white people?

      HE *IS* A WHITE PROFESSOR. AND THE SCHOOL DEFENDED HIS RIGHT TO DO SO … so Robby is just fomenting hysteria, sadly common in today’s Reason.

  32. I think it’s probably fair to say there’s a double standard here

    ctrl+f deeply evil

    Yup.

  33. Yeah… I’m not so sure. Considering his revolutionary politics, a statement like that cannot be taken lightly. If your tweet is obviously satirical then calls to take it down would be met with ridicule and scorn. That didn’t happen here.

  34. But then again, the alt-right person might not be joking.

    Well exactly. And when they post about genocide you’ll be sorry you defended this guy. And by the way, this guy is an instigator. His job is to get you defend him to give the alt-right cover for their own mischief. They are trying to ignite the fire. Which is why he should be roundly criticized.

  35. It’s poetic that the American Association of University Professors was founded in response to the dismissal of a Stanford professor (sociology) who advocated East Asian genocide.

    This professor eventually became the chairman of the American Civil Liberties Union.

    1. Ross, who lived in Wisconsin at the time, was a reserved proponent[17] of sterilization and indicated his support for the measure.[18] He qualified his support by contrasting it with the greater harm of hanging a man.and advocated its initial use “only to extreme cases, where the commitments and the record pile up an overwhelming case.”

      Ross visited Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917. He endorsed the revolution even as he acknowledged its bloody origins. He was subsequently a leading advocate of US recognition of the Soviet Union. However, he later served on the Dewey Commission, which cleared Leon Trotsky of the charges made against him by the Soviet government during the Moscow Trials.[19]

      From 1900 to the 1920s, Ross supported the alcohol Prohibition movement as well as contunuing to support eugenics and immigration restriction.[20] By 1930, he had moved away from those views, however.

      In the 1930s, he was a supporter of the New Deal programs of President Franklin Roosevelt. In 1940, he became chairman of the national committee of the American Civil Liberties Union,

      I….if I saw a fictional character like this, I’d be like “OK, settle down, Ayn Rand, you’re going a bit far making your villain too right-on”.

    2. It’s poetic that the American Association of University Professors was founded in response to the dismissal of a Stanford professor (sociology) who advocated East Asian genocide

      It’s called freedom of expression. The majority of commenters here (so far) will have no idea what you linked to.
      Just as you don’t know ….

        1. I guessed Tulpa above, but you might be right. Or are we sure they aren’t the same person…?

          1. I was thinking Tulpa too.

        2. Hihn, we know it’s you.

          How would that change it from a freedom of expression issue.

          If you click Robby’s link, you’ll see how Robby has played you on this.
          Even the university defended the professor’s right of free expression.
          (Will he check the link?)

          1. It’s my freedom of expression to say JG the Second is a raging douche-nozzle.

            1. I asked, “Will he check the link?”
              Nope. Instead he attacks me personally for …. defending HIS free speech!

              It’s my freedom of expression to say JG the Second is a raging douche-nozzle.

              Yes it is. Free speech is a right of yours and all your fellow thugs and bullies, like Nazis, the KKK, etc.

      1. Just as you don’t know ….

        Considering I’m the one who provided the example, other than your childish “If Heroic Mulatto’s for it, I’m against it!” game, on what basis do you stand to argue that I don’t?

        1. Just as you don’t know ….

          Considering I’m the one who provided the example, other than your childish “If Heroic Mulatto’s for it, I’m against it!” game,

          You’re full of shit AGAIN, since I never did such a thing. Shame on you.

          1. It’s Hihnarrhea!

            1. So you defend blatant bullshit too?

              1. So you claim to be telepathic as well?

                1. So you claim to be telepathic as well?

                  Retard, I was attacked for calling you out as a fucking liar. So he defended your blatant bullshit.

                  Second callout on Heroic (sic) Mulatto’s bullshit (again in self defense)

                  Considering I’m the one who provided the example, other than your childish “If Heroic Mulatto’s for it, I’m against it!” game,

                  You’re full of shit AGAIN, since I never did such a thing. Shame on you.

                  Shame on you AGAIN. Target your aggression elsewhere, thug

            2. Red Rocks Dickin Bimbos|12.26.16 @ 8:39PM|#
              It’s Hihnarrhea!

              (snicker)
              https://reason.com/blog/2016/12…..nt_6646750

  36. I don’t really want people punished for saying stupid things on Twitter, though the social network is well within its rights to take whatever action it deems necessary.

    Also true for a private university. This continues Reason’s long-standing ignorance on the fundamental libertarian principle of free speech.

    1. True, but many private universities, Drexel among them, have an implicit contractual relationship with both their students and faculty that promises free speech.

      1. I was going to note something similar. A private accredited university, as a member institution of the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AACU) is bound by the joint agreement made with the AAUP concerning academic freedom and tenure, particularly:

        If the administration of a college or university feels that a teacher has not observed the admonitions of paragraph 3 of the section on Academic Freedom and believes that the extramural utterances of the teacher have been such as to raise grave doubts concerning the teacher’s fitness for his or her position, it may proceed to file charges under paragraph 4 of the section on Academic Tenure. In pressing such charges, the administration should remember that teachers are citizens and should be accorded the freedom of citizens. In such cases the administration must assume full responsibility, and the American Association of University Professors and the Association of American Colleges are free to make an investigation.

        As I noted earlier, since the AAUP, itself, was founded to basically argue that a professor making speeches on his own time about how we need to kill all the Japs didn’t affect his fitness for the job, I doubt you’ll get much traction in this case as well.

        1. HeroicMulatto
          e that a professor making speeches on his own time about how we need to kill all the Japs didn’t affect his fitness for the job,

          THAT is what you’re full of shit on.
          Like your attack on Trump’s border wall.

          1. THAT is what you’re full of shit on.

            If by “you’re,” you mean “John Dewey,” then yeah.

            1. (laughing)

              Cowardly Mulatto “that a professor making speeches on his own time about how we need to kill all the Japs didn’t affect his fitness for the job.”

              Galt: “THAT is what you’re full of shit on.”

              Cowardly Mulatto “If by ‘you’re,’ you mean ‘John Dewey, then yeah.”

              I meant your pathetic fucking lie about killing all the Japs … that’s why I quoted it!

              DO YOU NOW CLAIM THAT JOHN DEWEY WROTE THE WIKIPEDIA ENTRY YOU LIED ABOUT?

              (Now he’ll get even more pathetic. Watch and see!)

                1. You’re still here, dumbfuck,

      2. True, but many private universities,

        Why do you include “but” and then agree with me?

        1. I ain’t agreeing with you. Drexel, as Heroic Mulatto pointed out, is contractually obligated towards its students and faculty to allow freedom of speech, despite their position as a private university.

          In fact, “many” was an understatement. Nearly all private universities are so obligated. Very few, like Liberty University (as an example) are not so obligated.

          1. I ain’t agreeing with you.

            You have no idea what you’re doing. And Robby has manipulated you rather shamefully. Follow Robby’s own link

            George Ciccariello-Maher, who is white and an associate professor of politics at the Philadelphia university, told The Associated Press by email Monday that his Christmas Eve message to nearly 11,000 Twitter followers – “All I Want for Christmas is White Genocide” – was meant to be satirical.

            Drexel was not amused, condemning Ciccariello-Maher’s tweet and saying in a statement it was “taking this situation very seriously.”

            While the University recognizes the right of its faculty to freely express their thoughts and opinions in public debate, Professor Ciccariello-Maher’s comments are utterly reprehensible, deeply disturbing, and do not in any way reflect the values of the University,” Drexel said.

  37. I mean, what’s a drexel anyway?

    1. I use mine to polish jewelry and sharpen garden implements

    2. It’s the man it was named after.

    3. dremel for voxels.

  38. — I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. —

    So George, I find your character utterly lacking in value. Go die in a fire.

    1. The professor is white. (lol)

  39. Speaking of genocide: cheetahs are headed for extinction. Thanks, socialism. How come buffalos are doing fine? Because people can own them.

    1. I think of that whenever a government burns several tons of confiscated ivory: poaching ivory is remunerative because it’s so expensive. It’s expensive because it’s so rare. So, naturally, instead of flooding the market with confiscated ivory and driving down the price, the authorities burn it and make it even rarer. And poaching continues.

      1. “Cash For Tuskers”

        1. I usually paid cash for my Tuskers

    2. Are cheetahs (cheetaeh?) good eats? I guess people might wear them, tacky fuckers. Now, tigers….

  40. I was having this weird dream last night that Donald Trump was elected President. Then I woke up and you know how like when you awake from a bad dream, it takes a few moments for you to realize, with much relief, wow that was just a dream, thank… OH SHIT!

  41. Quality trolling from Robby.

    1. It certainly sent Hihn into one of his orgasmic REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE-fests.

  42. Sargon 1, Robby 0. Someone actually bothered to look at this guy’s other tweets. You might want to do any work at all trying to find out what’s going on, asshole.

    1. All actual journalism takes place on youtube and twitter.

    2. Sargon 1, Robby 0

      Six minutes. Worthwhile.

      1. Not really. But it did expose Robby as a liar on the University’s objection.
        Did you notice the school DEFENDED the professor’s right of free expression? Also at Robby’s own link!!
        Or were you looking for something else?

      2. The Sargon link is near the top of the thread too. First link in the comments section, as I type this.

        1. The Sargon link is near the top of the thread too.

          The one you lied about, calling it a “real reporter?” The one that reports how the university defends his right to posy what he did? Or shal we all cherry-pick the facts we want?

          1. typo posy = post

  43. Sorry Robbie. Free speech means you can say what you want to, it doesn’t mean there won’t be consequence. Continuing to employ an advocate of hate speech is a negative mark on the school’s reputation. Drexel isn’t going to David Duke as a sociology professor for obvious reasons.

    1. The university disagrees, since they defended the professor’s right of expression, without reservation.

      1. And I agree with the university. Don’t fire him unless you have to, but at least let there be transparency. If you make views like this, you should have to defend them, publicly.

        1. He said it was intended as satire.
          He’s white.
          Like when Dave Chappelle jokes about being a Grand Wizard (or sumfing) in the KKK

          1. Aww, someone has a sore arse? Would you like a free sample of my Brexit Butthurt lotion?

            1. READY FIRE AIM

              Aww, someone has a sore arse

              (laughing at the fool) Since when is stating a simple truth mean a “sore arse” to your ilk?

              Would you like a free sample of my Brexit Butthurt lotion?

              Did you buy enough for yourself?

  44. By the way, if you think that genocide in this country isn’t possible you should do a bit to research on the Rwandan genocide. Race on race, tribe on tribe, sect on sect. It is NOT impossible.

    Speaking as a reformed leftie, I have seen a growing acceptance on the left of left authoritarianism and hate. Part of why I moved independent. Beware. This is not a joke, there is a segment of people like this that really do want you dead if you are even a step to the right of their view.

    1. It is NOT impossible.

      We’re three steps out of the cave as far as human nature goes. Leftists seem to think that human nature can be molded by force of government and the power of good intentions. They are delusional of course.

      I have seen a growing acceptance on the left of left authoritarianism and hate.

      Yep. And they dress it up in opposites. Equality means leftists are superior to anyone who disagrees with them. Inclusiveness means no other points of view shall be included. Tolerance means only their point of view shall be tolerated. Thus in the name of equality, inclusiveness, and tolerance, they would cheerfully murder anyone who disagrees with them.

      1. Leftists seem to think that human nature can be molded by force of government and the power of good intentions. They are delusional of course.

        So are you.
        Ron Paul is not generally considered to be on the left, but he’s among the very worst at advocating government force to control or change human behavior.

    2. On the other hand there used to be these “Twelve Tribes” guys in Times Square, who ranted for hours at a time, and advocated white genocide as a warm-up.

      No one took them seriously and everyone gave them their freedom of speech. It was Times Square after all. After some years they went away.

