ROMNEY WORDSWORTH - I don’t know if there will always be enough material for an article every Friday on the March of Militant Feminism (and assorted Queers) but it seems I have plenty to work with today, so here goes:

An overhead shot of the LMU Campus taken from a Helicopter.

#1) At Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, a so-called “Catholic University”, a university employee is being investigated for a “hate crime”.  What was her crime?  Stating to 3 LBGTQ students that she personally believed there are only two genders.  Despite this view being completely in line with Catholic teaching, Loyola University immediately suspended the employee, activated its “Bias Incident Response Team”, and even called in the L.A. police department to charge the woman with a “hate crime”.

Said the offended students:  “You can have your opinion as long as it doesn’t deny my existence.”

#2) The New Hampshire State Legislature on Wednesday rejected a bill that would have made it a crime for a woman to show a breast or nipple in public.  The rejection was the result of the Free the Nipple movement on the Left, which wants to strike down all laws that criminalize the public display of the naked female breast.

So, don’t just burn your bra, women, burn all your tops too, and just let those Fun Bags flap in the wind!

Kneeling young man proposing to his fiancée.

Because nothing says “oppression” like being given a diamond worth three month’s of a man’s salary

#3) According to the feminist blog, Bustle, the tradition of men proposing to women by giving them engagement rings is “problematic” because it “perpetuates the rape culture”. 

“The stereotype that men must get women to date them or marry them or sleep with them and that it’s up to women to respond can be problematic - not just because it discourages women from going after what they want, but also because it encourages men to pursue what they want at a woman’s expense,” Suzannah Weiss writes in a piece titled “6 Marriage Traditions That Reinforce Rape Culture.”

Ms. Weiss continues with the blanket declaration that: “Putting what men pursue over what women want perpetuates rape culture.”  Wow!  So, unless men submit to women’s will all the time, in all things, and live as subservient, second class citizens, we’re all just perpetuating rape culture.  I suppose the fact that I go out the door every day NOT wearing a dog collar and a leash is ALSO perpetuating rape culture.  And then these nuts wonder why people equate feminism with man hating?

HERE IS A LIST OF EVERY SINGLE TIME OBAMA COMMITTED AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE THAT DEMS & MEDIA COVERED UP “Impeach!” It’s been more than eight years since Democrats uttered that word – long enough for anyone to wonder if it was still in their vocabulary, considering the deafening silence through the dozens of serious scandals during President Obama’s administration – but now that President Trump is the man in the White House, it’s back with a vengeance. Democrats everywhere are wildly slinging the “I” word, hoping to nail Trump for high crimes and misdemeanors after the New York Times claimed a memo written by former FBI Director James Comey said the president urged him to end the federal investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn. Some members of Congress are getting in on the action. They include Reps. Maxine Water, D-Calif., and Al Green, D-Texas. Even a Republican, Rep. Justin Amash, claimed Wednesday there are grounds to impeach President Trump. House Oversign Committee Chair Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, asked for the alleged Comey memo and other documents. Chaffetz tweeted that he is prepared to subpoena the information. And Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., invoked “Watergate.” Now the Democratic Party is reportedly poll testing impeachment as a 2018 election issue. More than 1 million people signed a petition calling on Congress to impeach Trump. Wasting no time Wednesday, the mainstream media sprang into action, enthusiastically echoing the left’s impeachment calls. MSNBC launched a Watergate ad implying Trump is America’s new Richard Nixon. “Watergate. We know its name because there were reporters who never stopped asking questions,” says MSNBC host Chris Hayes, who hinted that Trump is next on the impeachment chopping block. “Now, who knows where the questions will take us. But I know this: I’m not going to stop asking them.” Meanwhile, some overzealous members of the left plastered fliers around Washington, D.C., demanding all White House staffers resign Wednesday. The posters read: “If you work for this White House you are complicit in hate-mongering, lies, corrupt taking of Americans’ tax money via self-dealing and emoluments, and quite possibly federal crimes and treason. Also, any wars will be on your soul. … Resign now.” But constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley, who voted for President Obama, warned “impeachment” enthusiasts not to get ahead of themselves with President Trump. Why? At this time, there’s no evidence Trump actually committed a crime. “The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo,” Turley wrote in a May 17 opinion piece posted at the Hill. Turley explained: For the first time, the Comey memo pushes the litany of controversies surrounding Trump into the scope of the United States criminal code. However, if this is food for obstruction of justice, it is still an awfully thin soup. Some commentators seem to be alleging criminal conduct in office or calling for impeachment before Trump completed the words of his inaugural oath of office. Not surprising, within minutes of the New York Times report, the response was a chorus of breathless “gotcha” announcements. But this memo is neither the Pentagon Papers nor the Watergate tapes. Indeed, it raises as many questions for Comey as it does Trump in terms of the alleged underlying conduct. A good place to start would be with the federal law, specifically 18 U.S.C. 1503. The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo. There are dozens of different variations of obstruction charges ranging from threatening witnesses to influencing jurors. None would fit this case. That leaves the omnibus provision on attempts to interfere with the “due administration of justice.” However, that still leaves the need to show that the effort was to influence “corruptly” when Trump could say that he did little but express concern for a longtime associate. The term “corruptly” is actually defined differently under the various obstruction provisions, but it often involves a showing that someone acted “with the intent to secure an unlawful benefit for oneself or another.” Encouraging leniency or advocating for an associate is improper but not necessarily seeking an unlawful benefit for him. . Obama’s Iran nuke deal Obama knew about Hillary’s private email server Obama IRS targets conservatives Obama’s DOJ spies on AP reporters Obamacare & Obama’s false promises Illegal-alien amnesty by executive order Benghazi-gate Operation Fast & Furious 5 Taliban leaders for Bergdahl Extortion 17 ‘Recess ‘ appointments – when Senate was in session Appointment of ‘czars’ without Senate approval Suing Arizona for enforcing federal law Refusal to defend Defense of Marriage Act Illegally conducting war against Libya NSA: Spying on Americans Muslim Brotherhood ties Miriam Carey Birth certificate Executive orders Solyndra and the lost $535 million Egypt Cap & Trade: When in doubt, bypass Congress Refusal to prosecute New Black Panthers Obama’s U.S. citizen ‘hit list’