Pepperdine University, a Christian liberal arts college located in southern California, is the latest institution of higher education to join in the trashing of Christopher Columbus.

Pepperdines president, Andrew Benton, bowed to the wishes of a minority of the student population when he announced January 30 that a statue of Columbus Columbus on the Malibu campus would be removed and sent to Pepperdines Florence, Italy, campus. Benton explained his decision by saying stories of conquest and the art associated therewith are painful reminders of loss and human tragedy. The statue was removed last month.

The statue had been donated to the university in 1992 upon the 500th anniversary of Columbus discovery of the New World by Columbus 500 Congress. No doubt the group mistakenly believed that Pepperdine, with its reputation as a conservative Christian college, would appreciate the man responsible for first bringing the Christian faith to the New World.

Speaking publicly about the decision, Benton defended the statues removal. I did not expect it to be popular. I didnt do it to be popular. I did it because I believed it was the right thing to do.

A small group of vocal students demanded the statues removal from the schools amphitheater, calling it a celebration of genocide and racial oppression.

In an official statement, the university argued that Bentons decision recognizes the importance of compromise in creating a campus culture of unity and inclusiveness.

Kaitlyn Pfingston, a graduate student spoke against the statues removal at a recent campus meeting on the subject, and particularly took issue with Benton calling it a compromise, saying, Thats a concession. Its not a compromise. Where is there any kind of compromise? Hes either removing [the statue] or hes not.

Pfingston also took issue with the assertion that Columbus was an instigator of genocide, and said that Bentons action supports that false impression. By [Benton] conceding [he] is effectively saying that those claims are accurate. And what that actually does is prevent other students who have the same opinion as me from speaking out because they dont want to be labeled bigoted or indifferent to human suffering or indifferent to indigenous populations.

Jens Cole, a junior at Pepperdine, dismissed the argument that most students were either indifferent to Bentons action, or actually opposed it. I think you have to pay respect to the people who were siding toward it being offensive and inappropriate.

Really? What would Cole think about offending those who see Columbus as a symbol of the good of Western Civilization? Why are their feelings and views not as important as those who wanted the statue removed?

Hannah Fleming, another student at Pepperdine, illustrates why the Left will never be satisfied, and will always find something else to be offended about. While she admitted that most people are indifferent, Fleming, who said she grew up on an Indian reservation, even opposed the decision to send the statue to Italy, arguing that removing [the statue] but still having it associated with the university is a little bit controversial.

The denigration of Christopher Columbus by secular progressive universities is unfortunate enough, but for a Christian university to jump on the trash Western Civilization bandwagon is particularly disturbing. The college is associated with the very conservative churches of Christ in the United States, and was founded in 1937 in south central Los Angeles by George Pepperdine, and moved to Malibu after some radicals in the 1960s threatened to burn down the campus. Pepperdine had earned his fortune with the Western Auto Supply company, begun with an investment of only $5. When he founded the college, he said he had two major objectives. First, we want to provide first-class, fully accredited academic training in the liberal arts.

Secondly, we are especially dedicated to a greater goal (emphasis added) that of building in the student a Christ-like life, a love for the church, and a passion for the souls of mankind. (Emphasis added.)

Ironically, this was the very goal shared by the man that the present president of Pepperdine has decided to trash Christopher Columbus.

While depicted in modern popular culture as a man motivated primarily for gold and spices, this was only a part of his larger motivation. It was his desire to find enough wealth to finance a crusade to free the Holy Land from Islamic domination and conquer the Holy Sepulcher [Christs empty tomb]; for this I urged Your Highnesses, Columbus told King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella of Spain, to spend all the profitsfrom this enterprise on the conquest of Jerusalem. (Emphasis added.)

The Muslims had conquered Constantinople in 1453, completing their multigenerational conquest of the Christian world in the East, including the Byzantine Empire and the lands where Jesus had lived, died, and risen from the dead. Columbus, after careful study of the Old and New Testaments, along with some readings in the works of the historian Flavius Josephus, and the noted church father Augustine, had concluded that the city of Jerusalem needed to be in Christian hands before the Lord would return.

Specifically, Columbus believed the biblical prophecies would dictate the reconstruction of the Temple first. And Columbus was convinced that his present mission was part of the overall plan of God to see this was accomplished.

Columbus did not set out from Spain to enslave American Indians, since he was ignorant of their very existence. After reading of the travels of the Venetian Marco Polo, Columbus was inspired to reach the Grand Khan, the Mongol ruler of China. The Chinese monarchs had expressed to Polos family some interest in the Christian faith, leading Columbus to hope for the conversion of China, so they could then combine forces and drive the Muslims out of the Holy Land.

In other words, Andrew Benton, president of Pepperdine, a college founded with a passion for the souls of mankind, has removed the statue of the man who shared that passion.

Nationally conservative syndicated talk show host Dennis Prager, who launched a petition (which has garnered over 10,000 signatures) to keep the statue at Pepperdine, said, speaking of Pepperdine, Once regarded as one of the few sensible universities in the country, that appears to be a thing of the past. They have gone Left. They are getting rid of their statue of Christopher Columbus for reasons of diversity. The university presidents letter of explanation is an embarrassing bow down to political correctness.

Benton said that the statue was a painful reminder of loss and human tragedy, but Prager disagreed, saying he believed that Christopher Columbus should be venerated for his brave and heroic expedition. Columbus daring journey to North America led to the creation of the freest and most prosperous nation in human history.

William Fowler, a history professor at Northeastern University, took issue with Bentons comments about Columbus. The issue of genocide is a term [Columbus] would not have understood. To be guilty of genocide [Columbus] would have had to have intent. What evidence do we have of his intent to commit genocide?

On the contrary, Columbus intent was to take the gospel to Asia, and when he first arrived in the islands off the coast of North America, he believed he had reached the outskirts of Asia. No logical person could believe that his intent to was to commit genocide upon the very people he was hoping to convert to Christ, and help European Christians re-take the Holy Land.

Considering that Columbus died in 1506, it is difficult to argue that he was responsible for any genocidal activity which took place after that date. As George Grant wrote in The Last Crusader: The Untold Story of Christopher Columbus, To be sure there were perverse abuses ... but heap all that upon the shoulders of one man a man who unleashed upon the Americans far more good than woe is patently absurd.... Far from being a racist, he proved time after time to be overly enamored with the native populations he encountered.

While the Spanish no doubt were guilty of abuses, they did not commit genocide in the New World. The biggest killer of the indigenous population was not the sword of the conquistadores, but rather smallpox and measles. While Columbus certainly unwittingly made this possible by achieving contact with peoples of the Western Hemisphere, he can hardly be held responsible for it. Nor could other Europeans who followed him, who had no understanding of the transmission of these diseases.

Soon after his contact with the native peoples, Columbus wrote, I believe that they would become good Christians very quickly.

That hardly sounds like a man who wished to commit genocide, nor does it sound like a man that the president of a college founded out of passion for the souls of mankind would want to denigrate.

Steve Byas is a professor of history at Randall University, a liberal arts college in Moore, Oklahoma, associated with the Free Will Baptist denomination. He has written on Columbus and other historical figures he believes have been unfairly treated in modern times in his book Historys Greatest Libels.