      So is this Prof to be taken more seriously than those guys? I don’t personally, but Drexel might.

      1. I loved those guys!

        Nice to know the costumes from Conan the Barbarian were put to good use.

      2. On the other hand there used to be these “Twelve Tribes” guys in Times Square, who ranted for hours at a time, and advocated white genocide as a warm-up.

        NO SHIT? ?And they were white?

    3. Ironically, the same people who say ‘white genocide is impossible because privilege, or because we’re the majority’ are the same people gleefully predicting and anticipating the near future when white people are a minority so they ‘get what’s coming to them.’

      And it is certainly true that any attempt to eradicate white people would be a farcical failure. But what difference does that make? The Nazis failed to eradicate the Jews, the Hutus failed to eradicate the Tutsis. Was that failure any consolation to the individuals who got murdered? If the day comes when leftist douche bags commit acts of violence against white people, does the inevitable failure of their grand scheme somehow undo that violence?

      1. The pompous ass doesn’t know the professor is white.

    4. Well, there is a fairly hard brake, since a lot of right wingers like having guns, and joke about all the accessories for guns being like buying accessories for Barbie’s dream house. But left wingers don’t have them. They could try to pull the U.S army to their side, but I kind of doubt the GI bill kids are going to be all that sympathetic to special snowflakes.

      1. You’re right that guns are less popular on the Left, but you might be surprised that there are many of them who do own guns, and not just grandpappy’s old hunting rifle that he passed down; I’m talking about AKs and ARs. Many of them even concealed carry.

        It just goes to show the hypocrisy on the Left. They enjoy making use of all kinds of freedoms while advocating the denial of those same freedoms to others.

        1. Yeah I know about some of the Black Lives Matter and Pink Pistols crowd. Hell, I used to hang out with some Texas Homos, and they really love packing heat when people think about pulling hate crimes against them. A .9mm pointed at a bigots face really makes bigots reconsider their options. There’s a good reason there aren’t any sob stories about Texas Homosexuals that could be turned into Oscar bait.

          But that’s maybe 2% of the lefty population.

          1. There’s virtually no homosexuals hate crimes anyway. It’s national news if someone doesn’t bake them a cake. They’re like the non-existent Muslim hate crimes.

            Good for them if they want to carry guns, but the reason they aren’t attacked is because the majority of Americans are not violent.

            1. Oh you sweet summer summer child. You think that acceptance of homosexuality was just some natural thing. It really wasn’t, there was a shit ton or violence and street fighting involved.

              If I was looking for someone that could handle themselves in a fight, I figure the nearest 40 year old fag probably knows how to throw a punch better than you.

              1. So you can’t rebut me and instead get get all pissy and say I can’t fight. Okay, sorry to tell you homo hate crimes are virtually non-existent. Homosexual oppression is non-existent, and more to the opposite end as it’s fashionable right now. I get it, plenty of people like to feel they made a difference. Look at how many stupid people think they are Rosa Parks and holding off the secret Nazi army. I’m sure the delusions are fulfilling. People like to think they’re important I guess.

                1. Okay, sorry to tell you homo hate crimes are virtually non-existent. Homosexual oppression is non-existent. Homosexual oppression is non-existent,

                  Ron Paul alone proves you a psycho … for anyone who NEEDS more proof than you’ve given,

                  lPeople like to think they’re important I guess.

                  Many of us are. But not you.

          2. Pointless nitpick, but a “.9 mm” pointed at someone ain’t doing shit, other than maybe doubling them over with laughter.

            A 9mm, though, that’s one of the fun ones.

        2. It just goes to show the hypocrisy on the Left. They enjoy making use of all kinds of freedoms while advocating the denial of those same freedoms to others.

          Which shows the massive stupidity and bigotry on the right … assumes everyone on the left is anti-gun — thus stating the proof of his own stupidity. Scary.

    5. By the way, if you think that genocide in this country isn’t possible

      Get a grip. The professor is white,

    6. By the way, if you think that genocide in this country isn’t possible you should do a bit to research on the Rwandan genocide.

      The Rwandan genocide happened in this country? Who knew?

  45. many private universities, Drexel among them, have an implicit contractual relationship with both their students and faculty that promises free speech.

    Some schools have explicit policies espousing free speech and the embrace of freedom of thought and intellectual exploration but that doesn’t seem to inhibit their tendency to consider some speeches more equal than others.

    1. isn’t free speech limited when calling for the harm of others, which genocide fits into harm pretty clearly.

      1. Umm, the professor is white.

        1. Ummm hey douchebag, you keep saying that like your tiny fucking brain thinks it means something.

          There are plenty of examples of traitors to their race, gender, or creed betraying their people over the course of history.

          1. Ummm hey douchebag, you keep saying that like your tiny fucking brain thinks it means something.

            Ron said “others.” (laughing)

            There are plenty of examples of traitors to their race, gender, or creed betraying their people over the course of history.

            BECAUSE of their race, gender or creed????

  46. I guess we’re not getting Links, so may as well start shitposting.

    A video that overlaps Heroic Mulatto and Bear Odinsson while being perfectly SFW:

    Anglish – What if English Were 100% Germanic?

    Not only is it pretty interesting (at least to me), it name-checks Poul Anderson, whose books I’ve been reading this past month, and kicking myself for never reading him before. Every libertarian-leaning person should read his Polesotechnic series at least.

    1. He was one of the greats. I met him once.

    2. Modern English is heavily inundated with Romance languages. Benefit, if you’re a native speaker of English learning a Romance language, you can quickly figure out words you haven’t learned just from the root of the word. You will also quickly figure out which worlds are from the old Germanic English and which are the words derived from the Latin Romance language roots.

      1. That’s what video is about. And also, how to construct sentences using only German-root words (sometimes you need archaic words, and sometimes you need to go full German and coin new ones from parts).

        1. I know. I can think of hundreds of examples of this right off, but it’s too long of a list to go into. But some things that come to mind right off are words like birthday. Where we typically only use anniversary for a wedding date, speakers of Romance language will refer to your birthday as (Portuguese – anniversario). Or our word, start, which we could instead say ‘commence’, but no one says ‘We should ‘commence’ getting ready for our trip now. I mean you could say that, but it would make you sound like a retard.

