This is likely only because of the heat they were feeling thanks to FIRE. But they have cancelled the program.

Late Thursday, University of Delaware President Patrick Harker released on the school’s website a Message to the University of Delaware Community terminating the university’s ideological reeducation program, which FIRE condemned as an exercise in thought reform. He stated, “I have directed that the program be stopped immediately. No further activities under the current framework will be conducted.” Harker also called for a “full and broad-based review” of the program’s practices and purposes. While concerns remain about the University of Delaware’s commitment to free expression, FIRE commends President Harker for his decision to immediately terminate the Orwellian residence life education program.

This is a victory. A small one, but hopefully these small victories will add up and the systematic moonbattization of academia can come to an end.

A big thumbs-up to FIRE. Make sure to show them your support.

Previous:
Brainwashing at the University of Delaware

I am in shock at this.

The University of Delaware subjects students in its residence halls to a shocking program of ideological reeducation that is referred to in the university’s own materials as a “treatment” for students’ incorrect attitudes and beliefs. The Orwellian program requires the approximately 7,000 students in Delaware’s residence halls to adopt highly specific university-approved views on issues ranging from politics to race, sexuality, sociology, moral philosophy, and environmentalism. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) is calling for the total dismantling of the program, which is a flagrant violation of students’ rights to freedom of conscience and freedom from compelled speech.

“The University of Delaware’s residence life education program is a grave intrusion into students’ private beliefs,” FIRE President Greg Lukianoff said. “The university has decided that it is not enough to expose its students to the values it considers important; instead, it must coerce its students into accepting those values as their own. At a public university like Delaware, this is both unconscionable and unconstitutional.”

The university’s views are forced on students through a comprehensive manipulation of the residence hall environment, from mandatory training sessions to “sustainability” door decorations. Students living in the university’s eight housing complexes are required to attend training sessions, floor meetings, and one-on-one meetings with their Resident Assistants (RAs). The RAs who facilitate these meetings have received their own intensive training from the university, including a “diversity facilitation training” session at which RAs were taught, among other things, that “[a] racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality.”

The university suggests that at one-on-one sessions with students, RAs should ask intrusive personal questions such as “When did you discover your sexual identity?” Students who express discomfort with this type of questioning often meet with disapproval from their RAs, who write reports on these one-on-one sessions and deliver these reports to their superiors. One student identified in a write-up as an RA’s “worst” one-on-one session was a young woman who stated that she was tired of having “diversity shoved down her throat.”

According to the program’s materials, the goal of the residence life education program is for students in the university’s residence halls to achieve certain “competencies” that the university has decreed its students must develop in order to achieve the overall educational goal of “citizenship.” These competencies include: “Students will recognize that systemic oppression exists in our society,” “Students will recognize the benefits of dismantling systems of oppression,” and “Students will be able to utilize their knowledge of sustainability to change their daily habits and consumer mentality.”

At various points in the program, students are also pressured or even required to take actions that outwardly indicate their agreement with the university’s ideology, regardless of their personal beliefs. Such actions include displaying specific door decorations, committing to reduce their ecological footprint by at least 20%, taking action by advocating for an “oppressed” social group, and taking action by advocating for a “sustainable world.”

In the Office of Residence Life’s internal materials, these programs are described using the harrowing language of ideological reeducation. In documents relating to the assessment of student learning, for example, the residence hall lesson plans are referred to as “treatments.”

In a letter sent yesterday to University of Delaware President Patrick Harker, FIRE pointed out the stark contradiction between the residence life education program and the values of a free society. FIRE’s letter to President Harker also underscored the University of Delaware’s legal obligation to abide by the First Amendment. FIRE reminded Harker of the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943), a case decided during World War II that remains the law of the land. Justice Robert H. Jackson, writing for the Court, declared, “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.”

“The fact that the university views its students as patients in need of treatment for some sort of moral sickness betrays a total lack of respect not only for students’ basic rights, but for students themselves,” Lukianoff said. “The University of Delaware has both a legal and a moral obligation to immediately dismantle this program, and FIRE will not rest until it has.”

