Authorities steadfast in promoting HK’s universal suffrage

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-06/05/c_134301601.htm

BEIJING, June 5 (Xinhua) — Chinese authorities are steadfast in promoting a universal suffrage package proposed by the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region’s (SAR) government and sincerely hope the city can seize the opportunity to advance its democratic development, said a commentary published on Friday.

The Hong Kong SAR government plans to submit the plan, which was revealed in late April, to the SAR Legislative Council (LegCo) for a vote on June 17, which means that the realization of a “one person, one vote” chief executive election in 2017 has come to a critical stage.

The package proposed by the SAR government is the most appropriate institutional arrangement for Hong Kong’s universal suffrage, said the commentary carried on the People’s Daily, China’s leading newspaper, adding it is in line with the Basic Law, decisions of the National People’s Congress (NPC) Standing Committee, as well as national sovereignty, security and development interests.

The commentary said the plan has given consideration to interests of all social strata, conforms to the SAR’s reality and has won broad support from residents.

To realize the city’s universal suffrage is a goal set by the Hong Kong Basic Law and a solemn promise made by the Chinese central government to all SAR residents, said the commentary.

It said after its return to China’s rule in 1997, the central authorities have been steadily promoting Hong Kong’s democratic development in line with the basic law and Hong Kong’s situation.

The NPC Standing Committee, China’s top legislature, has clarified legal procedures, a timetable and roadmap for Hong Kong’s democratic development, laying a solid foundation for the ultimate realization of universal suffrage.

After the top legislature made a legal decision that Hong Kong can launch universal suffrage in 2017 on Aug. 31, 2014, central government officials in charge of the matter have talked to people from all walks of life in Hong Kong, explaining the decision. Meanwhile, the SAR government held several public consultations.

The measures show the central authorities’ firm stance in supporting Hong Kong’s democratic development, said the commentary.

To realize the “one person, one vote” chief executive election in 2017, members of the LegCo played a crucial role. However, some Hong Kong legislators hold different views about the universal suffrage package, threatening to veto the plan which states that candidates to be the next SAR chief executive will be picked by a 1,200-member nominating committee from four social sectors consisting of 38 sub-sectors.

Some trumpet so-called “real” universal suffrage with the real intention of seizing administrative power.

As the package must be endorsed by at least two-thirds of LegCo members, legislators are critical in deciding whether Hong Kong would reach the democratic milestone, which is now only a step away.

If they persist in vetoing the plan, not only will the right to choose for more than five million voters be annulled, the economic development of the SAR will also be affected. Such a prospect does no good for anyone.

The central authorities sincerely hope all the legislators use their vote in line with the best interests of Hong Kong and the nation, take into account the majority of Hong Kong people’s opinion and make historical contributions to the SAR’s democracy and social progress, said the commentary.

The Profound Racism of #BlackLivesMatter’

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2015/john-perazzo/the-profound-racism-of-black-lives-matter/

“Black Lives Matter.” At first blush, it seems difficult to imagine anyone taking issue with the obvious, self-evident truth articulated by those three simple words. But when we peel away the veneer of deception, we find that Black Lives Matter (BLM) is in fact one of the most destructive, hateful, racist movements in living memory. Founded by a core group of revolutionaries who detest the United States and revere the nation’s most devoted radical enemies, BLM is, at its essence, an ideological reincarnation of the Black Panther movement that flourished in the Sixties.

Black Lives Matter was established two years ago in response to the acquittal of George Zimmerman, the “white Hispanic” who was tried for murder and manslaughter vis-à-vis the 2012 killing of Trayvon Martin. According to BLM, Zimmerman’s act was but a microcosm of the “virulent anti-Black racism” that “permeates our society” and continues to exacerbate “the deep psychological wounds of slavery, racism and structural oppression.”

Emphasizing the permanence of America’s depredations, BLM maintains that: (a) our nation’s “corrupt democracy” was originally “built on Indigenous genocide and chattel slavery” and “continues to thrive on the brutal exploitation of people of color”; (b) “the ugly American traditions of patriarchy, classism, racism, and militarism” pervade every aspect of our society; (c) “structural oppression” still “prevents so many from realizing their dreams”; and (d) blacks in the U.S. are routinely “de-humaniz[ed]” and targeted for “extrajudicial killings … by police and vigilantes” in our “white supremacist system.”

You see, “Black Lives Matter” means a whole lot more than just “Black Lives Matter.”