          1. But this helped me a lot when learning Portuguese, because even if you haven’t yet learned a word, you can still recognize it by the root. Like University, so when someone says Universidade, you recognize what it is even if you never heard the word before.

          2. Yeah, they do say English has the largest vocabulary and that two-words-for-everything nature is probably the main reason.

            1. 2 or 3 or 4 or 6. Our use of verbs and present/past/future tense is a lot easier. Also, we don’t need a masculine and feminine version of almost every word.

              1. Wait until we have to come up with a new word for each of the 47 genders.

                1. I might not have to try to argue as much that it is perfectly OK to end sentences with prepositions. We’re speaking a Germanic language, not Romantic, Romantic rules don’t apply to us.

      2. I’m guessing “Uncleftish Beholding” makes an appearance? I only watched the first few seconds and immediately quibbled with his argument that English is “not exactly” a Germanic language. Bzzt!

  47. Drexel is “taking this situation very seriously”

    So, John A. Fry is “taking full responsibility”?

    1. Now that’s just dumb. The guys behind the counter in pawn shops are always armed. Always.

    2. I guess, since it was also a pawn shop, they figured there’d be cash on hand, but seriously, why? A moment’s thought (about the same time required to go “hey, if we wear a mask, they won’t know who we are from a photo”, which they got), and you should realize this guy is far more likely to be packing than an average store owner.

      1. As Jerryskids points out above, gun shop guys are ALWAYS armed.

        1. I misread…sarcasmic, not Jerryskids.

  48. Did somebody say…genocide?

    1. Down, boy. Not the right kind. You’ll get your turn soon.

    2. You know who else — oh! Never mind.

  49. My wife bought this for our son for xmas. I’ll be in the oven seeking sweet relief..

    1. “Honey, *WTF* were you thinking?”

    2. I’m seriously considering a drum kit for my daughters 8th birthday. I was someone to jam with. I will use it regardless. Always wanted to learn the drums.

      1. Yeah, I’d trade them for a drum set right about now. These stoopid things are glorified harmonicas and he’s freakin 10 yrs old, not the toddler age that they’re meant for. I told her that if he’s interested in trumpet and/or sax we can just buy him a professional lesson or two to give him a feel for it. Not everyone’s a big fan of playing the trumpet once you figure out what your lips have to do to make sound.

        1. Not everyone’s a big fan of playing the trumpet once you figure out what your lips have to do to make sound.

          (raises hand)

          all wind instruments *blow*

          i think if you’re going to give kids a musical instrument in the modern day, a set of miditrigger pads is actually more practical and utilitarian, and actually does teach kids how to use the same music-making tools/software everyone else is currently using. Hook those things to a laptop or an iPad, and some kids-level version of Garage-band or Ableton, and you’re pretty much set for the next decade or so.

          1. Fuck you.

            You wish you could get pussies as wet as when they hear an EWI.

            1. I really need one of those.

              One of my many “good ideas never fully acted on” was the idea of an “ALL-CASIO* POWER TRIO” band.

              I have a set of midi drum pads
              a DG-20 midi guitar
              and a casio-keyboard that has multiple controllers & drum pads

              All of them have MIDI outs

              the idea was to plug all of them into my Akai S5000 and play incongruous patches. e.g. Piano on the guitar, drums on the keys, and some melodic thing on the drum pads.

              we jammed on the idea once. then dissambled the stuff and never did it again. But a “horn” would totally complete the band.,

      2. I am buying my grandson a drum set.

        Yes, I am doing it on purpose. I am evil like that.

        1. Wow, that’s a total dick move. I consider sending a kid a drum set the ultimate fuck you to their parents. I’ve mostly just been sending Legos, and Electronic kits to inlaws I don’t like, on the basis that they would step on Legos. Sending a drum kit to a kid goes from passive-aggressive to straight up aggressive.

  50. “But then again, the alt-right person might not be joking.”
    Um, what makes you think he’s joking? He also said that the genocide of white people in Haiti after the Haitian revolution was a good thing. He seems pretty serious. Why is it that, whenever a leftist says something despicable he gets cut some slack because he said ‘um, just kidding’ afterward?

    “We gotta get all these niggers outta this country if there’s any chance of making it great again!”

    “Just kidding, haha.”
    All better Robby? I didn’t think so.

  51. Did somebody say…genocide?

    Just don’t say “holocaust” or you’ll find yourself up on copyright infringement charges.

  52. Why would you consider comments by an alt-right person to be more serious than any left leaning person? i think the left is by far more dangerous and more likely to pass a law to make their wishes come true.

    1. The more we complain about Robbie’s cosmotarianism the pinker he gets. He is trolling us. I can almost hear his hair’s maniacal laughter.

      1. yes true but if Reason writers keep trying to maintain the appearance of politically balanced articles by making unprovable claims against people who have nothing to do with the main story people may quit reading and donating

        1. That has already begun to happen

  53. Yeah, objection noted, Mr. Soave. Noted, spat upon, shot through the head, drawn, quartered, burned and dragged through the street in front of screaming mobs.

    IOW, he can keep his Twitter account, but must be fired from his job, which, we are led to believe, includes (I am never sure how this is supposed to work) ensuring the safety of the delicate feelings of his students. Such sentiments are not conducive to feelings of inclusion and safety on the part of his white students, so…out he goes!

    Drexel, a PRIVATE ENTERPRISE, can dump him for whatever reasons they choose, and however undesirable arbitrary employment loss may be, it is already an active principle for those whose comments are deemed “problematic” or “insensitive” on an entirely subjective basis by any member of a “marginalized” group. Or would you rather we adopt a two tier system of logic, morality and justice based on group membership?

    Pretty sure that’s something we’ve tried to *correct*, when it existed before in our history.

    1. That’s kind of old news. Although I don’t think it’s kind of funny that when it comes to ferreting out fake news, the mainstream media went with the cuckholded guy. Nobody could be bothered to take him aside and tell him that he’s screwing up the narrative.

