VA’s Weeping Vaginas

Ugly Bitch Crying - Weeping VaginasVA’s weeping vaginas are especially dripping and snotty right now. Yep, the titularly female millennials of the toxic wave of feminism on the University of Mary Washington’s campus are suing their college for not sufficiently protecting them from people who “said mean things” to or about them on an anonymous social media app Yik Yak.

They claim that, by not blocking Yik Yak on the school’s Wi-Fi, the university fostered a sexually hostile environment that failed to “protect the Plaintiffs from [the] effects” of the offensive yaks.

But then, this is par for the course for the womyn of modern feminism. They demand special protections from opposing views and other things that offend them. And, to sort of give them the benefit of the doubt, these womyn have been so misraised that they are actually viscerally threatened by such things, which makes their demands logical in a way, if still heinous, counterproductive, anti-American, and rather anti-feminist.

Weeping Vaginas Aren’t Men’s Equals

Weeping vaginas that a screaming and engaging in lawfare to gain specials protections from opposing views that offend them, especially if such offense actually scares them, aren’t men’s equals. They may well be sadly the equal of the penis-bearing snowflakes but not of actual men. Indeed, they can’t even rightfully claim to believe that they’re the equals of men since they spend so much time claiming oppression and the need for coddling and protection at the expense of other’s basic freedoms.

Related Reading:

America's Bitter Pill: Money, Politics, Backroom Deals, and the Fight to Fix Our Broken Healthcare System
Fiske Guide to Colleges 2018
The Law of Success Deluxe Edition
Collaborative Law
A Room of One's Own

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Adieu Et Bon Débarras

Adieu Et Bon Débarras, Paris!

Adieu Et Bon Débarras, Paris!

Goodby and good riddance, Paris – specifically the The Paris Agreement which was brokered in France during the COP 21 talks. All the signs are present that President Trump will remove America from this Climate Change Agreement. Once again proving he’s a political outsider, strongly looks as if Trump will keep yet another campaign promise.

I’m happy with this and our domestic enemies are livid over it – weeping, wailing, gnashing their teeth, and promising retribution. I will, however give these Liberals and Progressives a small measure of credit this time. This isn’t just another episode of their derangement. President Trump pulling America out of Paris Agreement is apocalyptic for their hopes and dreams of a “greener,” weaker America.

And yes! I’m big enough to admit that I’m petty and mean enough so that a significant part of my happiness with leaving the Paris Agreement is that the Left is so butt-hurt over doing so.

Here, however, is one important point, though not the key point for me: This Paris Agreement isn’t actually that horrific from my point of view. It is and was largely meaningless and without any provisions – or even delusions thereof – of any of its various articles being actually binding or enforceable upon the the 196 signatories. In this it is a lot like NATO.

Is It A Treaty Or Not?

No. My primary reason for being happy about leaving the Paris Agreement is that it really wasn’t legally enacted in the first place or, at least, it was easily arguable that it wasn’t. This is because it’s a treaty or, at least it certainly seems to meet the legal requirement for being one, and Obama just signed it as if he were king without ever sending it to the Senate for ratification, which is constitutionally required. So, if it is a treaty, it is not one that America ever entered into and President Trump would just be correcting an illegal act by Obama.

Then again, some legal experts argue that the Paris Agreement isn’t a treaty, despite it easily meeting the prima facie standard of such under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which states “an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international law” (VCLT art. 2.1(a)) is a treaty. It was, after all, specially and specifically crafted to not be a treaty so that it didn’t need to undergo the required scrutiny by the various states that such things entail. In other words, it was written in a manner that Obama could sign it unilaterally under the auspices of the UNFCCC, instead of sending to the Senate for approval. So it could be argued that this was just an Executive Agreement under the law.

If the latter is held to be true, this is ironic in the extreme since Obama’s signing the Paris Agreement violated the 1992 Executive Agreement with the Senate to submit for their review and ratification any future agreements which contained “targets and timetables” for emissions reductions by the US.

So, there it is. Either it’s a treaty; in which case, it’s null and void due to its unconstitutional and illegal enactment; or it’s simply an Executive Agreement by Obama; in which case, it ceased being binding on January 20th, 2017 and President Trump is well and completely within his rights to either formally rescind our nation’s participation or simply ignore it in whole or in part and to do so for any or no reason whatsoever.

Either way, President Trump would be doing the right thing in my opinion. Whether it was executive overreach on Obama’s part or his simply violating the agreement under which the Senate ratified the UNFCCC in the first place, putting an end to it would the right thing.

Related Reading:

The Progressive Virus: Why You Can't Permit it to Go Forward
Big Agenda: President Trump’s Plan to Save America
21 Weeks: Week 1
White Trash: The 400-Year Untold History of Class in America
Lonely Planet France (Travel Guide)

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Gendered Public Housing

Sadly, we’re forced to hear the womyn of the current, toxic wave of Feminists rant, rail, scream, and whine about sexism and “The Patriarchy.” While sane people understand that these strident complaints are both groundless and merely the desperate demand for attention by failed women, they may have a point within the narrow context of public housing. The rules governing which housing the state will provide for those unable to support their children is highly gendered.

Gendered Public HousingGendered Public Housing In America

You see, there is something akin to “The Patriarchy.” We as a society certainly do hold women to lower standard than men in some ways and in some contexts. 😉

Of course, we’re we to treat women who are unable or unwilling to support their children as we do the males – I won’t call them men – who behave in this way, the Feminists would strap on their pussy hats and go crazy in the streets. This is simply because Feminism isn’t about sexual equality; it’s about garnering more, and more, and more special privileges, protections, and monies for females.

Related Reading:

The Plot to Hack America: How Putin’s Cyberspies and WikiLeaks Tried to Steal the 2016 Election
Mean Dads for a Better America: The Generous Rewards of an Old-Fashioned Childhood
The Complete Make-Ahead Cookbook: From Appetizers to Desserts-500 Recipes You Can Make in Advance (America's Test Kitchen)
The Law Of The Beast: A Bad Boy Romance
Witches, Sluts, Feminists: Conjuring the Sex Positive

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | |