Quote of the day—Barbara LeSavoy

Firearm possession should be banned in America; President Obama can orchestrate this directive. His presidency can be remembered as a remarkable turn in United States history where a progressive leader forever changed the landscape under which we live and work. This is his legacy. To establish gun control laws in America that will reduce high levels of male violence and usher in a culture of peace and civility.

Barack Obama is the president of the United States. He can change the country. He can do it today. I believe in him.

Barbara LeSavoy
Director of Women and Gender Studies at The College at Brockport.
October 9, 2015
Obama’s legacy on guns should be to ban them
[One has to wonder how it is she determines truth from falsity. Does she believe men are incapable of violence against women without guns?

A firearm is the best tool to ensure she is not a victim of male violence. It is just the opposite of what she believes. It is guns which promote civility.

Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]


20 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Barbara LeSavoy

  1. I read about this foolish woman elsewhere. It’s really disturbing that someone who not only holds such views is an educator, but espouses them and retains that position.

    For Barbara’s benefit, I’d like to offer some clarity. Barak Obama is your President, not mine. As a consequence of his extra-Constitutional actions, I’ve withdrawn my consent to be governed and beyond rendering unto Caesar, exist as an advocate of regional separatism, or secession if you prefer. For those views, I’ve been accused by some as being guilty of “sedition” and sentenced to prison, all before charges or trial of course, but it would seem that radical Progressives like Barbara don’t see the need for due process when their views make it clear that wholesale changes to our fundamental rights are needed or indeed, overdue.

    Although she’s a whack job, it’s alarming to consider that her views are much closer to those of the current administration that in all liklihood, your or mine are.

    Jeff B.

  2. “Director of Women and Gender Studies.” This tells me pretty much all I need to know.

    Thanks Barbara. Please explain how you achieved your position without a basic working knowledge of the Constitution of the United States, and separation of powers, things I learned in 7th grade.

    • Exactly. I would not call such a person “educator”. Not that that’s a real word anyway — if someone is called “educator” that means he/she isn’t fit to be called “teacher”.

      But anyway, “gender studies” isn’t a real subject, and people who dabble in it aren’t scholars, teachers, educators, or any other form of functioning human. To find that a person who claims to do this stuff is spouting nonsense isn’t surprising — it’s just a dog returning to its barf.

      • These college professors should be extremely grateful tenure exists. At my alma mater, the University of Wisconsin, Psychology is the most popular major, but it is also a huge money pit. It gets subsidized by all the profitable departments of the university (think hard sciences, which boost the number of remunerative patents that the university owns and licences). Do the sports revenues also trickle down to the general budget? Basically, we underwrite these moonbats with our hard work. That’s depressing.

      • “Gender Studies” = “any person with a penis is bad and icky and probably racist”

    • I agree. She must have never watched that video “How a Bill Becomes Law” from School House Rock. She thinks the president has the powers of a king? This is amazingly ignorant and/or stupid.

  3. “To establish gun control laws in America that will reduce high levels of male violence and usher in a culture of peace and civility. ”

    Because there was no war, death and destruction before firearms were invented….

  4. I hear echoes coming down through the ages, from dictators, tyrants, emperor/gods, petty thieves and psycho-killers.

    “Once (fill in the blank) are killed off, the world will be cleansed, a new and bright age of peace and intellectual betterment, a glorious Thousand Year Reich, will be born, and we will for once be able to live in peace, love, prosperity and harmony. If only (those people) were swept from the face of the Earth, our problems could begin to heal…”

    Notice too that Barbara LeSavoy’s manner of speaking is essentially religious language. She longs for a Savior, a man of exceptional power, who will take it upon himself to do what no other president would dare to do, even at great risk to himself, so that she can have salvation from her torments.

    This is jihad, in essence, and why for years I’ve been pointing out the relatively cozy relationship between Progressives and jihadists. Disagree with either one and you’re an infidel, a blasphemer, an upstart, a “wrecker” as the Soviets put it, you’re “gumming up the works” as Obama put it, and so you are part of the cause of all Earthly suffering. Of course you should be swept aside, and the sooner the better. Justice demands it.

  5. Liberalism is it’s own religion. When you defy and deny God, you will replace Him with something else. Either your own ego like the POTUS or a surrogate.

    The SJW, homosexual, ecological and other pet Leftist causes are fueled by a need to find meaning when they have dismissed the Creator from that role.

    • Humans are hardwired for a belief system. Which means it is a mental void that must be filled. This explains the wide ranging idiocies that so many will grasp so tightly to. Logic is not required in that area of the mind.

    • Yep. It goes by many names, but it basically boils down to “humanism”. Worship of man, not God.

      Humanism has five basic core tenets: atheism, amorality, evolution, human autonomy, and globalism. Get rid of God (as opposed to the State), moral absolutes (as opposed to moral relativism), Ordered Creation (as opposed to random-chance spontaneous generation), God as a source of authority (as opposed to man’s self-rule), and individual and national sovereignty (as opposed to a “one-world government”).

      As all of these are essentially articles of faith (having in some cases even less supporting evidence than their religious counterparts), humanism is a religion in a very real sense.

      Not coincidentally, a liberal utopia would include all those things.

      • Why is it necessary to “worship” anything?

        Why can’t there exist an moral framework which is independent of god(s) or government(s)?

        • For such a framework, see the works of Ayn Rand, or Neil Smith. A nice succinct statement is Neil’s essay about the “zero aggression principle”.

        • The default position of a “belief system” seems to be something bigger/more powerful than humanity itself. It would appear that it has to have a framework or structure that can be envisioned. Trying to fit it to humans directly appears to violate the rules.

          It’s only been a few years since researchers have concluded we are hardwired this way (they weren’t too happy with their findings). So far, I’m not seeing any further studies to look into this. I suspect that both/all? sides of this are very leery of looking any deeper. That, or it’s just too soon for any in depth studies to be finished.

        • For an exceedingly small portion of the population that MAY be possible, but just look at many. Once some form of god is removed, they just start to try to worship something else, and what they try to worship is often dangerous.

          You can not like it all you want, but a vast majority of the population seems to be hardwired to have an irrevocable psychological need to have a supremely powerful something to appeal to that will eventually write the wrongs for them.

          Now a relatively inoffensive “Believe my way or you’re going to go to hell.” doesn’t really hurt anyone else unless you’re overly easily offended. On the other hand, a “Believe my way or I’ll cut of your head” (Musulm) or “Believe my way or I’ll have you put in prison” (liberal). Gets to be a serious problem when such people get into power.

          • True. And don’t forget that freedom of religion (freedom to believe what you want) is a fairly rare notion, found only in one or two western countries in the judeo-christian tradition. And in the christian case, only in the past few centuries. Islam today is not fundamentally different from the “christianity” of the Spanish Inquisition.
            I said “one or two” deliberately. A lot of western countries pretend to have freedom of religion, until you dig deeper and find that they actually only allow you to have (or at least express) approved beliefs. This is the case in western Europe, for example, and in the USA in certain areas (like the vast majority of universities).

Comments are closed.