  54. The hilarious thing is that if push ever came to shove, where would puss puss here be……hiding under the bed with his dipshit buddies like Marconi the troll.

  55. I dunno, leftists are always talking about how great genocide would be. It’s not really a stretch to think he’s serious.

    Seriously, engage one into a conversation about the environment and sooner or later they will say there are too many people. Usually sooner.

  56. Also I realize it’s largely virtue signalling, but are there any actual examples of alt-right people saying genocide should happen and then actually committing an act of violence?

    The casual way the media throws out stuff like that, without any evidence backing it up, is essentially propaganda.

    Meanwhile, environmental activists on the left who essentially advocate genocide (saying the Earth is too crowded) actually have made concrete steps toward accomplishing that. The de-factor ban on GMO crops in parts of the world has led to countless deaths and blindness due to malnutrition. The ban on DDT has kept millions in thrall to mosquito born diseases.

    Those are actual things that have affected the world in a major way. Has any alt-right twritter troll done anything, much less on that scale?

    Even if you include that pizza-gate moron, he didn’t actually hurt anyone and actually thought he was rescuing people.

    1. “The casual way the media throws out stuff like that, without any evidence backing it up, is essentially propaganda.”

      No way! Fake News? is a tactic exclusively employed by the alt-right. Every real media outlet is a bastion of ideological balance and rigorous adherence to the facts.

      1. I heard part of an interview with Julian Assange today. He said that the whole ‘Russians hacked the election’ kerfuffle is a total fiction.

        1. And you can bet that if the Russians had leaked info about the Republican candidate and that candidate subsequently lost, the Lefties would be singing their praises and calling Russia a great friend of American democracy.

  57. Why would you make the assumption that they are joking? I’m pretty sure it was 100% serious. Left-wing racism is far more prevalent than the other varieties these days.

  58. These days the alt-right is sounding a lot more reasonable than Reason.

    1. All I really want for Christmas is some more real libertarians to work here once again, like in the good old days. More David Harsanyis, Andrew Napolitanos, and John Stossels, and fewer Steve Chapmans, Shikha Dalmias, Rico Suaves, Elizabeth Nolan Browns, and Pete Macadoodle Suderweigels.

      Give me that, and I promise to be a really good boy in 2017 Santa.

      1. Bullshit. You are never going to be a good boy, but for once I agree with you.

  59. He’s like Dylan Storm Roof – trying to incite a race war. Maybe his daddy told him to do it. Maybe his middle name is “Bolsh”. What he did was despicable and he has no defense.

  60. Semi-OT: Is anyone else tired of hearing people – mostly “progressives” – whining about the “materialism and commercialism” of Christmas?

    The “anti-materialist” viewpoint is corny. I understand that there are bratty children out there who will throw a fit if they don’t get the latest iPhone, and these children need a good kick in the ass. I understand that there are things in life that far exceed the value of material goods. But material goods are nevertheless required for life. They say money doesn’t buy happiness, but give away all your money and possessions, then report back to me with your happiness levels.

    If you amass so many material goods – or rather, the money that can be exchanged for them – you eliminate a whole class of worries from your life. Worrying about paying bills will make you unhappy. Wondering where your next meal comes from will make you unhappy. So why is it some terrible thing to strive for more money? As long as you’re not hurting anyone else, who cares?

    This is something that I’ve thought all year round, but around Christmas, there’s always a spike in complaining about materialism. If you don’t like the “materialism”, have a gift-free Christmas. Nobody is stopping you.

    1. Is anyone else tired of hearing people – mostly “progressives” – whining about the “materialism and commercialism” of Christmas?

      (shrug)

      I don’t recall anything saying participation was compulsory.

    2. “Worrying about paying bills will make you unhappy. Wondering where your next meal comes from will make you unhappy.”

      Certainly, none of the homilies I’ve heard on the True Meaning of Christmas suggest that it’s tacky to earn money to eat and pay needed bills.

      I *have* heard a priest complain about families spending more money than they have during Christmas.

      Does that make him some kind of commie?

    3. Of course, Christmas is horribly materialist, but demanding that others pay for your education or birth control? Totally fine.

      If a Taoist bitches about Christmas materialism, that’s fair enough though.

    4. Whining about commericalism. Some things are evergreen. I remember (my memory is bad, but this is the gist) reading that there was a cartoon in the New Yorker in the 1930s about two guys walking down the street and seeing Christmas decorations. The one guy said to the other, “well, I guess it’s almost Halloween.”

      I’ve been hearing about how Christmas is earlier every year. But the fact is, I’ve heard that my whole life. If Xmas came 6 hours earlier every year since I’ve been hearing about it, the season would be starting in August by now.

    1. ^i see (mr simple|12.26.16 @ 1:50PM) beat me to this above

    2. “I can lick fifty tigers today.”

      Sure you can Jugears.

      1. This reminds me of a friend from my youth. He was one of those guys sometimes referred to as a ‘hard man’. He was built like a brick shithouse and tough as a piney woods rooter. He had never lost a fight.

        He got into a dispute with a guy half his size. Nothing about that fellow would tip you off…unless you knew that he was a welder. Never get into a fight with a welder.

        Their dispute escalated to a physical confrontation. My friend described it like this:

        “I don’t know what happened. He grabbed my chest and picked me up by my skin. By my damned skin. I was paralyzed by pain and the next thing I knew my face was in the dirt and gravel was in my mouth. Don’t fuck with that guy”

        1. He grabbed my chest and picked me up by my skin

          That’s Chandleresque

        2. “piney woods rooter”…

          I like that.

          1. A piney woods rooter is a feral hog that lives in the pine forest hills in Louisiana.

  61. OT: Anybody else having difficulties posting with their phone? Since about Friday every time I try to post with my phone (Verizon LG Transpyre with Android and Chrome), the posts just go to a blank page. No problem posting from the desktop, though.

    1. You too?! I can’t understand why I can’t either. I keep dial the correct letters from my rotary phone but it’s not working!