FIRE is a nonprofit educational foundation that unites civil rights and civil liberties leaders, scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals across the political and ideological spectrum on behalf of individual rights, due process rights, freedom of expression, and rights of conscience on our campuses. FIRE would like to thank the Delaware Association of Scholars (DAS) for its invaluable assistance in this case. FIRE’s efforts to preserve liberty at the University of Delaware and elsewhere can be seen by visiting www.thefire.org.

It’s just unbelievable. There are no words. Fun fact? Freshman are required to live in the dorms unless they have family nearby.

What’s really fun is that Democrats like John Edwards want everyone to go to college. And why not? Then everyone will be brainwashed into being perfect little zombie-fied moonbats.

Please feel free to contact the University of Delaware and demand that they stop this. We live in a free society, and to be completely frank, this is bullshit. NO ONE should have to put up with that. NO ONE.

Patrick Harker, President, University of Delaware: 302-831-2111; president@udel.edu
Kathleen G. Kerr, Director of Residence Life, University of Delaware: 302-831-1201; kkerr@udel.edu

Also, please make sure to visit the FIRE website and show your support. It’s a great organization, fighting against the indoctrination of the people who will be running our country in the future.

Hat tip: Moonbattery

Not in the new movie, anyways.

My newest post at Wizbang covers it all:

G.I. Joe was unabashedly patriotic. Many fans were, of course, excited to hear about the new movie to be released by Paramount.

But of course, in the liberal land of Hollyweird, a Real American Hero is just unacceptable. Nope, it’s gotta be a global hero. G.I. Joe will be a global operation, not an American one, and G.I. Joe now stands for Global Integrated Joint Operating Entity:

The studio’s live-action feature film version of G.I. Joe will no longer revolve around a top-secret U.S. special forces team but rather an international operation.

In a follow-up to their confirmation that Stephen Sommers will direct G.I. Joe, Variety offers this new description of the team: “G.I. Joe is now a Brussels-based outfit that stands for Global Integrated Joint Operating Entity, an international co-ed force of operatives who use hi-tech equipment to battle Cobra, an evil organization headed by a double-crossing Scottish arms dealer. The property is closer in tone to X-Men and James Bond than a war film.”

…

So why the changes? Hasbro and Paramount execs recently spoke about the challenges of marketing a film about the U.S. military at a time when the current U.S. administration and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are at a low-point in global polls. When a studio makes a film as expensive as G.I. Joe will likely be, they want to know that as many people as possible around the world will want to see it. In other words, G.I. Joe — “A Real American Hero” — is a tough sell.

Nothing is sacred to liberals. Nothing patriotic or American is worth preserving. And I’m sure it never crossed their little liberal minds that perhaps if Hollywood made movies in the vein of those released during WWII, in which America, the military, and our soldiers were portrayed as strong, patriotic heroes, rather than today’s military movies in which the United States is always the bad guy, war is always “wrong”, and our soldiers are morally corrupt, people wouldn’t have such a negative outlook on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (the mainstream media should get that memo, as well). They could be supportive and make movies that showed America, our troops, and their mission in a positive light. But that would go against the liberal agenda. What’s even worse is that one of the scripts they had was evocative of the patriotic G.I. Joe, but they chose to go with a script that was less militaristic, described as “X-Men meets Mission: Impossible”.

Make sure to read the whole thing.

You know, I think liberals were right when they said Iraq is just another Vietnam. We’ve got liberals insulting our troops right and left, with politicians clamoring for defeat while crying “QUAGMIRE!” and simultaneously smearing our troops with this kind of garbage — just like in Vietnam.

Presidential hopeful Barack Obama was warned by a friendly voter Monday to avoid public spats with his Democratic rivals - but remarks he made later could add fuel to the criticism against him.

Maggie North of Claremont told Obama he risks becoming part of the usual political scene if he keeps being drawn into well-publicized disputes with rivals. He and chief rival Hillary Rodham Clinton have jabbed at each other over foreign policy, the war on terrorism and the use of nuclear weapons.

…

But during a later appearance before about 800 people in Nashua, Obama made a comment likely to further the spats he was warned about.

Answering a question on how he would refocus U.S. troops out of Iraq to better fight terrorism, he said, “We’ve to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there.”

Earlier this month, Obama drew criticism when he said he would send troops into Pakistan to hunt down terrorists even without local permission, if warranted.

John Kerry did it and won the Democratic nomination. Maybe Obama thinks it will work for him, too. After all, every Dem thinks crap like that of our troops, because they hate them. It’s just that most of them are seasoned politicians who are smart enough not to say it out loud (most).

However — that anyone would say something like that, let alone say it to gain political profit, about our troops in Iraq is despicable in my book. There is nothing lower than insulting, smearing, and debasing the sacrifice of the men and women over there risking their lives for Obama to act like a donkey’s ass. They protect his right to slander them, yet this is how he repays them?

There really is nothing lower.

Silly, silly Democrats. Do they really think they’re going to get away with stuff like this without it getting out? Even if no one in the House talks, there’s something called CSPAN — remember? And stuff like this always gets out, especially if it’s been videotaped.

Eric Cantor explains what happened:

High drama on the house floor tonight. Dems brought an Agriculture appropriations bill to the floor greatly expanding government programs, yet again. Republicans moved to recommit the bill to committee, in order to add language prohibiting any taxpayer funds under the agriculture programs from going to illegal immigrants.

The Democrat chair closed the roll call when Republicans had won – as the electronic voting tally indicated enough votes to return the bill to committee. Shouting erupted on the floor, as the Democrats attempted to change the outcome of the vote after the gavel had come down – the vote was closed.

Republicans attempted to adjourn, but we were ruled out of order. Confusion set in as members waited at least five minutes for the chair’s decision.

Republicans members then began to leave the floor in protest, after Democrats proved they would go to whatever lengths necessary to further their agenda. A bad call by the chair, the vote was closed. Then the Democrats allowed their members to continue voting to change the outcome. An outrage. Is this a democracy or a dictatorship?

All but a few Republicans refused to vote on final passage since it became obvious that a fair vote would not happen.

UPDATE:Republicans are conferencing this morning after the travesty that occurred last night on the floor of the house. The overwhelming sense of the members is, we have to stand up and reject the democrats manipulation of the rules of the house to further their attempts to thwart Republican efforts to stop government benefits from flowing to illegal immigrants. Republican house members are demanding that democrats right their wrongs.

That is SO ethical! Pioneer Pelosi is right. Most ethical Congress ever.

The Politico has more:

Details remain fuzzy, but numerous Republicans argued afterward that they had secured a 215-213 win on their motion to bar undocumented immigrants from receiving any federal funds apportioned in the agricultural spending bill for employment or rental assistance. Democrats, however, argued the measure was deadlocked at 214-214 and failed, members and aides on both sides of the aisle said afterward.

One GOP aide saw McNulty gavel the vote to a close after receiving a signal from his leaders – but before reading the official tally. And votes continued to shift even after he closed the roll call - a strange development in itself.

Whatever the final tally, acrimony quickly exploded between lawmakers on either side of the aisle as Democratic leaders tried to plot a solution, while parliamentarians on either side argued over protocol.

Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) eventually offered a motion to reconsider, according to floor staff on either side, ostensibly giving members a chance to recast their votes. But the maneuver sparked a chorus of angry protests from the Republicans, yelling “shame” on Democrats, while they returned fire with angry volleys of their own.

When Democrats finally moved to consider the spending bill as the last vote of the night, furious Republicans left the chamber en masse to protest the maneuver. The House eventually recessed at 11:18 p.m. But Republicans quickly discovered that there was no longer any record of the controversial vote and immediately charged Democrats with erasing the bad result.

Best part of all?

It was caught on camera. All of it:

Here’s Eric Cantor reacting on the floor:

You know, are the Dems really this arrogant? It seems they must be. I mean, you’ve got them publicly admitting that they want failure from Iraq because it would benefit them politically, and now you’ve got Pioneer Pelosi’s most ethical Congress ever using strong-arm tactics to cheat on a vote, all of which is caught by videotape and aired on CSPAN. I mean, are they idiots? Their approval rating is lower than George Bush’s (and that’s saying something!), yet they keep acting as if the American people are too stupid to catch onto what they are doing! It’s the damnedest thing I’ve ever seen! I mean, how much more blatant can you be? At least attempt to hide your bullshit. But, in their arrogance, they don’t think they have to.

And the vote the Dems so furiously wanted to defeat? It would keep illegal immigrants from getting taxpayer funding in the agriculture bill.

Man, they sure do love America, those Dems.

As Kathryn Jean Lopez noted, is this a democracy or a dictatorship?

They really, really support the troops! Really, they do!

These idiots keep blathering on about how they don’t want us to win in Iraq, and then get furious when we call them cowards, traitors, and defeatocrats (emphasis mine):

House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said Monday that a strongly positive report on progress on Iraq by Army Gen. David Petraeus likely would split Democrats in the House and impede his party’s efforts to press for a timetable to end the war.

Clyburn noted that Petraeus carries significant weight among the 47 members of the Blue Dog caucus in the House, a group of moderate to conservative Democrats. Without their support, he said, Democratic leaders would find it virtually impossible to pass legislation setting a timetable for withdrawal.

“I think there would be enough support in that group to want to stay the course and if the Republicans were to stay united as they have been, then it would be a problem for us,” Clyburn said. “We, by and large, would be wise to wait on the report.”

Many Democrats have anticipated that, at best, Petraeus and U.S. ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker would present a mixed analysis of the success of the current troop surge strategy, given continued violence in Baghdad. But of late there have been signs that the commander of U.S. forces might be preparing something more generally positive. Clyburn said that would be “a real big problem for us.”

So basically, he is rather blatantly admitting that he doesn’t want there to be positive signs of progress from Iraq because it would hurt the Dems politically.

Haven’t we conservatives been saying that all along? And now, he just proved us right.

But don’t question their patriotism, oh no. It’s patriotic to wish for your country to fail, don’t you see? It’s a good thing for the terrorists who want to attack and kill us to win in Iraq. They love America SO much!

As Misha from Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler says,

Try them, convict them and execute them for treason.

Or, if that’s too rough for you, let’s just cram them into container ships and send them off to whichever totalitarian dystopia they’re worshiping at the moment, because a free country has absolutely no use for them. Whatsoever. They’d probably f*ck up the harvest if we used them as fertilizer.

Hat Tip: Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler

Previous:
Democrats side with terrorists
Did you get your white feathers yet?
Navy SEAL memorial dedicated over liberal protests

trea·son (trē’zən)
n.

Violation of allegiance toward one’s country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one’s country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.

A betrayal of trust or confidence.

Would giving money to terrorists in Iraq today constitute treason? I don’t think the Greatest Generation would have stood for this, but we just roll over and take it, because after all, the groups in question are acting for “peace”.

Misha from The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler has the story of how two American “anti-war groups” gave $600,000 in cash and supplies to terrorists in Iraq:

A New York Times best-selling author says members of the supposed “peace movement” delivered hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash and supplies to terrorists engaged in a bloody street battle against United States Marines in Iraq.

The latest book by Lt. Col. Robert “Buzz” Patterson (U.S. Air Force-Ret.) is called War Crimes: The Left’s Campaign to Destroy Our Military and Lose the War on Terror. In the book, he claims that two anti-war groups — “United for Peace & Justice” and “CODEPINK: Women for Peace” — literally gave aid and comfort to terrorists when they delivered $600,000 in cash and supplies they claim was humanitarian aid to civilians.

According to Patterson, Congressman Henry Waxman (D-California) facilitated the transaction for CODEPINK by signing a letter allowing them to get the cash and supplies into Fallujah.

“Here is an American Congressman …. Here are American citizens who belong to these organizations,” says Patterson. “They travel to Iraq and they are materially supporting, they are aiding and abetting the enemy that is killing American Marines. If that’s not treason, nothing is.”

Patterson says that is not the only treacherous thing these groups have done. “When the Iraq war first started, CODEPINK and Medea Benjamin went to Baghdad and opened an office designed to try to encourage American soldiers to desert, go AWOL, and not fight the war,” he explains. “Again, that’s aiding and abetting the enemy.”

The author laments that the story has received virtually no coverage by the U.S. media.

Misha responds:

Assuming for the moment, since that’s all one can responsibly do until some evidence is produced, that he’s got the goods and that his “i”s are dotted and his “t”s crossed, CODEPINK, in association with a U.S. Congressman, conspired to and succeeded in funding the terrorist scum that we’re at war with, the swine killing our servicemen and -women, and we all know that those cavedwelling apes don’t use their funds to buy apple pies and band aids with.