The lead founder of BLM is Alicia Garza, a young woman who candidly reveres Assata Shakur—the Marxist revolutionary, former Black Panther, and convicted cop-killer whose 1979 escape to Fidel Castro’s Cuba was facilitated by the Weather Underground Organization and the Black Liberation Army. Others whom Garza praises for their “extraordinary” accomplishments include Angela Davis (a Marxist and former Black Panther); Ella Baker (an avowed socialist who had ties to the Communist Party USA and the Weather Underground); and Audre Lorde (a black Marxist lesbian feminist).

In recent months, you’ve likely heard some commentators—generally in reaction to black killings of fellow blacks or of police officers—tweak Garza’s signature catch-phrase to suggest that “All Lives Matter.” But this type of ideological deviation is unacceptable to Miss Garza, who reminds us that blacks “are uniquely, systematically, and savagely targeted by the state” in a way that no other people are. “[S]tand with us in affirming Black lives,” she declares. “Not just all lives. Black lives. Please do not change the conversation by talking about how your life matters, too.” The “tired trope that we are all the same,” Garza elaborates, serves only to “perpetuate a level of White supremacist domination.”

“Black Lives Matter”? You bet. Other lives? Screw you.

Another of BLM’s co-founders, Patrisse Cullors, is a self-identified “freedom fighter” who advocates dramatically “reducing the law-enforcement budget” and forcing some police departments to be entirely “disbanded or abolished.” “With a reduction of law-enforcement money,” says Cullors, “we can then be putting it back into Black communities”—i.e., government-funded programs that provide “black folks” with “jobs,” “housing,” and “healthy food.” In other words, a Marxist paradise filled with dutiful slaves who are entirely dependent upon Washington.

The third and final co-founder of BLM, Opal Tometi, is a “Black feminist writer” and “cultural organizer” who contends that “the racist structures that have long oppressed Black people” perpetuate a “cycle of oppression” that “allows law enforcement to kill Black people at nearly the same rate as Jim Crow lynchings” once occurred in the Old South.

To improve the allegedly abysmal condition of blacks in the United States, BLM has issued a series of non-negotiable demands. These include: (a) “an immediate end to police brutality”; (b) “full, living-wage employment for our people”; (c) “decent housing”; (d) “freedom from mass incarceration”; (e) “a public education system that teaches the rich history of Black people”; and (f) “the release of all U.S. political prisoners.” Most of these demands are modeled, sometimes word-for-word, on those that were articulated by the Black Panthers in the 1960s.

Recently, BLM sponsored a panel discussion on “Policing, Race, and Injustice,” featuring a talk by former New Black Panther Party chairman Malik Shabazz. That’s the same Malik Shabazz who has openly advocated a race war in America; who has exhorted blacks to avenge police shootings of African Americans by creating “funeral[s] in the police community”; who refers to “the white man” as black people’s “common enemy”; who characterizes America’s founders as nothing more than a loathsome pack of “Indian killers, slave traders, [and] slave owners”; and who praised Osama bin Laden after 9/11 as a Muslim “brother” and “a bold man” who was bravely “standing up” for his beliefs and “bringing reform to this world.”

Have you noticed that the supporters of BLM are able to recite the names of their sainted martyrs—Trayvon Martin, Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Freddie Gray, Tamir Rice, Timothy Russell, Malissa Williams, etc.—as easily you can name the members of your own immediate family? Notably, however, they can’t name any of the 6,000 black Americans whose lives are snuffed out each year by black killers. Those unfortunate, anonymous souls, you see, aren’t worth a damn to the BLM crowd, because their deaths can’t be exploited to gin up hatred against white cops, or to spark race riots in the streets. So while the names and likenesses of Trayvon, Eric, Michael, Freddie, and the rest are emblazoned on t-shirts, hoodies, and banners bearing the “Black Lives Matter” slogan, BLM views victims of black crime—whatever the race of those victims—as worthy of adorning nothing more than a roll of toilet paper.

“Black Lives Matter” is a misnomer. A more accurate name would be “Black Lives Matter if They’re Terminated by a White Person or a Cop; All Other Black Lives Can Go to Hell.” It doesn’t roll quite so easily off the tongue, but it’s exactly what BLM believes.