    2. Never, because I use an actual computer designed for typing and stuff.

      1. Can’t do that on my breaks at work.

  62. The guy was looking for approval from his peers I suspect. You see, when you live in a world where (it seems) all positive outcomes are dependent on your conformity, you will say stupid shit even if it harms you personally. You see, he’s IN now with all the other self-haters. He may have been “joking,” but the only part that makes it a joke is his own self-loathing and “whiteness.”

  63. I wanted a new thread and all I got was a nasty Hihnfection 🙁

    1. Awe shit. That bad?

    2. Have you tried an anti-hihnstimine?

      1. Ok, we’re on to you, trying to start that meth lab.

    3. Hihnfections are well known to be at their most severe around 3 or 4 in the morning.

  64. People joke about “What ever happened to that other guy in Wham!?” but Andrew Ridgeley ended up with Keren Woodward of Bananarama. Lucky guy.

    1. As far as I can tell, Ric Ocasek and Pavl?na Po??zkov? are still married 27 years on.

      Marilyn McCoo and Billy Davis Jr. from the Fifth Dimension have been married for 47 years now.

      1. To mention another ’80s music heartthrob of mine, Patty Smyth is still with John McEnroe.

        I just Googled to see what Marilyn McCoo looks like now. Wow. Not bad for 70+.

  65. Did anybody else get an email of KMW’s article about the end of the year?

      1. Hmmm. Mine’s time-stamped 4:06 PM. (Technically, 1306 from time zone UTC -8.)

  66. Really, what this comes down to, is that if you really want white genocide, then gather your following and try it. I’m serious, George Ciccariello-Maher, either try it, or you’re the biggest pussy who ever lived and you should lick the white dog turd. So which is it, mister?

    1. This is why I like you Hyp.

      I second that.

  67. Trump’s cabinet picks out to destroy own agencies

    Let’s say this were true. Where’s the problem?

    1. Other than that being a Salon link, I don’t see a problem.

    2. From Salon’s lips to God’s ears.

  68. Cornbread Mafia may be the best “mafia” name ever. Not looking good for this fella. Busted for growing some plants. Well, 2000 plants but still. The canuks ratted him out.

    1. Thanks for the nut-punch.

      1. sorry for that

        1. No prob. Used to it by now.

  69. There’s a petition making the rounds to get the meeting of this man and University officials recorded. I support this, as I think he should have to publicly defend his racism.

    1. I have a feeling he and the SJWs would use it as an opportunity to grandstand.

      1. And grandstanding would be productive how??

        1. As productive as the idiots who shout down Milo Yiannopoulos [sp?]

    2. defend his racism

      The dude is white. Can one be racist against ones own race? I would like to see him publicly defend the argument for genocide to achieve political change. The asshat is a full blown Marxist. Let him publicly defend those beliefs. I doubt he would be called out on them in a University hearing over a stupid Tweet.

      1. Can one be racist against ones own race?

        I dunno; but I assume this guy is just signalling to his friends how goodthinkful he is.

      2. Can one be racist against ones own race?

        Ask Thomas Sowell or Clarence Thomas (or rather, ask progressives about the versions that live in their heads).

        1. The progressives call anyone who does not fall into line like Sowell or Thomas, who happen to have a darker skin tone, an Uncle Tom or sell out or whatever. They don’t call them racists that I am aware of.

          After the election I have read numerous articles about whiteness, whitelash, all the horrid stupid fucks in flyover country who voted for Trump. What this professor is calling for is not a racist thing. He is calling for killing flyover people who voted for Trump so we can achieve a utopia ran by super smart PhD’s like him. I say let him defend that. He is not a racist. He is an authoritarian douche bag who backed Chavez. A murderous fuck who also liked to kill people who did not think like him. Let him defend that.

      3. Why not? There have been Jewish anti-Semites.

          1. Certainly in actions, if not in philosophy and intentions. I had been thinking of Samuel Roth, who I recently read about.

  70. “Trump says UN just a club for people to ‘have a good time'”
    http://www.sfgate.com/news/pol…..819585.php

    No doubt AP assumes this to be an indication of how outrageous Trump can be, but I’m guessing there are plenty of people who not only don’t find this offensive, but nod and reckon they’d been thinking that for quite some time.
    IOWs, it is one more measure of how impervious that echo-chamber has become.

    1. Trump’s tweet Monday about the U.N. ignores much of the work that goes on in the 193-member global organization.

      Nice editorializing there, AP. But I guess enabling kleptocrats around the world IS hard work, so there’s that.

    2. The General Assembly has also approved dozens of resolutions on issues, like the role of diamonds in fueling conflicts; condemned human rights abuses in Iran and North Korea; and authorized an investigation of alleged war crimes in Syria.

      Because approving “resolutions” fixes everything.

      1. Some resolutions are more equal than others:

        “10. Misogynistic Iran joined the Executive Board of UN Women, the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women.”
        More: http://www.unwatch.org/top-10-…..ents-2016/

        1. If that does not make them a joke, I don’t know what could.

          8. The UN Human Rights Council held a minute of silence for brutal dictator and human rights abuser Fidel Castro. UN Watch was the only NGO in the room which refused to stand.

          Good for UN Watch. They should have had a round of applause and an open bar to celebrate Castros death.

          1. Again, I can’t wait to hear the gnashing of teeth and see the rending of garments when the Trump administration moves the American embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to its capital of Jerusalem.

            1. Do you really think they will do that? I am not sure Trump would even do it. That would cause some serious hysteria.

              1. We’ll see. It was a campaign promise…and it’s Trump…so who knows? But as far as foreign policy has been concerned, Trump has, so far, basically reenacted this scene. So I’m bullish on him committing to the move.

                1. HM, didn’t get “English: Meaning and Culture” under the tree, so it’s on order. One reason Mrs. Sevo didn’t ‘gift’ it was the hard-cover price: $1,900+. I got the soft cover, which I might regret; if so, I’ll go back and buy the real thing.
                  I understand short-run university editions; I think my copy of Athenian Economics was well over $500, and worth it, but it’s a shock to those who just ‘buy books’.

