Last week, the online edition of Time magazine published an article titled Conservative cases against the prohibition of critical racial theoriesCuriously, its author is Aziz Huq, a law professor at the University of Chicago, who is neither conservative nor very sympathetic to the United States or American values. There is nothing in this story about “banning” the CRT or conservative cases against it.
This article is mainly empty talk. It claims that different states that prohibit the use of Critical Race Theory (CRT) as a tool for indoctrinating schoolchildren describe this harmful philosophy in different ways, that CRT critics do not understand what CRT is. This at least prevents us from being insulted by being told that CRT is only taught in graduate courses. It equates state-supported propaganda and indoctrination with freedom of speech.
It is difficult to attribute the nonsense in the article to accident. Hook may be mentally retarded, but he is not an idiot. For example, he said that the Supreme Court had said that CRT could teach based on this:
Conservatives belittle the argument of “snowflakes” college students. But the reasons for opposing CRT are the same. Therefore, it receives the same response. Therefore, in a recent opinion on speeches by students outside of school, Judge Alito explained why students cannot simply be punished for rude rants about being excluded from cheerleading: “You cannot be suppressed just because the speech expresses the thoughts or emotions of others. Upset.” This is indeed the law: since 1951, the Supreme Court has not allowed the state to prohibit or punish speech because it angered the audience.
The case he mentioned involved a school district because she posted about her school on Snapchat in an attempt to disciplinary action against students. The student did not ask anyone to read it, she did not ask them to agree to it as a prerequisite for obtaining a passing score or keeping the job, and her position was not paid by taxpayers…even though they should stick to her laws and bills , Because of this grotesque over-expansion of Kronwafen in her school.
He lies in his description of Florida’s restrictions. This is what the good professor said: “For example, Florida defines it as any theory that’racism is not just a product of prejudice.'” It actually says: “Racism is not just a product of prejudice.” And racism is rooted in American society and its legal system to uphold the supremacy of white people.” This is not a small difference.
Former RedStater Dan McLaughlin briefly deleted this harmful false information National Review:
in case time If you want to publish a progressive academic paper and recite the usual progressive cases against the anti-CRT bill, it is of course free. However, when it is not written by conservatives and the premises or arguments of conservatives are not considered legitimate, calling it a “conservative case” is undoubtedly deceptive to its readers. Worse, it fails to tell readers that this is not a conservative writer. People would think that the minimum standard of journalistic honesty would require this.
It’s no longer news that a liberal law professor who seems to know nothing about conservatism outside of Twitter’s hot topics will lie and repost his career. This is the life of these people.
Then came the second stage.
As night fell, David “I am a manly fighting veterinarian” Frenchman appeared at the party.
This is excellent: https://t.co/vpETItWIEm
— David French (@DavidAFrench) July 13, 2021
Anyone who calls this smelly puddle of bubbling diarrhea “excellent” is a clown. But this is the French we are talking about, and it’s self-evident lately.
The French fully defends the CRT, which is a sequel to his praise in the public library that “Dress Queen Story Time” is “Blessing of Freedom”.On the weekend of July 4th, the French co-authored New York Times Column Claiming that the prohibition of political indoctrination in K-12 is a danger to “general education”.Helen Roy of Claremont University American thought The blog ruined her like a trout Substack article:
Totalitarians can’t go far without the help of promoters. Whether they succumb to power out of fear, principle, or instinct, they paved the way for hell.Fortunately, no “conservative” has ever tried to protect anything (especially clean Children) read David’s French. He does not write for conservatives. He and other “well-meaning conservatives” write for liberals and liberals who need to pat their heads and say “good boys”. The purpose of the mole is to secure his social status among those who hate him. Maybe he knows this. Maybe this is the reason.
(See RedState’s report on this tragic inferiority complex at For some Republicans, failure is the point; The fight for CRT has left conservative companies breathless; with Christopher Rufo issued a devastating condemnation of David French’s CRT Fluff Piece.)
If you wait long enough, you will find that the liar who infects the Conservative Party will actually defend any actions by the left to promote progressivism and weaken Western civilization. In the debate about gay marriage, the leader of the conservative movement assured us that you must be an irrational hater against everyone who is on the “right side of history” (spoiler alert: they are not on the right side of anything. ). We see the same pattern in transgenderism and CRT. At least the North American Boys and Men Lincoln Association is honest about its goals.
Our mission is clear: destroy the Republican Party.
-Project Lincoln (@ProjectLincoln) July 15, 2021
People like the French want to destroy our country and us, but they don’t have the courage to express their goals. If they do, then they will no longer be used by the wealthy progressive donors who let them live in upscale neighborhoods and send their children to private schools that cost as much as Ivy League schools. So, on the contrary, they try to convince us that the only way we can stick to the principles is to let those who hate them win.
I think they might have gone too far this time.