USCU Lesbian Professor Lisa Johnson Described ‘Serious Mental Illness’

http://theothermccain.com/2014/03/31/uscu-lesbian-professor-lisa-johnson-described-serious-mental-illness/

The director of the University of South Carolina Upstate (USCU) Center for Women’s and Gender Studies (CWGS) suffers from a “serious mental illness” and in 2010 described herself as a “newlywed lesbian” whose partner was apparently her former student.

Professor Merri Lisa Johnson published a 2010 book about her struggles with borderline personality disorder. The description of her partner in that book appears to fit a young “butch” lesbian who graduated from USCU in 2008, two years after Professor Johnson joined the faculty of the school in Spartanburg, S.C.

USCU became the focus of controversy when it was reported that the school would host a performance of “How to Be a Lesbian in 10 Days or Less” next week as part of the CWGS-hosted symposium, “Bodies of Knowledge.” When asked by Campus Reform reporter Lauren Cooley “what percentage of the funding” for the symposium “was coming from the university,” Professor Johnson replied: “Until you call and ask how much money has been spent on heterosexual literature, I’m not going to answer that question.”

In her 2010 book, Girl in Need of a Tourniquet: Memoir of a Borderline Personality, Professor Johnson describes herself as a “psycho girlfriend” with a history of dysfunctional relationships with both men and women: “Johnson combines her late-in-life coming out story (between ages 31-37) with the story of what amounts to a nervous breakdown as the result of an affair with a married lesbian colleague.” That affair “prompted her to seek professional help,” apparently around the time Professor Johnson  left Coastal Carolina University to become director of USCU-CWGS in 2006.An article about the book describes Professor Johnson:

A newlywed lesbian-after-marriage, Johnson currently resides in South Carolina with her partner Stace and their two loyal shih tzus.  The mixed species pack of four shares a 1920s-era craftsman bungalow fondly known among family and friends as The Haney-Johnson Halfway House for the Bright but Broken-Hearted.

Stacey Haney was one of Professor Johnson’s most honored students at USCU, receiving one of four Campus Consciousness-Raising Awards for the 2006-2007 school year and also winning an Award for Scholarly Achievement in Women’s and Gender Studies for the 2007-08 school year. Professor Johnson selected the annual CWGS award winners in her role as the center’s director. Haney served as president of the student group Upstate Feminists, and in 2008 presented a paper at the Wofford College Conference on Gender entitled, “Butch is Back: The Marginalization of Butch Feminists Across the Feminist and Queer Communities.” Haney, who graduated from USCU in December 2008, subsequently served as a teaching assistant at CWGS and in 2009-2010 took graduate courses at the University of South Carolina in Columbia, researching “new theoretical approaches for understanding transgendered identity and embodiment.”

Professor Johnson has edited feminist anthologies, including Jane Sexes It Up: True Confessions of Feminist Desire (2002) and Third Wave Feminism and Television: Jane Puts It in a Box (2007).

In an article last fall, Professor Johnson described her “queer feminist insistence on the importance, validity, and complexity of women’s pleasure” and her “Marxist feminist distrust of pleasure under patriarchy,” adding that “teaching Women’s and Gender Studies 101 since fall 2006 . . . has firmed up my radical side.”

The National Institutes for Mental Health describes borderline personality disorder (BPD) as “a serious mental illness marked by unstable moods, behavior, and relationships. . . . People with this disorder also have high rates of co-occurring disorders, such as depression, anxiety disorders, substance abuse, and eating disorders, along with self-harm, suicidal behaviors, and completed suicides.”

Bernie Sanders’ rape-fantasy essay reveals left-wing hypocrisy

http://nypost.com/2015/06/05/bernie-sanders-rape-fantasy-essay-reveals-left-wing-hypocrisy/

Consider this twisted scenario: A national publication unearths an essay written decades ago by a conservative Republican candidate for the White House in which the man describes, in deviant detail, women who fantasize about being gang-raped. He also writes about men who get thrills by imagining episodes in which they physically force females into degrading sex acts capable of making readers of Hustler rise up in revulsion.

Shock! Outrage! The National Organization for Women would launch a petition drive calling for the man’s head and other body parts.

President Obama would warn that the offensive piece of writing contributes to an “epidemic’’ of sexual assault on college and university campuses. Across America, ladies enrolled in institutions of higher education would earn course credit by schlepping around mattresses on their backs as forms of protest/performance-art projects.

Well, the creepy essay is real, but it was not written by a Republican. The imaginary tale of sexual assault, pleasure and pain was penned by presidential candidate Bernard “Bernie’’ Sanders, 73, the independent junior senator from Vermont.