See more here:

Columbus Statue Removed at Pepperdine Bow to Political Correctness - The New American

John Howard reckons there are two issues that helped Donald Trump win over American voters, and theyre ones the former prime minister closely identifies with himself,

Political correctness and identity politics were key to Trumps success, Howard told a corporate crowd at a Committee for Economic Development of Australia lunch in Sydney yesterday, Fairfax Newsreported.

Americans, like Australians, are resentful of the avalanche of political correctness, Howard said.

I think political correctness has become a problem in Western societies, weve become far too apologetic about our Western identity and anything thats a sense of some kind of defence of cultural traditionalism or national identity is in many ways frowned upon, Fairfaxreported him as saying.

Meanwhile, the Democrats suffered from an excess of identity politics, he said, apparently a reference to the fact that Hillary Clinton, Trumps presidential election rival, came with a loaded history in politics that was offputting to many voters.

There is nothing new about people who are economically insecure or dispossessed trying to reach out to some sort of new champion, he said.

The Australian reported from the same event that Howard noted Australia was going through a very challenging stage politically, in which a fragmented Senate was making it difficult for prime minister Malcolm Turnbull to push through legislation, as it did for predecessor Tony Abbott.

See the rest here:

Why John Howard thinks Australians are sick of political correctness ... - Starts at 60

By Pete Papaherakles

National Review (NR),considered by many as the flagship of conservative journalism, fired one of its top journalists last week in an effort to comply with the tenets of the cult of political correctness, i.e., cultural communism. The reason for the dismissal was not for something that the journalist wrote for the magazine but for perceived racism expressed in an entirely different media outlet.

John Derbyshire, a prominent NR contributor, was fired for an article he wrote on April 5 in Takis Magazine, a conservative online journal published by socialite Taki Theodoracopulos. The article titled The Talk: Non-Black Version was written as a response to the Talk that black parents are having with their children in the aftermath of the Trayvon Martin shooting, advising them on how to avoid looking or acting in a way that would get them killed by whitesas if that was what got Martin killed.

Derbyshire wrote as if advising his own children how to avoid being hurt or killed by blacks. Like the black parents, Derbyshire points out that there are distinct differences between blacks and whites, something that in itself is considered taboo for whites in todays politically correct culture to mention. Some of the controversial elements of his advice involved warning them to stay out of heavily black neighborhoods, advice against attending events likely to draw lots of blacks and if at a public event that the number of blacks suddenly swells, leave as quickly as possible.

Many of his points are linked to newspaper stories of black-on-white crime, almost always kept out of the national media, and included mostly unknown statistics about the large number of black-on-white crimes. AFP published a special report in the April 16 edition titled The Complexion of Crime in America, which revealed that blacks are 18 times more likely to murder whites than whites are to murder blacks.

NRs editor in chief Rich Lowry called the article appalling, nasty and indefensible. Derbyshire, one of NRs best writers, was summarily sacrificed on the altar of political correctness for saying pretty much the same things AFP has been saying for years.

In a telephone interview with AMERICAN FREE PRESS, Theodoracopulos, who started his journalism career writing for NR in 1967 and routinely features articles by Pat Buchanan and other conservatives, told this reporter that he was appalled with the decision.

They [NR]were in such a hurry to toe the PC [politically correct] line, I dont even think they read the piece, he remarked. They have been completely taken over by the neocons and no longer take positions against Israel or on the race issue. Joe Sobran and others in the past have met similar fates. It just goes to show what a bunch of rats theyve become. What they did to him was especially cruel considering he is undergoing chemotherapy at the time.

The Trayvon Martin shooting has stirred up racial tensions in the U.S., exposing a dangerous double standard in race attitudes. While it is acceptable today for blacks to openly call for the murder of George Zimmermanwho is not white nor black but Hispanic, and was attacked and beaten by Martinwhites are not even allowed to talk to their children about black-on-white crimes for fear of offending the high priests of political correctness.*

* Get a copy of AFPs special 8-page report on Cultural Communism. One to five copies are $3 each. Six to 39 copies are $1.65 each. 40-499 copies are 50 each. 500 or more are reduced to just 40 each. Call AFP at 202-544-5977 to charge or send request to 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, #100, Washington, D.C. 20003

Peter Papaherakles, a U.S. citizen since 1986, was born in Greece. He is AFPs outreach director. If you would like to see AFP speakers at your rally, contact Pete at 202-544-5977.

Read the rest here:

Conservative Rag Bends to Political Correctness - American Free Press

Jennifer Saunders has claimed political correctness has put paid to there being any more Absolutely Fabulous.

The comedian has ruled out resurrecting characters Edina and Patsy for another series of the BBC sitcom because people are now too easily offended.

Handout via Getty Images

Speaking to the Press Association (via The Mirror), she said:People are so politically correct now; we couldnt get away with anything. You cant even get away to be a politically incorrect character, because that is seen as being politically incorrect [sic].

Everyones down on everyone for everything.

Her co-star Joanna Lumley seemed to agree, adding it was best toleave it where it is.

The worlds a bit funny now, its gone a bit strange, its a bit harder to parody, Jennifer continued.

Because so much of the world right now is so grim, and hard and fearful, and people so take affront at everything.

BBC

Absolutely Fabulous had a outing on the big screen last year, which proved to be a hit at the box office.

However, it wasnt without its controversy, as it faced accusations of racism when Janette Tough - best known for her portrayal of Wee Jimmy Krankie - was cast as fictional male Japanese fashion designer, Huki Muki.

Stand-up Margaret Chowho branded the casting as yellowface,by having a white actor playing an Asian character.

#YELLOWFACE is racism. Sorry. Its unacceptable, she tweeted. Not now. I was thrilled about #abfabmovie but now I just cant be. Im very disappointed.

I love AbFab but #YELLOWFACE is something I cannot watch - I just cant. Its sad when heroes are no longer heroic. Too bad. #racism.

She added: Its hard enough to get into film and TV as a person of color - and when roles written for us are played by white actors - its an outrage.

Joanna previously spoke out against political correctness, claiming it was watering down British comedy.

'Absolutely Fabulous' Film Premiere

LONDON, ENGLAND - JUNE 29: Joanna Lumley and Jennifer Saunders pose with guests at the World Premiere of 'Absolutely Fabulous: The Movie' at Odeon Leicester Square on June 29, 2016 in London, England. (Photo by David M. Benett/Dave Benett/WireImage)

David M. Benett via Getty Images

Continue reading here:

Jennifer Saunders Claims Political Correctness Has Ended ... - Huffington Post UK

Donald Trump electrified crowds. He refused to bow to the Left's totalitarian PC orthodoxy

BombThrowers: The concept of political correctness, or PC, goes back more than a half century. Over time PC has changed America for the worse. It was invented not to expand discussions but to prevent them through peer pressure and intimidation.

The origins and continuing implications of PC were part of a high-profile panel discussion at the 2017 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) held in a Maryland suburb of Washington, D.C., over this past weekend.