Do you have a relative or loved one over in the sand box right now? In that case, he or she may, at this very moment, be fired upon with weapons bought and paid for by CODEPINK, in association with Henry Waxman (D-al Qaeda).

I have a loved one in the sandbox right now. I have friends there. How about you?

It doesn’t surprise me in the least that CODEPINK would do something like this. However, it is absolutely infuriating that a United States Congressman would facilitate the transaction.

There should be a full investigation put forth to investigate this, and if it is true, then every last person involved should be executed for treason. PERIOD.

Snopes.com FINALLY acknowledged the Help My Baby Live scam:

Recipe for a hoax: Establish a web site announcing that you are going to bring about (or allow) some dire circumstance unless you can raise a specified amount by a given deadline. Set up a mechanism on your web site to receive donations publicly (or at least make it appear that you’re receiving donations, even if you really aren’t). Stand back and watch with amusement as people heap opprobrium on you for daring to consider such a terrible thing, much less crassly tying it to money.

No matter how many times the scenario plays out, people keep falling for it. Once it was supposed rabbit owners claiming they were going to kill and eat their bunnies unless their exorbitant demands for money were met by self-imposed deadlines; more recently it’s been Help My Baby Live, a site on which an ostensibly expectant couple maintains they’re not “financially secure enough” to raise a child and are going to opt for an abortion unless they can raise $50,000 in donations within three months.

… there are several clues that indicate the “Help My Baby Live” site is not on the level, but rather a prank to yank the collective chains of a gullible audience:

The PayPal account initially used on the site to accept donations (which has since been shut down by PayPal) was tied to a Matthew Schiros, whose name shows up as the author of an anti-abortion blog entry (which has since been removed from the internet).

Interesting, to say the least. But the “evidence” tying Matt Schiros to the site is simply that he is listed as the administrative and techical support for Invisihosting, a company I think he works for, and that the site is simply using the hosting company’s PayPal account.

In the Snopes.com forum for this topic, this was posted:

The source code for the page reveals an e-mail address of schiros+paypal@invisihosting.com hooked to the PayPal account. Googling on ’schiros’ and ‘invisihosting’ links the name ‘Matthew Schiros’ to the e-mail address ’schiros@invisihosting.com’ and that blog.

- snopes

The Democratic Underground is all over it, labeling Matt Schiros a right-winger, and indicative of pro-lifers, claiming it is the work of “wingnuts” and wondering how many “anti-choice people” they’ve hoodwinked, and what their “real motives” are.

On CourtTv’s message boards, a user posted an e-mail exchange between him/herself and Matthew:

Matthew,

I was directed to this website http://www.helpmybabylive.com/ from a very busy bulletin board that I frequent. Well as you can tell I was appalled by the very nature of this website so I wanted to find out who in the world would make such a heinous or fraudulent website. Well naturally they were a bunch of cowards, so they went through you to get the anonymity they were wanting and that YOU are allowing. So, I decided to email you and ask you politely to remove that website. I realize that it is most likely in your interest to allow sites like this and this is how you are making money, but I think you should take into account that not everyone is going to do good with anonymous sites and that it may fall back on you. I am waiting anxiously for your reply.

Thanks so much

Here is his information incase you would like to give him a piece of your mind about the process he uses to allow others to basically do what they want and not get caught. He is an accomplice imo and should be treated as such.

Registrant:
InvisiHosting, LLC

1817 E. Oltorf
Apt 2103
Austin, Texas 78741
United States

Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: HELPMYBABYLIVE.COM
Created on: 16-Jun-07
Expires on: 16-Jun-08
Last Updated on: 16-Jun-07

Administrative Contact:
Schiros, Matthew schiros@invisihosting.com
InvisiHosting, LLC
1817 E. Oltorf
Apt 2103
Austin, Texas 78741
United States
5124664146

Technical Contact:
Schiros, Matthew schiros@invisihosting.com
InvisiHosting, LLC
1817 E. Oltorf
Apt 2103
Austin, Texas 78741
United States
5124664146

————————————————————————-

Hello,
Thanks for your email. You’re not the first person to email us about this site, and you won’t be the last.