A self-described “democratic socialist,’’ Sanders champions such leftist causes as ending global warming and combating income inequality.

The reaction from members of the Democratic Party?

Silence.

The piece, titled “Man — and woman,’’ was published in the Vermont Freeman, an alternative newspaper, in 1972, when Sanders was 30 years old. He wrote it after studying psychology at Brooklyn College in his native borough, after he embraced socialism as a student at the University of Chicago, and before he was elected mayor of Vermont’s largest city, Burlington, in 1981.

“A man goes home and masturbates his typical fantasy. A woman on her knees. A woman tied up. A woman abused,’’ it begins.

“A woman enjoys intercourse with her man — as she fantasizes being raped by three men simultaneously.’’

The essay was not exposed by some right-wing dirty trickster, but was reprinted in the left-leaning magazine Mother Jones. The most striking part is not that Sanders reveals his deep-seated thought crimes — it’s a dirty little secret that rape fantasies are harbored by a variety of people, even liberals.

But in the piece, Sanders denies an article of faith among progressive circles: Women must be infantilized, treated as children in need of protection.

And he disgusted me by writing, “Do you know why newspapers with the articles like ‘Girl 12 raped by 14 men’ sell so well? To what in us are they appealing?’’ Did Sanders confess that he finds real-life instances of sexual violence against children titillating?

Sanders is spinning the piece as fast as he can. “It was very poorly written and if you read it, what it was dealing with was gender stereotypes, why some men like to oppress women, why other women like to be submissive, you know, something like ‘Fifty Shades of Grey,’” he said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” this past Sunday, referring to the sadomasochistic novel and movie.

The left is giving Sanders a pass for an obvious reason: He’s seen as the progressive hope for defeating Hillary Rodham Clinton, whom he’s challenging for the 2016 Democratic Party’s nomination for the presidency. While a recent University of Connecticut poll shows that Clinton has 57 percent of Democratic voter support, crackpot Sanders leads the rest of the pack, favored by 15 percent of voters polled.

(A new CNN/ORC poll gives Clinton 60 percent of party voters’ support, Vice President Joe Biden 14 percent and Sanders 10 percent — but 57 percent of respondents say they don’t find Clinton “honest and trustworthy.’’)

Traveling to Iowa last week just before a group of Democrats abandoned its effort to draft leftist Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren as a candidate for the White House, Sanders talked before packed rooms across the state in which the first-in-the-nation presidential caucuses are to be held Feb. 1. This caused dumbstruck New York Times reporters to conclude that Sanders is a viable contender.

The wild card may be former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a political independent who was approached, Post columnist Michael Goodwin reported this week, by New York Dems who urged him to run for president as a Democrat.

As a 2012 candidate for the Republican nomination for the White House, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum — who’s running again — drew outrage from the political left and right after he said that women who get pregnant after being raped should “make the best of a bad situation’’ and give birth.

That year, Todd Akin, then a Republican US representative from Missouri, lost his bid for a US Senate seat after he declared that victims of “legitimate rape’’ rarely get pregnant.

But Sanders is excused — because he’s a liberal.

The hypocrisy on the left is stunning.

Dhimmi U.S.A: US Embassy moves Fourth of July Celebration to June 4 ‘out of respect for Ramadan’

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/06/us_embassy_moves_fourth_of_july_celebration_to_june_4_out_of_respect_for_ramadan.html

In a mind-boggling gesture of official US Government dhimmitude, the US Embassy in Jakarta, Indonesia celebrated our sacred Independence Day holiday on June 4, so as to avoid any conflict with the month-long Ramadan celebration. If you think any Islamic countries – there are 57 of them (not counting ISIS) that count themselves officially Islamic – will move their DC embassy’s celebration of Ramadan to accommodate our Independence holiday, I have some bridges to sell you.

The Jakarta Post (hat tips: Pamela Geller and Jihad Watch) writes:

“US Embassy celebrates 4th of July earlier out of respect for Ramadhan,” by Dylan Amirio

The United States Embassy enjoyed its annual 4th of July celebration on Thursday, June 4, one month early, in order to respect the upcoming Ramadhan month, which will begin on June 17 and last for one month.

US Ambassador to Indonesia Robert O. Blake and US Ambassador to ASEAN Nina Hachigian presided over the festivities, which involved brass band renditions of the Star-Spangled Banner and the Indonesian national anthem, Indonesia Raya.