This fascinating panel met on the main stage at CPAC and featured moderator Jan Riordan of the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, along with a panel consisting of Fox News contributor and Conservative Review columnist Tom Borelli, U.S. Rep. Francis Rooney (R-Fla.), College Republican National Committee chairman Alex Smith, and Capital Research Center president Scott Walter. It was a wide-ranging discussion, delving into the history of political correctness, its impact in culture and business, the dumbing down of education, and what the future may hold.

Scott Walter kicked off the discussion by defining political correctness. Not surprisingly, Walter, whose organization, Capital Research Center (the parent of Bombthrowers), specializes in unmasking organizations of the Left and their funders, gave a succinct explanation:

The real origin of the term goes back to the first half of the twentieth century and the hard Left where they made no bones about itthere is no objective truth, all that matters is what serves the party, so truth will change from day to day. This is what you see in [George] Orwells Nineteen Eighty-Four, where things go down the memory hole. Then it began seeping into the broader Left in this country and it was probably around the 1980s I think when conservatives began to make fun of political correctness because it was already becoming so ridiculous. But I have friends who, at graduate school in Cornell in the 1980s and at meetings there would be: Oh we cant say that. It wouldnt be politically correct. Now it has become a vicious orthodoxy that is enforced with bullying, so that whatever the political agenda of today is, if you violate it, wham!

In fact it was 1950s large-C Communists who created that phrasepart of the enforcement mechanism for maintaining strict adherence to doctrinaire communism among their membership. That rigid, uniform obedience to Communist ideology is what allows the Communists to stay on message and is what has made their messaging so effective. If you repeat a lie long enough, and get many people repeating it, sooner or later it begins to gain acceptance as legitimateno matter how outlandish.

Just consider transgender bathrooms. A few short years ago, such an idea would have been laughable, had anyone even considered it. But last year Obamas Justice and Education Departments jointly issued a Dear Colleague Letter on Transgender Students imposing bathroom use based on an individuals internal sense of gender on schools nationwide. Thankfully, President Trump recently reversed that official guidance.

Fox News Channels Tucker Carlson debated Zac Petkanas, a senior advisor to the Democratic National Committee who heads DNCs Trump War Room. Petkanas called President Trump a monster for reversing Obamas action. Carlson pressed his guest to offer one example of a scientist who would publicly claim that ones sex is determined by what a person says it is, regardless of their biology. Petkanas claimed he could name thousandsbut never didand insisted that, like global warming, it was settled science. He accused Carlson of embracing right-wing pseudo-science. Carlson then asked him if he could change his race too just by saying so and upped the ante by offering him $1,000 if he could produce one, just one, scientist who says you can determine your sex just by saying so.

Watch the Carlson versus Petkanas video here:

Liberalism really is a mental disorder.

Congressman Rooney was asked how political correctness impacts his work in Congress. He said there were so many egregious instancesImagine this. In recent years, the government decided that you couldnt say the word Islam and terrorist in government manuals, including the government counter-terrorism manual. You cant say Islam and Islamic terrorism in the government manual!

Alex Smith said there were too many [instances of PC] to count on college campuses today She mentioned the maddening case of Dr. Condoleezza Rice being disinvited from speaking at the Rutgers University commencement last year, and how students then entered university administration buildings and destroyed property to make their point. She noted that on college campuses nationwide there is the real lack of intellectual diversity, while the Left trumpets all kinds of other diversity.

Tom Borelli described how PC infects the business world, saying that many business leaders, like Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, are progressives, and use their companies to advance PC ideas, while other companies are intimidated by shareholder activists and boycotts or threats of boycotts. The most recent example he cited was Nordstroms decision to drop Ivanka Trumps footwear line. While Nordstrom denied it, this was believed to be in response to the #GrabYourWallet campaign, which asked people to boycott any company carrying Trump products, refrain from doing business with the Trump family, or boycott businesses whose owners supported Trumps candidacy. He also mentioned how when Under Armors president publicly stated that President Trump would be good for business, Under Armors stock was downgraded, an action hugely important for the investment community. (Editors note: Tina Trent touched upon #GrabYourWallet in a recent Bombthrowers article.)

This is the extent to which the lunacy of political correctness has infected our society today. And it is a very dangerous lunacy. It requires rigid adherence to ideas that go against common sense, decency, and everything we know to be true. Anyone who makes the mistake of questioning the insane PC orthodoxy is targeted for vilification as racist, sexist, homophobic, or fill-in-the-blank-phobic. It is a tactic designed specifically to enforce conformity and destroy opponents, following Lenins admonition to write in a language which sows among the masses hate, revulsion, and scorn toward those who disagree with us. It is a mark of totalitarian thinking that is in fact the sixth stage, polarization, in The Ten Stages of Genocide.

In the Soviet Union, defying political orthodoxy was grounds for execution. In the book, Black on Red: My 44 Years Inside the Soviet Union, author Robert Robinson recounted his life in the Soviet Union under Stalin. He said that clothing was so poorly manufactured that pant legs differed in length, shoe pairs never matched sizes, and nothing fit properly. It was so bad that a public campaign was launched that made wearing ill-fitting clothes a badge of patriotism. Not only was it dangerous to complain about it, but if you were found to be wearing clothes without defects, you were accused of being disloyal to the regime. In communist states it is dangerous even to think about questioning the prevailing orthodoxy. As the saying goes, Think before you think.

Our nation, on college campuses and elsewhere, is rapidly approaching that point. It is one of the many reasons why candidate Donald Trump electrified crowds. He refused to bow to the Lefts totalitarian PC orthodoxy. In fact he shifted the paradigm, restoring PC to the butt of jokes it deserves to be. That is yet another reason college campuses and the Left nationwide have gone on a lunatic crusade to destroy President Trump and anyone willing to admit they voted for him. They have advanced by manipulating language to bend culture to their despotic will. President Trump now threatens their dominance.

This was an excellent forum on a critical topic, and this column cannot do it justice.

So I urge you to watch the entire thing, right here:

Read more:

Is political correctness killing US institutions? - Canada Free Press

What you do with your own body shouldn't have to be anyone's business but your own. When you start competing in sports, you're making it everyone's business. That's unfair to others, but also to yourself.

By now you've heard the story of Mack Beggs the high school wrestler who was born a female and competed against females to win the Texas state wrestling championship.

Beggs began transitioning to a male in 2015. ATTN reports that The transition hormones are significant because some male hormones have the potential to enhance athletic performance.

MORE: Political correctness on the podium: Transsexuals will be competing against women and men at the Olympics

Dr. Brandon Mines, assistant professor at Emory University's Department of Orthopedics, told CNN that Testosterone and anabolic steroids are in the same family and have the effect of increasing muscle mass and strength gains. He is allowed to take them and compete because they are considered a valid medical purpose.

This so-called 'valid' purpose as well as the fact he wasn't allowed to compete against boys, resulted in Beggs steamrolling the competition. How bad was it? He went 56-0.

The overwhelming dominance is disturbing. It's clear he doesn't belong competing against women. By contrast, MMA 'athlete' Fallon Fox, a male turned female martial artist, annihilated her female opponents.

Is it fair to females that they face off against a girl who is trying to become a man? Is it fair they compete against a woman using what essentially amount to performance enhancing drugs? It's clear that all Beggs wants to do is compete, and I respect that. It's good seeing kids be healthy and in shape, but at the what expense?

Is this really how you want to win? Competing against women when you're a man? Competing while male hormones give you an advantage? To prove what? To cause a big enough disruption so state rules will be changed?

Honestly, I don't even think Beggs should be competing against men either. If a woman tried to play hockey, how would men react? Not hit her? How is that fair? The same applies to wrestling or any sport with contact. It's opening a massive problem. No amount of drugs can change the fact you still grew up at a physical disadvantage or advantage. Which is why Fallon Fox is able to destroy her opponents.

It's only a matter of time until someone gets seriously hurt. Whether that person happens to be transgender or someone competing against them when you modify your body, you can't expect the rules to change to accommodate you.

Unless a transgender's dream involves NASCAR or competitive gaming such as StarCraft (see Scarlet), sports are something that should be removed from the equation. Respecting people is fine and encouraged, but when 'respect' results in these results, it's no longer about 'respect'.

Unfortunately, any sort of compromise results in the integrity of the competition also being compromised.

Go here to see the original:

Enough with the political correctness: transgender individuals shouldn't be allowed to compete in sports - The Rebel

Some Americans - including many in the press - will oppose President Trump no matter what he says in his first address before Congress tonight, Bill O'Reilly said in his Talking Points Memo.

O'Reilly said that doesn't really matter, however, because Trump will be judged on how his policies jump-start the economy, fix the immigration problem and keep Americans safe.

He argued that if Trump can follow through with his campaign promises and major policies, then the culture war will begin to go his way.

"Americans are tired of political correctness and left-wing totalitarianism," O'Reilly said. "Most of us have had it with extremism on both sides."

He said that the U.S. remains a bastion of opportunity and common-sense views held by regular folks.

"But that profile has been smothered by big government zealots, ideological fanatics and a media that promotes the P.C. culture," O'Reilly said.

He said that Trump will "trounce his enemies" if his vision brings increased prosperity and security.

"If economic opportunity rises, all the class warfare B.S. will be harder to sell. But in order for that to happen, America needs to be unleashed."

Watch the full Talking Points Memo above, and see O'Reilly weigh in on the "war" between Trump and the press.

Trump Grades His Performance: A for Achievement, But a C+ for Messaging

Waters to Skip Trump's Address; Other Dems Will Avoid Aisle Handshakes

People Lost It Over a Photo of Kellyanne Conway on the Oval Office Couch

'Some Say I've Done More Than Anybody': Trump Hits Back at 'Incompetent' Pelosi

See the rest here:

O'Reilly: 'Americans Are Tired of Political Correctness & Left-Wing Totalitarianism' - Fox News Insider

The cast of Moonlight accepts the Academy Award for Best Picture. CREDIT: Chris Pizzello/Invision/AP

Best Picture Oscar winner Moonlight is a critically-acclaimed exploration of black and queer identities. Its at once a coming of age drama, a film about the intersections of race and class, a love story, andabove allthe story of a black man grappling with his sexual orientation over the course of his life. Its hard to summarize all that the movie entails. But according to Fox & Friends Tucker Carlson, its only a winning film because of political correctness.

It was forgone, Carlson said of La La Lands short-lived victory on Sunday night. Moonlight had to win because you knew what the film was about. And thats part of the problem with Hollywood.

Carlson explained that the second you feel a political imperative it destroys your art, calling the celebration of Moonlight overbearing and pompous and boorish.

As the Washington Posts Abby Phillip pointed out, Carlson didnt indicate if hed actually seen the movie, which also won Best Adapted Screenplay and earned Mahershala Ali his own award for Best Supporting Actor. His comments align with the old adage Celebrities should stay out of politics. Hollywood, the argument goes, has one purpose: entertainment. When it wades into political territory, theyve gone too fardoing a job they werent asked to do.

Carlsons statement is patently false. If the honor rewarded political correctnessa euphemism for minorities inclusionperhaps people of color wouldnt have been erased for decades by the Hollywood establishment and LGBTQ people wouldve been celebrated instead of overshadowed by white, cis men who portrayed them onscreen.

Instead, only 32 African Americans, 10 Latinos, and eight openly gay people won Academy Awards as of 2016a small fraction of the 2,900 winners since the first ceremony in 1929. They may have deserved accolades, but non-white and LGBTQ people have been losing for generations.

Underlying Carlsons comments is the notion that artists particularly black artistsshould be quiet. They dont have a right to produce something that pushes boundaries and audiences and then celebrate what theyve created, even though they are historically ignored by the Academy and the entertainment industry writ large. They are arrogant beneficiaries of affirmative action driving the industry.

Whats most troubling about Carlsons argument, though, is the inherent assumption that black and queer experiences arent a standard. To be black and queer is to live on the margins. They are experiences that only exist in the realm of politics, where others try to assert themselves and be heard. They arent mainstream or deserving.

No matter. The cast of Moonlight should bask in their groundbreaking victory. Were basking in the light with them.

Continued here:

Fox News' Tucker Carlson says 'Moonlight' only won Best Picture because of political correctness - ThinkProgress

LONDON -- The founder of a U.K. Christian TV network has found a unique way to share famous quotes from Jesus -- by displaying them on buses throughout London.

Revelation TV's Howard Conder explains how God gave him the vision for this campaign, called QuoteJesus.com.

"The Lord spoke to me very clearly about starting to put the words of Jesus on the buses in London," he told CBN News. "We have a website. We have the buses booked. We're now on our second campaign."

Conder, who started his career as a musician, says he now believes God is using his previous self-promoting skills to now promote Jesus.

"I experienced first hand how bands and performers were marketed ruthlessly," he explains in a video posted on the Quote Jesus website "In time, I became a Christian and saw things in a new light. I channeled that same energy and drive into which I had to working in a purpose greater than myself."

Conder says he's overcome many challenges to launch this campaign, which he believes will impact many thousands of lives.

"There's 17.5 million people who visit London," he said. "There's between 8-9 million who live here. So we've got so many people who will, subliminally, will at least be looking at those scriptures, and here we have one here: 'You will be with me in paradise.'"

So what does the future hold for this unique evangelist project?

"I believe that the future of Quote Jesus is something that's not just for here in London," Conder said. "It's across our nation. But it's also I believe could go global. Why with all the millions of Christians that are around today, all they need to do is just get on board literally with us. But to help us to bring the quotes of Jesus to this generation."

With so much political correctness in the U.K. seeking to silence the Christian voice, the hope is that these public displays of quoting Jesus will play a significant part in people going on their own personal journey towards faith in Christ.

Read more:

The Bus Campaign That's Giving UK Political Correctness a Run for Its Money - CBN News

The controversy of not enough black people nominated last year hurts the winners this year. It is unfair to all the black actors and actresses, who are nominated, to have a shadow cast over them. Last year, a fake controversy appeared, when there were complaints that not enough black people were nominated for an Oscar. Now, this year's Oscars had a record amount of black people nominated. This was obviously a political correctness response from the left.