          2. “8. The UN Human Rights Council held a minute of silence for brutal dictator and human rights abuser Fidel Castro. UN Watch was the only NGO in the room which refused to stand.

            “National Health Care” was rated by one of the UN councils. Cuba scored high on the list, the same list rated US medical care very poorly.
            During the push for O-care, I searched and found the rating criteria several times to rebut the claim that the US medical care was ‘an embarrassment’; that list of criteria is not at the top of any search engine, you have to look.
            One of the criteria which was (is?) a major score determinate of “quality of care” was quite simple: Were consumers of it charged for what they bought? If so, that rated “poor” on a scale heavily weighted toward such matters. There was no criteria I found in the list which measured wait times.
            IOWs, it was a score card written by statists, foisted on the world by them as if it had validity other than a pure statist desire for free shit, with the result bought by, oh, the slimy US left. And peddled as ‘fact based’.
            Yes, the UN should DIE.
            Now.

        2. Didn’t know about that site. Glad I came to the bottom of this thread.

    3. This reminds me of that pearl-clutching NY Times list of all the people Obama insulted. Why, he insulted Hillary, and Obama, and George Will, and Bill Kristol, and Iran, and China, and various news organizations, and….

      So I read down the list, and think: “This is supposed to make me dislike the guy…?”

    4. BTW, one of our own is in the comments, givin’ ’em Hell; get ’em kcassidy!

    1. “This expansion adds a layer of protection to one of the last great wilderness areas on Earth.”

      You mean, most of Earth?

  71. Shorter Robby”

    “While in principle is is unfortunate that the non-leftist lost his job/was publicly humiliated/disemboweled over his intemperate if possibly discriminatory speech it is really only leftists saying leftist things that might cause me to man the barricades.

  72. All I want for Christmas is a squirrel genocide.

  73. All I want for Christmas is a squirrel genocide.

  74. All I want for Christmas is a squirrel genocide.

  75. All I want for Christmas is a squirrel genocide.

  76. All I want for Christmas is a squirrel genocide.

    1. How many do you really need?

      1. depends on the acorn yield this fall?

  77. Mourning Trump and the America We Could Have Been.

    The New Yorker is not that good at counter factuals.

    What makes Clinton’s defeat unique, I think, is that we’re grieving for the nation we could have been, a nation some of us feel we are: a nation that elected a female President and rejected the rhetoric of nativism and fear that Donald Trump so casually embraced.

    1. *From Nov. 10. But I just saw it, so ptttttp.

    2. a nation that elected a female President

      They really think this is why she lost. It’s beyond parody.

    3. In this election, because the division between the candidates was so stark, many of the liberal ?lite are asking themselves what they missed, how this could be. It feels tragic that we as a nation could have arrived at such different conclusions?not just different but irreconcilable

      Irreconcilable I tell you!

      My English 101 prof assigned The New Yorker as required reading back in the early 90’s. We had to write essays weekly on the content.

    4. “…we’re grieving for the nation we could have been,…”

      The “we” being the author and the turd in his/her pocket?
      Sure ain’t me. The more the left whinges on, and the more he keeps trolling them, the more I wish I had voted for him.

  78. OT: I finally picked up Seveneves but unfortunately it’s boring me. Too much maker-geek wankery. I miss the fun and inventiveness of Diamond Age and Anathem.

  79. “If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?”
    ? Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago 1918-1956

    Think I’ve seen this quote posted here before. You’re evil. *Boom*, killed ya. You’re good. *Boom*, here’s some free shit. By believing that their internal battle has been won, collectivists get to use violence guilt-free. Yet I’m the threat and called a “radical individualist” by the very same people that proclaim white privilege is real. Doubt I’ll make it through the entire three volume set, but I’m gonna give it a shot.

    1. Here’s what triggered that thought. Fucking Lewis Black. Hack.

      1. Ugh, why would anyone submit themselves to that?!

        1. Vitriolic virtue signalling is delicious.

      2. “Here’s what triggered that thought. Fucking Lewis Black.”

        A man who has made a career of acting like a D ignoramus and claiming to be ‘smart’.
        Pretty sure commie-kid isn’t smart enough to make a living off it, but there’s not a lot of difference.

        1. It’s funny that he goes off on screaming rants against individualism while holding a mic on stage in front of thousands of people. No irony there. Nope.

          1. No self-knowledge, either. Like Stalin condemning Hitler for causing mass deaths:
            ARE?
            YOU?
            KIDDING?

            1. Consistency is not their strong suit.

        1. Never. I serve Myself until I die.

    2. “Solzhenitsyn”

      Other than a hatred of Soviet communism, he pretty much was against everything that libertarians should advocate for. Better to go with Orwell, I would say.

      1. american socialist|12.27.16 @ 12:42AM|#
        “Solzhenitsyn”
        Other than a hatred of Soviet communism, he pretty much was against everything that libertarians should advocate for. Better to go with Orwell, I would say.”

        A hatred of what you hold dear is a good starting point.
        Other than that, WIH would an asswipe like you presume anyone here cares about your whines?
        Fuck off.

        1. Machiavelli and Sun Tzu weren’t libertarians so I’m not readin’ them. Amsoc ups the stupid every single fucking time.

  80. “conservatives on Twitter were predictably outrageD”

    So what? Fuck them and their speech codes on campus.

    1. american socialist|12.27.16 @ 12:32AM|#
      “conservatives on Twitter were predictably outrageD”
      So what? Fuck them and their speech codes on campus.

      Notice that asswipe presumes a “conservative” speech code on some campus.
      There is stupid.
      There is really stupid.
      There is abysmally stupid.
      And there is asswipe.

      1. Notice that asswipe presumes a “conservative” speech code on some campus.

        Umm, he quoted Robby’s writing that conservatives were PREDICTABLY enraged.. Now THINK.
        If conservatives on Twitter are outraged — like so many conservatives here — then many on Twitter are supporting speech codes on campus — like so many conservatives have done here.
        OR …. for the unknown percentage NOT supporting campus speech codes, then …. YOU AGREE WITH AMSOC! .

        There is stupid.
        There is really stupid.
        There is abysmally stupid.
        And there is asswipe.

        Yes, but we’ve come to expect it from you..

        There is also the matter of Robby’s dishonest reporting. His own link reports that the college defended the professor’s right of free expression. Their ONLY (stated) concern is for the image of the school. How many people would assume the professor was speaking for the university? These days, libruls aren’t the only ones so easily manipulated by hysteria.

        1. “Umm, he quoted Robby’s writing that conservatives were PREDICTABLY enraged.. Now THINK.
          If conservatives on Twitter are outraged — like so many conservatives here — then many on Twitter are supporting speech codes on campus — like so many conservatives have done here.”

          Have I mentioned that you’re a stupid shit? I have now.
          Fuck off, shitbag.

          1. (yawn)

  81. Why shouldn’t a private university fire a professor for offensive, racist language? Drexel’s image and business are tainted by this guy’s behavior.

    1. Drexel’s image and business are tainted by this guy’s behavior.

      Other than yourself, how many would equate that to the university itself?

  82. Oh boy here we go.

    Drexel absolutely should take this seriously because this employee of theirs reflects poorly on them.

    The government isn’t coming after this guy, which they shouldn’t (though you could make the case they could if drexel receives public funding).

  83. According to the prof, the joke is that:

    (1) “white genocide” is a term supposedly used by the alt-right to refer to the alleged erasure of white culture by modernity or multiculturalism or something; and (2) the prof thinks its dumb and was making fun of it.

    I don’t know – it’s a pretty offensive thing to say if you are not one of fewthousand or so people in the right who believe in the idea or one of the few thousand people on the left who worry about what those thousand or so people think, and therefore don’t get the joke. (If I thought that the idea of genocide of minorities at the guns of US police were overblown and said “all I want for Christmas is for the police to commit genocide on the inner city,” it’s at best a fairly tasteless joke.)

    1. According to the prof, the joke is that:

      Bullshit. Are you also suckered by anonymous emails?

      1. I wasn’t commenting on whether he actually was joking or not, only trying to figure out what the alleged “joke” was supposed to be.

        But since you sort of asked, here’s my opinion.

        “White genocide” does seem to have a meaning in a little corner of the left, in that they believe that it’s something that “white supremacists” talk about. (Google for a little background and to see the Wikipedia page).

        So I tend to think that he thought he was making fun of white supremacists, but it’s possible that he either was calling on whites to be either the victims of or perpetrators of genocide.

        1. I think by “joke” he really means “highly inflammatory but not necessarily literally.”

        2. I wasn’t commenting on whether he actually was joking or not, only trying to figure out what the alleged “joke” was supposed to be.

          (sigh) “Bullshit” means you lied about what he said.
          And now you change your story. What a piece of work.

          1. Fuck off, asswipe.

            1. BOOGA BOOGA
              Cyber-bullies don’t scare me

          2. Are you really this mad about everything, JG II? If so, and I mean this seriously, you don’t have to be. There are people who love you and want to help you, whether it’s religious folks, counselors or whatever. I want you to be happy too.

            If not, and this is just fun for you, then carry on.

            1. Are you really this mad about everything, JG II?

              (snicker) No rage, moral integrity. I called you out as a fucking liar. And you attack me instead of defending your lie — which proves me correct.

              if his is just fun for you

              Exposing bullshitters is not fun, it’s a moral imperative.

              Let the record show that — when challenged — you ran away from your psycho lie. So I win. And you’re exposed as a belligerent blowhard!
              Thank you for playing


              .

              1. I’m not attacking you – if you were unhappy, I honestly wanted to try to help. Best wishes.

                1. I’m not attacking you –

                  https://reason.com/blog/2016/12…..nt_6643207

                  Trump is not the only psychopathic liar,

  84. I’m sure Robby will be rushing to defend this poor woman over her wrongful termination.

    http://www.reuters.com/article…..SKBN14G1HH

    That’s the Reason standard isn’t it? At least according to Hinkle – who called out all those ‘religious liberty’ types who have not rushed to the defense of a would be mosque in Culpeper, Virginia.

    So when is Soave going to issue his statement in support of the woman?

    And the difference couldn’t be more profound. While both comments have racial tones, only one is calling for actual murder.

    1. Or: When is Hinkle going to call Soave out for his failure to defend the woman from the heavy hand of government – which clearly wanted her punished for what is obviously protected political speech.

    2. ‘m sure Robby will be rushing to defend this poor woman over her wrongful termination.

      I checked your link. And shuddered.

      That’s the Reason standard isn’t it? At least according to Hinkle – who called out all those ‘religious liberty’ types who have not rushed to the defense of a would be mosque in Culpeper, Virginia.

      Here’s what Hinkle wrote. https://reason.com/archives/201…..n-culpeppe
      NO equivalence at all,

      So when is Soave going to issue his statement in support of the woman?

      ZERO equivalence.

      And the difference couldn’t be more profound. While both comments have racial tones, only one is calling for actual murder.

      Bullshit, He’s white. Talking about whites. NO racial overtones.

      A white WOMAN saying Michelle Obama — who is black BTW — is “an ape in heels,” now THAT has racial overtones. And you DARE to equate the two?

      Hinkle ridiculed all the phony conservatives who piss and moan about religious liberty … but only ONE religion. So you’re also clueless on what religious liberty means, as you defend the moral hypocrisy of National Review, Daily Caller and others. So you manage to defend overt racism and religious bigotry. Self-righteously!

      1. Fuck off, asswipe.

        1. (yawn)

  85. Here’s what REALLY happened … on top of Robby’s dishonesty on the university’s position. The professor was making a DIRECT response to white supremacists on Twitter … which now also exposes all the bigots who posted wacko delusions here. Trump is just the most visible manifestation of our society’s collapse into hatred (by the shrinking minority of tribal partisans).

  86. And if he’s a natural blue-eyed blond, it’s funny.

  87. And if he’s a natural blue-eyed blond, it’s funny.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.