Blake explained that the theme of the event leaned toward “green” development, which supported the US’ focus on building and promoting a green economy and more environmentally sustainable development.

He also praised Indonesia’s performance as a fully functioning democracy, aiming for further collaboration between the two countries in the years to come.

“The US will continue to support Indonesia in the future through its democratic achievements. Democracy is an American value which we have championed since [the country’s birth in] 1776,” Blake told the crowd during the festivities at his residence near Taman Suropati, Central Jakarta, on Thursday.

He added that moving the 4th of July celebrations to June 4 was one done out of respect for the upcoming Ramadhan month, which will last from June 17 to July 17.

The event also showcased a number of American products and businesses, including the Zero FX Electric Motorcycles, which Blake explained were an environmentally friendly vehicle used by the California Highway Patrol.

Officially, embassies are the national territory of the country being represented, not of the host country. So there is no need to accommodate local sensibilities in celebrating our most sacred national holiday. Perhaps the pipe dream of peddling electric motorcycles to one of the world’s biggest petroleum exporters that happens to have a pretty large conventional motorcycle industry of its own took precedence over our national dignity?

It is a bedrock of Islamic scripture that infidels must bow down in submission to Islam and Muslims, being tolerated so long as they endure humiliations and pay a special tax. Muslims have no obligations at all to infidels, which is why you will never see an counterpart to the submission just demonstrated by the US Embassy in Jakarta.

This is a moment of national dhimmitude and deep shame. I hope someone will ask Marie Harf to explain if any Muslim countries plan on moving their embassy’s Ramadan celebrations to accommodate our Independence Day. That would allow for some great Harfing.

Colleges and Universities leads to lower fertility rates

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323375204578270053387770718

College. Higher education dampens fertility in all sorts of ways. It delays marriage, incurs debt, increases the opportunity costs of childbearing and significantly increases the expense of raising a child. If you doubt that the economics of the university system are broken, consider this: Since 1960, the real cost of goods in nearly every other sector of American life has dropped. Meanwhile, the real cost of college has increased by more than 1,000%.

If college were another industry, everyone would be campaigning for reform. Instead, politicians are trying to push every kid in America into the current exorbitantly expensive system. How could we get college costs under control? For one, we could begin to eliminate college’s role as a credentialing machine by allowing employers to give their own tests to prospective workers. Alternately, we could encourage the university system to be more responsive to market forces by creating a no-frills, federal degree-granting body that awards certificates to students who pass exams in a given subject.

 

 

Liberal, Progressive, Blue State Oregon Was Founded As A Racist Utopia

When Oregon was granted statehood in 1859, it was the only state in the Union admitted with a constitution that forbade black people from living, working, or owning property there. It was illegal for black people even to move to the state until 1926. Oregon’s founding is part of the forgotten history of racism in the American west.

Waddles Coffee Shop in Portland, Oregon was a popular restaurant in the 1950s for both locals and travelers alike. The drive-in catered to America’s postwar obsession with car culture, allowing people to get coffee and a slice of pie without even leaving their vehicle. But if you happened to be black, the owners of Waddles implored you to keep on driving. The restaurant had a sign outside with a very clear message: “White Trade Only — Please.”

It’s the kind of scene from the 1950s that’s so hard for many Americans to imagine happening outside of the Jim Crow South. How could a progressive, northern city like Portland have allowed a restaurant to exclude non-white patrons? This had to be an anomaly, right? In reality it was far too common in Oregon, a state that was explicitly founded as a kind of white utopia.

America’s history of racial discrimination is most commonly taught as a southern issue. That’s certainly how I learned about it while going to Minnesota public schools in the 1980s and 90s. White people outside of the South seem to learn about the Civil War and civil rights movements from an incredibly safe (and often judgmental) distance.

Racism was generally framed as something that happened in the past and almost always “down there.” We learned about the struggles for racial equality in cities like Birmingham and Selma and Montgomery. But what about the racism of Portland, Oregon, a city that is still overwhelmingly white? The struggles there were just as intense — though they are rarely identified in the history books.

According to Oregon’s founding constitution, black people were not permitted to live in the state. And that held true until 1926. The small number of black people already living in the state in 1859, when it was admitted to the Union, were sometimes allowed to stay, but the next century of segregation and terrorism at the hands of angry racists made it clear that they were not welcome.

more at

http://gizmodo.com/oregon-was-founded-as-a-racist-utopia-1539567040