Now we will never know if those actors and actresses that won, received an Oscar because they were the best. It is unfair to the great performances by these actors, to have any doubt Loom over their wins or nominations. If left-wing political correctness hadn't reared its head, we would know that these actors won because they are the best. But leave it to the left and political correctness to destroy a special moment.

I don't know if anyone won because of their skin color, But the fact that I have to even ponder that, is ridiculous. I don't look at someone's skin color, I just look at whether they're deserving or not. But last year and this year, political correctness made skin color an issue for the Oscars. When the left tries to fix something, you can be assured it will end up even worse.

More:

Political Correctness Hurt the Oscars - WSAU (blog)

Jennifer Saunders can never claim to be politically correct.

It is one of the reasons her show Absolutely Fabulous was so well loved over the years.

But it is also the reason the comedian has ruled out bringing back the much loved characters, Edina and Patsy.

The celeb told Press Association, reported by Mirror in the UK, that people are so politically correct now they couldnt get away anything.

You cant even get away to be a politically incorrect character, because that is seen as being politically incorrect, Jennifer said.

Everyones down on everyone for everything.

Joanna Lumley has also said it was best to leave the show where it is, as the world had gone a bit strange.

Because so much of the world right now is so grim, and hard and fearful, and people so take affront at everything.

The Ab Fab movie released in 2016 had its share of critics; in particular actress Margaret Cho who took offence at a character named Huku Muki, accusing the pair of racism.

The Guardian reported Cho had accused the makers of the movie of yellowface, after casting a white person in an Asian role.

Although they might not be bringing about an Ab Fab revival it hasnt stopped their pair from sharing their humour.

Its not for all tastes, but they have discussed Donald Trump in this recent interview.

Here is the original post:

Political correctness puts end to much loved television characters ... - Starts at 60

A Virginia town has canceleda visit, organized by its parks-and-rec department, to the The Ark Encounter and Creation Museum after a complaint from the Freedom From Religion Foundation. The town? Christiansburg, of course. Taking the towns name a little too literally, arent you, folks?

A round of applause,please, for legislation in Virginias General Assembly that would give the Board of Corrections the authority to investigate jailhouse deaths. Even more applause if lawmakers can figure out how to prevent more of those deaths in the first place.

During a stopin Fredericksburg Wednesday, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Tom Perriello won us over and lost us again in a single sentence. He said vetoing bills that create gerrymandered legislative districts would be the single most impactful thing I will do as governor. The gerrymandering part sounds swell. But impactful? Thats just disgustful.

We at The News Virginian wonder if use of the word impacthas increased in situations where effect is the more accurate word choice because fewer people know the difference between affect and effect and dont want to be caught using the wrong one. Some say that is indeed the case. We cant be sure, but for the record, affect is the verb, effect is the noun (in the context of our discussion here at least.) One thing affects the other. One thing also has an effect on the other.

Speaking of bureaucratese, we also have a suggestion for Merriam-Webster: Banish the word utilize from the English language. Please. It has got to be the most superfluous word in the English language, perhaps any language. There is no context in which use cannot take the place of utilize. It is a word used almost exclusively by politicians and bureaucrats to make themselves sound smarter or better informed than they really are. The next time you hear someone using the word utilize (or the even worse utilization), consider taking whatever it is theyre saying with a large grain of salt.

Outrage over the possiblerepeal of Obamacarehelps prove an enduring point: A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take it all away.

This week an Israeli soldierreceived a prison sentence for unnecessarily shooting a wounded Palestinian attacker in Hebron. Palestinian authorities, on the other hand, often erect monuments to, and otherwise glorify, terrorists who kill Israelis. But go ahead, keep pretending the Middle East could have peace if Israel just gave up some more land.

Sigh.There is no inherent standard of English,is the official policy of the wait for it writing centerat the University of Washington at Tacoma. Standards and rules and things like that are racist, goes the thinking (if you want to call it thinking). So the staffvows toemphasize the importance of rhetorical situations over grammatical correctness in the production of texts. OK. But if its racist to believe some ways of writing are better than others, then there seems to be no point in having a writing center in the first place. Maybe everyone there should just quit.

Stephen Schwartz, U.S. ambassador to Somalia,recentlygavea Make Somalia Great Again ball cap to Somali president Mohamad Abdullahi. We are not making this up.

The Richmond Times-Dispatch and The News Virginian

Read more here:

EDITORIAL: Political correctness ... and more absurdities | The ... - The Daily Progress

The Oscars this year will have a remarkably different vibe than last year, starting with a lack of protests over the skin color of the nominees. Last year, as youll probably remember, the ceremony was heavily infusedwith the social media-driven #OscarsSoWhite protests, which Al Sharpton then latched onto to lead a protest outside the Kodak theater.

As Maria Puente in USA Today wrote after the announcement of this years nominees:

So is this the start of a permanent shift in nomination diversity or just a temporary break from the same-old, same-old? Is it the result of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences recent efforts to diversify and expand its voting membership?

Or is it the consequence of a powerful social-media campaign to shame Hollywood about the persistent lack of diversity in the industry and in those it chooses to nominate and honor with gold statuettes every year?

The amount of African-American representation at this years award show obviously left the insatiable social justice left demanding more Hispanic and minority representation as wellapparently no matter if the film, artist or engineer deserves it for the work. Armchair hashtag activists can attempt to take credit for their tweets and outrage pushing the academy to nominate more African- Americans in film this year. But they would be misguided in doing so.

The simple fact is this was a very good year for films centered around African- American culture and performers. It may be the best year in modern history for it. Denzel Washingtons Fences, Moonlight, Hidden Figuresall deserve the attention they are getting as works of art. Acting categories could see threeout of the big fourfinal awards go to actors of colorand all of them would be deserved.

Washington, who has won prior awards for his work on the play Fences, also directs himself in the film version. He knows the character Troy Maxon and thunders his way through it. His winning ofthe Screen Actors Guild award could be an early notice to Casey Affleck that its not going to be his year.

Mahershala Ali steals the spotlightin Moonlight, giving the film a flawed and layered moral center. Its the closest thing to a lock in any category this year. ThreeAfrican- Americans out of the five Supporting Actress nominees dominate that category as well: Viola Davis in Fences (the favorite), Naomie Harris in Moonlight and Octavia Spencer in Hidden Figures. (Spencer is a previous winner for her role in The Help in 2012).

Its possible that Michelle Williams, an Oscar darling, takes home the award for basically one powerhouse scene in Manchester by the Sea, but I dont see how that happens over Davis or Spencer.

Each of these films represented different parts of black culture in America and throughout history, and each deserves its place at the awards. Though La La Land still appears to be the favorite for Best Picture, theres been a sudden burst ofSJW angst around the film, everything from claims that it whitewashes jazz, to people complaining that its just too pretty or too white.

If there are two sleepers to upset LaLa Land, theywould have to be MoonlightandHidden Figuresthe lattertook home Best Ensemble honorsat the SAG Awards, the closest thing the union awards show has to a Best Picture. Moonlight, while short and a bit hollow in the script department, has one of the most authentic settings of the year (and best soundtracks).

Some have criticized Hidden Figuresfor featuring a White Savior (Kevin Costner), which is something of a pattern infilms about black history. But it was a genuine crowd pleaser and a story not many knew about. It also surprised at the Box Office, and thats one of the only things Hollywood loves more than stories about itself.

If Moonlight or Hidden Figures unseatsLa La Land it would be hard to call it an upset. Neither Moonlight, Hidden Figuresnor Fencesisnominated for the purpose of bringing more forced diversity to an award show that may or may not be trying to shy away from more social media controversy. It would one thing to suggest otherwise if the level of craftsmanship werent apparent in thosefilms. If anything, its surprising more films and performances from black-led works werent nominated. Specifically,Loving andBirth of a Nation.

What is clear is that even if the winners represent a cross section of diversity, social justice criticswill not relent in the future. Remember two years before the ridiculous OscarsSoWhite campaign, 12 Years aSlave swept fourawards, including Best Picture and Best Supporting Actress. The awards were absolutely deserved.

Its easy for opponents of political correctnessto level the charge that this years rich diversity ofnominees are only up there to placate a mob obsessed with their Netflix and Twitter. Butcritics in a rush to grab their phone for an outraged tweet should step back and appreciate the year that this was for African-American film.

Continued here:

Despite Rumblings About Political Correctness, the Black Oscar Nominees This Year Deserve All the Accolades - Heat Street

Two weeks ago, conservatives were up in arms about the treatment of Breitbart tech editor and alt-right online superstar Milo Yiannopoulos, who was, to hear them say it, being rudely deprived of his free speech by triggered liberal snowflakes in the name of political correctness. After Yiannopoulos was forced to cancel a speaking event at UC-Berkeley due to protests on campus, President Donald Trump tweeted: If U.C. Berkeley does not allow free speech and practices violence on innocent people with a different point of view NO FEDERAL FUNDS?

On Saturday, Yiannopoulos was invited to give a speech at Conservative Political Action Conference, an influential gathering of conservatives in Washington where President Trump is also scheduled to speak. American Conservative Union, which organizes the event, said that Yiannopoulos message was important to hear at a time when political correctness is properly being discarded.

If the specter of political correctness can move a political institution like CPAC to embrace a glorified internet troll, its probably worth examining what political correctness is. Conservatives say that its the antithesis of free speech: the idea that there are some things you shouldnt be allowed to say. The truth, of course, is more complicated. Of course youre entitled to free speech, but youre not entitled to a platform, and institutions with control of particularly influential platforms like the American Conservative Union and UC-Berkeley should be discriminating about which voices they decide to elevate.

In other words, people with platforms should know where to draw the line. Thats not a radical idea.

Where do conservatives draw the line? As the last year and a half has proved, thats a hard question to answer. Its not at mocking prisoners of war for being captured. Its not at proposing to ban more than one billion people from the country on the basis of their religious beliefs. Its not at picking fights with the parents of a fallen soldier. And its not at sexual harassment.

CPACs embrace of Yiannopoulos last week only deepens the mystery. It means they dont draw the line at someone who, despite being gay, has advocated for forcing gays back into the closet in order to preserve the nuclear family. It means they dont draw the line at someone who instigated an army of racist trolls against comedian and Saturday Night Live star Leslie Jones. It means they dont draw the line at aggressive transphobia, hate speech against Muslims, or ad hominem attacks against feminism.

But this week, we got some answers. On Sunday, a video emerged in which Yiannopoulos appears to condone statutory rape and sexual relationships between boys and men. For once, there was universal outrage at his comments, and in the span of 48 hours he lost his speaking slot at CPAC, his book deal and his job at Breitbart.

So it turns out conservatives do draw the line, not at bigotry or harassment or hate speech, but at pedophilia. Whether they like it or not, the right subscribes to the same basic idea behind the UC-Berkeley protests namely, that there should be standards for elevated public speech. They just have vastly lower standards.

Groves is a government sophomore from Dallas. Follow him on twitter @samgroves

Read more:

CPAC inadvertently shows logic behind political correctness - UT The Daily Texan

POPULAR YOUTUBER PEWDIEPIE has been dominating the headlines this week because of a variety of perceived anti-semitic jokes in his videos. Initially reported by the Wall Street Journal, this story exploded and ultimately lead to Pewdiepie getting dropped by Disney.

Some of our best-known comedians have called on the Government to introduce an exemption from defamation for comedy, to allow citizens think, laugh and collaborate. The Journal.ie itself carried a storyrecently about an offensive MC at a Galway comedy night.

Could comedians be at the forefront of a battle against an assault on free speech?

Should comedians be allowed to offend?

Should comedians be allowed to offend? Or should comedy be censored so that it is politically correct?Personally, I agree with the former.

I feel that there should be no enforced censorship in comedy. All censorship ever does is make the thing that people want to censor more powerful.

Many people complain about the snowflake generation of millennials who are offended by everything. Id offer a different point of view.In the past, comedy has been perfectly happy to have people of a certain gender, race or sexuality as the butt of a joke. We arent anymore.

Listening to their audience

David Mitchell found himself in hot water a number of years ago for an Anne Frank joke involving a drum kit. Source: Shutterstock/Featureflash Photo Agency

Comedians need to listen to the reasons people give for being offended, to take certain things on board, and to think critically about their comedy writing. This can only result in a better routine and jokes that appeal to a broader audience.

If you want to keep willingly making lazy jokes based on simplistic stereotypes, then you might have to just accept that youre a person who deserves the hate theyre getting.

As adults, we should all be smart and aware enough to tell the difference between this joke is annoying people for a pretty valid reason and this joke is annoying someone because their name is Steve and they dont like how you pronounce Steve.

Many comedians have weighed in on this issue over the years

For some, being mindful of what they say actually has creative benefits. Graham Linehan has his own rules for these challenges. He has said: If the person I was making fun of contacted me, would I be able to defend it? If the answer is yes, I go ahead.

If youre going to offend, punch up. Take the piss out of people in power. Look at how well Saturday Night Live is doing these days.

Melissa McCarthys impression of Sean Spicer is hilarious because it both points out the absurdity of the man, and how the Trump administration cant deal with any sort of criticism. What would ever be the point in using comedy to punch down or to bully instead? No point whatsoever.

You can joke about anything

David Mitchell found himself in hot water a number of years ago for an Anne Frank joke involving a drum kit, which he defended as satirising the situation they were in.

Mitchell himself didnt write the joke, but defended it saying: The tragic circumstances give it an edge and make the audience more likely to laugh, but thats not the same as finding the Holocaust funny.

I agree with Mitchell. You can joke about anything, but its the target of the joke that matters.

Get breaking news from TheJournal.ie via Facebook. Just click Like.

Link:

Has political correctness gone mad? 'Comedians must be allowed to offend' - thejournal.ie

LONDON -- The founder of a U.K. Christian TV network has found a unique way to share famous quotes from Jesus -- by displaying them on buses throughout London.

Revelation TV's Howard Conder explains how God gave him the vision for this campaign, called QuoteJesus.com.

"The Lord spoke to me very clearly about starting to put the words of Jesus on the buses in London," he told CBN News. "We have a website. We have the buses booked. We're now on our second campaign."

Conder, who started his career as a musician, says he now believes God is using his previous self-promoting skills to now promote Jesus.

"I experienced first hand how bands and performers were marketed ruthlessly," he explains in a video posted on the Quote Jesus website "In time, I became a Christian and saw things in a new light. I channeled that same energy and drive into which I had to working in a purpose greater than myself."

Conder says he's overcome many challenges to launch this campaign, which he believes will impact many thousands of lives.

"There's 17.5 million people who visit London," he said. "There's between 8-9 million who live here. So we've got so many people who will, subliminally, will at least be looking at those scriptures, and here we have one here: 'You will be with me in paradise.'"

So what does the future hold for this unique evangelist project?

"I believe that the future of Quote Jesus is something that's not just for here in London," Condor told CBN News. "It's across our nation. But it's also I believe could go global. Why with all the millions of Christians that are around today, all they need to do is just get on board literally with us. But to help us to bring the quotes of Jesus to this generation."

With so much political correctness in the U.K. seeking to silence the Christian voice, the hope is that these public displays of quoting Jesus will play a significant part in people going on their own personal journey towards faith in Christ.

Read the original post:

The Bus Campaign That's Giving UK Political Correctness a Run for ... - CBN News

By Joe Henao | 8 hours ago | Updated 8 hours ago

I wasnt quite sure if it was a universal maxim, but I had heard friends of mine recite the humourous adage, hes just saying what were all thinking, fictitiously assuming the role of the cucked Trump supporter proclaiming their admiration for our new Commander-in-Chief and his knack for stating the obscene, perverse and politically incorrect.

Although the phrase was generally used as a low jab towards Trump and his groupies, it reveals much of what is inefficient, and theoretically damning, regarding liberals and their use of political correctness as a means, end and political action.

As a disclaimer, Id like to point out that the act of censoring our speech for the sake of inclusivity and general respect should be commonsensical. It is in no way harmful in and of itself, and we should press our peers to consider utilizing language that does not carry with it preconceived sexist, racist, ableist, etc. values that devalue people and their identities.

This should be of no debate. (Hint: punch those who do debate it.) It is when political correctness is simultaneously employed as both an act of resistance and as a means to true liberation when it falls short. I urge liberals to reconsider what they understand as revolutionary and legitimately useful. The struggle does not end here.

Popular aphorisms Trumpisms such as, He just tells it like it is, or Hes just saying what were all thinking, should exact to us the nature of the isms politically correct liberals desperately attempt to combat. Discrimination, injustice and violence are not structured within language; they are structured within the base of the reality we inhabit.

Language, the medium poltical correctness aims to alter, operates in the most symbolic of realms, existing not as a categorical truth, but as a way of understanding, relaying and reflecting the social landscape were subjected to navigate.

Postmodern deconstructionists such as Foucault and Derrida, whom left-liberals love to misconstrue, correctly conveyed to us how power, hierarchy and violence is transcribed and sustained through language. Are we so ridiculous to assume that their solution was to simply not speak? Of course not, and for precisely this reason these thinkers were not liberals, but critical leftists.

Our goal should, therefore, not be to constantly censor our speech, but to rewire the zero-level relations of society so that the linguistic lexicon available to us does not contain within it discrimination/violence. Simply put, political correctness aims to alter the superstructure of society, while the true root of the violence that exists within our language is reflective of the relations in the base of society. If we are to truly uproot injustice and attack it at its source, we must attack the base, not language.

He tells it like it is: In this sense, racism very literally, is. Hes just saying what were all thinking. Regardless of whether or not racism is communicated or expressed through language, it still exists, and is still being thought and experienced.

Political correctness does nothing but obscure a forever lurking issue, acting as the proverbial band aid struggling to suppress an open wound. Within our subjective reality, violence exists structurally whether we speak about it or not.

So then, what is to be done? Ultimately and this will no doubt elicit opinions from all ends of our political constellation we must radically reorganize the ways in which we relate to one another. What I am proposing is far too utopian for todays standards, especially considering the state of affairs following the election, but nonetheless, we should still aim for the eventuality of an alterity rationally built upon entirely different relations, and keep certain options on the intellectual backburner for future use. By all means, let us all be inclusive with our language and utilize every tool available to us in mitigating injustice, but know that the struggle does not end here.

Joe Henao is a junior in the School of International Service.

edpage@theeagleonline.com

Read the original post:

Op-ed: He's just saying what we're all thinking: How political correctness fails us in the age of Trump - The Eagle

I used to think I was your conventional regular guy. I just went along to get along. Now I find out it isn't so.

First off, I was born to Caucasian parents. Now I'm told, whether I like it or not and regardless of how I treat others, I'm a racist. And I'm being asked to apologize for the actions of ancestors whose names I don't even know.

I'm fiscally and morally conservative and otherwise a social moderate. By today's standards that makes me a fascist.

I am incurably heterosexual, and I'm having trouble understanding why some other people have a different orientation. So the gay lobby automatically brands me a homophobic.

I've always been non-union. That, I'm told, makes me a traitor to the working class, and big business has me in its pocket.

Although I haven't had occasion to shoot a firearm since I was in the Army half a century ago, I believe in the Second Amendment and in people's right to own and use guns in a legal manner. Oh, but no, that makes me a member of the vast gun lobby. But the fact I think there are certain types of weapons that don't belong in civilian hands, on the other hand, makes me a radical gun-control advocate. I'm in a no-win situation.

I'm a Christian. That means Muslims label me an infidel and those of an atheist bent brand me a radical religious nut who wants to impose my beliefs on everyone else.

I'm in my 70s, which makes me a useless old man.

I am proud of my heritage and our inclusive American culture. That, I'm told, makes me a xenophobe (I keep having to go to the dictionary, too).

I champion the safety of myself and my family, and I support the police and the legal system. That makes me a right-wing extremist.

I believe in the defense and protection of the homeland for and by all citizens, which now makes me a militant.

I believe in hard work, fair play and appropriate compensation according to each individual worker's merits. Today that makes me an antisocialist.

This list, by the way, is based on something I saw on the internet recently. That makes me a plagiarist.

While I'm retired from a long career in the news media, the gamut of real news and fake news and alternative facts being thrown at us of late leads me to question much of what the media is feeding us, even sometimes the mainstream agencies. That must make me a reactionary.

And if that isn't enough, some of my friends and I have been tossed into something called a basket of deplorables.

As a result of all this, I'm not quite sure who I am anymore. Things are happening so quickly that I'm having trouble trying to adjust my thinking.

And now I'm becoming afraid to go into either restroom.

Jim Baileys column appears on Thursday. He can be reached by email at jameshenrybailey@earthlink.net.

Read the original post:

Jim Bailey column: Caught up in political correctness - The Herald Bulletin

Thursday February 23, 2017 Israel Hayom A new language was created not too long ago, in which what is good is actually bad, what is bad is not really that bad, and the basic values on which we were raised are blasted as outdated. That is the language of political correctness, by which ... and more »

Link:

Thursday February 23, 2017 - Israel Hayom

Strange, but in the final editing of my book, which is much concerned with the American conservative movement, I cannot find a single mention of the alt-right. I dont know what the alt-right is, or anyone in it. Perhaps it supplants the New Right which was more aggressive than the Old Right?

Ive never liked the term right; it reinforces the mythology that conservatism is even remotely aligned with fascism and Nazism. Such regimes, in their expansive power, have more in common with the Big Government of so-called progressives. And nationalism is inconclusive; FDR was no shrinking violet, and it was JFK who urged what you can do for your country.

Jake Turx is a correspondent for Brooklyn-based Ami Magazine. The orthodox Jewish reporter is one of many little-known journalists now permitted to participate in White House press briefings and news conferences. This is an affirmative action program hugely disfavored by the mainstream media. Thats because its real diversity.

Heres the background: Over last weekend vandals toppled headstones at the Chesed Shel Emeth Society cemetery in St. Louis. Recently there were reports of bomb threats to 48 Jewish centers. These reportsprompted Mr. Turx (pen name) to ask President Donald Trump what Turx thought was a friendly softball question about the president addressing anti-Semitism.

In response, it would have been both desirable and appropriate, and expedient, for President Trump to condemn anti-Semitism and racial and religious hatred. He should have done so, then. Instead President Trump called the question repulsive and insulting; but he might have added demeaning. (A) The presidents generic is not to reply to an attack, not yield even one inch to an unacceptable premise. (B) The presidents specific is that associating him in any way with anti-Semitism is outrageous. (C) The president saw the question premised on the political correctness of Jewish victimhood, and the thing Jews in the U.S. are victims of, is political correctness.

President Trump likely (and incorrectly) felt that responding properly would dignify the rap against him and his team and perhaps even be patronizing. He likely wanted to avoid a headline like Trump Denies Anti-Semitism or Trump Finally Condemns Hate. But his rhetorical diversion to the Electoral College convinced conspiracists the president had a sinister agenda. He supposedly did not want to disillusion his presumed anti-Semitic base.

I am the least anti-Semitic person that youve ever seen in your entire life, President Trump responded. His inelegant syntax, Bill Buckley would say, enabled CNN talking heads to conclude, as they did, that if President Trump is the least, then he is somewhat anti-Semitic. That may not qualify as Fake News; it is Fake Analysis.

The controversy has its roots in the relentless character assassination of candidate and now President Trump. First, there was the canard that he is an anti-Semite. That became implausible given, for example, his love for his daughter and his proximity to his son-in-law, both Orthodox Jews who raise Trumps grandchildren in that rigorous observance. In much greater detail I explained this and more to a vitriolic Trump hater who happens to be Jewish; he responded, But some Jews supported Hitler. There seems the inevitable comparison of Trump to Hitler, encouraged by CNN, which keeps replaying that neo-Nazi creep, who has almost no following, chanting Heil Trump.

Candidate Trump might not hate Jews, Trumps detractors said, but Trumps campaign is full of dog whistles because his campaign ads were coded to appeal to anti-Semites. That became implausible since only the liberal Jewish complainers deciphered the code. In reality, the only dog whistle to the anti-Semites is each time President Trump appoints to a major position someone who happens to be Jewish.

But if you accept the premise that Trump and his team are evil, the explanation is always ominous, and that helps explain the reaction on January 27, when the White House issued President Trumps statement on International Holocaust Remembrance Day. The statement inexplicably and inexcusably failed to mention the Jewish victims; it was worse than insensitive. It sounded like Barack Obama; had President Obama issued the same statement, I would have criticized it.

Trumps adversaries had a theory: Presidential Senior Counselor Steve Bannon is a historical revisionist. Allegedly Bannon aligned with the alt-right and its anti-Semites who want to minimize the extermination of Jews.

It turns out the author of the statement was Boris Epshteyn, an assistant to President Trump. Epshteyn was born in in 1982 in Moscow, then in the Soviet Union; in 1993 he emigrated to the U.S. In 1979, when I visited communist-ruled Leningrad (St. Petersburg), the Red hosts insisted on a cemetery commemoration for the quarter of the citys population killed by the Nazis. The communists played down the genocide of Jews. If you visited Auschwitz when the communists controlled Poland, the exhibit and tour guide alluded to the victims Polish opponents of the Nazis, communists, gypsies, and, almost parenthetically, Jews; in fact, Jews were overwhelmingly the carnage at what evolved from a concentration camp into a death camp. After Poland became free of communism, the Auschwitz exhibit and guides properly emphasized that Auschwitz was dedicated overwhelmingly to the annihilation of Jews. In other words, it was the communists the Left that minimized the Holocaust.

Perhaps before 11-year-old Epshteyn emigrated to the U.S., the Soviet education system had inculcated the party line World War II, not the Holocaust. In any case, Boris Epshteyn is no anti-Semitic lackey. Like many Jews from the former Soviet Union, Epshteyn is proud of his Judaism and his political conservatism.

For leftists born into a Jewish family, anti-Semitism is not about people who hate Jews. Its about people that the Jewish leftists hate, notably President Trump and, guilt by association, his advisers.

Rabbi Marvin Heir of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles prayed at the Trump swearing-in. A few days ago a reporter asked Heir about President Trumps failure to condemn anti-Semitism. Rabbi Heir replied that the president would pick the time and place. And so it was yesterday, at the end of a tour of the National Museum of African American History and Culture, that President Trump said the venue showed why we have to fight bigotry, intolerance and hatred in all of its very ugly forms.

About reports of increased anti-Semitism, he said, The anti-Semitic threats targeting our Jewish community and community centers are horrible and are painful and a very sad reminder of the work that still must be done to root out hate and prejudice and evil.

After reporting this, CNN interviewed one Steven Goldstein, executive director of the Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect. My question to him: Do you think Anne Frank was murdered because of a lack of mutual respect?

Asked on CNN if he was satisfied with Trumps condemnation of anti-Semitism, Goldstein said absolutely not. To prove his good faith, Goldstein emphasized, Trump must fire Steve Bannon, supposedly (and with no evidence) an anti-Semite. Trump used to complain that in repudiating hatred and prejudice, he could never satisfy his critics. And Goldstein proved Trump correct.

So who is Steven Goldstein? Like Boris Epshteyn, Goldstein lived in New Jersey; both started in politics with former Sen. Frank Lautenberg. Thats where the resemblance ends. Goldstein epitomizes the Dark State of philanthropy, using tax-free dollars for political polemics. Goldsteins Anne Frank Center is a progressive voice for social justice, fighting hatred of refugees and immigrants, anti-Semitism, sexism, racism, Islam phobia, homophobia, transphobia Did Goldstein leave anything out? Is the legacy of Anne Frank now reduced to this potpourri of political correctness?

Steven Goldstein reminds me of a variation of a current cartoon. A man says, Women and gays should have no rights. Jews are pigs. Goldstein, gay and Jewish, would likely reply, You must be one of those alt-right creeps behind Donald Trump! The man might respond, No, actually these are my religious beliefs. Im a devout Muslim. And Goldstein, who presumes to judge Trump and demands that Bannon be fired, would likely respond, I apologize. I hope you dont think Im Islamophobic!

Follow this link:

The Dark State of Political Correctness - American Spectator