InvisiHosting is about empowering the absolute freedom of speech on the Internet, unconstrained by any outside party that might want to restrict content according to their own personal preference or sense of taste.
We’ve got both an ethical and contractual obligation to our customers to not play censor, or content monitor, or any other such thing. If the site in question is illegal, have no doubt that we will be informed by the proper authorities and directed to remove it, but it is not our job to become the good taste police.

Think of the logical consequences of your request, that we remove their site. Would you restrict all speech only to things that you agree with, or, at the least, are not personally or morally offended by? That’s the same attitude that the Muslims who rioted after the publication of the Danish cartoons took, that free speech’s limit is someone else’s feelings. If we are truly to be a free society, everyone must be allowed to say whatever they’d like about whatever they’d like without fear of retribution.

I understand that you don’t like the site, but our position will always be that the solution to speech one disagrees with is counter-speech, not censorship. If you’d like to set up a page of your own decrying their behavior, we’d be happy to host that as well, because we believe in free speech for everyone.

I hope you’ll think this over, and I appreciate your comments.

Matt Schiros

Matt Schiros, however, also is apparently not new to posting offensive websites, such as www.amiblackornot.com which allegedly (I have not visited the site) asks visitors to rate “how black” the people pictured on the site are by using racial slurs.

So, who knows? I’d still be interested in finding out the truth, whether it is Matt Schiros behind the hoax, or someone else.

Previous:
Help my baby live?
PayPal pulls out!

The Help My Baby Live monsters are reporting that PayPal shut down their donations. Good to hear:

PayPal has shut down our donations, although we’ve managed to keep all the money made so far. We’re working on finding a different payment processor, but until then, you can contact us at the email address to the right, or, even better, contact the people at InvisiHosting.

We’ll find a new payment processor shortly, don’t worry.

We’ve noticed that a lot of people have been complaining about this site, through multiple channels. If you really don’t like it, and you really want it taken down that badly, buy the domain from us and close us down in the capitalist way. We’ll entertain serious, 5 figure bids for it.

Also, we lost about a day’s worth of email, so if you emailed us between Wednesday and Thursday, please re-send it. Sorry, computers and such.

75 days left until the dreaded abortion they claim they need the money to avoid getting. Seriously, this thing has scam written all over it, and since I wrote my original blog post, their donations have increased to over $13,000. Sad — these people don’t deserve a dime.

I’m still surprised that no one has blown the lid of these people. When will that happen? I think we all want to know who these people are, and what their real agenda is.

Previous: Help My Baby Live?

This was the main banner today on Rosie O’Donnell’s website, Rosie.com:

That is Rosie’s youngest daughter with bullets strapped around her. We all know Rosie abhors guns, war, and hunting — remember her blowout on her original “Rosie O’Donnell Show” with Tom Selleck over the NRA?

So gee, what could she be putting bullets around her youngest daughter, taking a picture, and then posting it as the main banner on her website? Could it be to send a political message? Noooo! Rosie would never exploit her daughter like that!!

Here are some of the comments left expressing awe, admiration, or apparently, an uncontrollable impulse to cry hysterically at the site of bullets on a child. The asterisks are mine, of course.

KARLA
RO, I AGREE WITH U ON MOSTLY EVERYTHING. BUT SOMEHOW I FOUND THE PICTURE OF VIVI DISTURBING. I DON’T EVEN LET MY CHILDREN PLAY WITH ANYTHING SIMILAR TO THAT. IT’S JUST A COMMENT. BUT OH WELL!!!!!!

Jessi
My god… . that picture. I can’t stop crying. This war is such bullsh*t.

Joanne
OH SNAP! That picture of VIVI is so real, that it is scary…to think, places in the world children are trained to kill, dressed like that. SHOCK AND AWE! WOOP THERE IT IS! Dear God!

Jessika
Oh, WOW Vivi looks beautiful.! the fact that U let her explore her imagination like that shows what a good mom U R. In some countries though, they are training terrorists that young, how sad is that?

Steven
Powerful picture on your header. What we need to be focusing on, instead of you know who. Love it. I can see the negative comments flowing in.

There are more comments, of course, but they are just more of the same.

I don’t know what point Rosie is trying to get across with that picture, considering we all know how much she hates guns. And, funnily enough, which countries are known to use children as ammo in war? Hmm… not the USA!

I’m sure Rosie would disagree, though. Or say something along the lines of, “American oppression is what makes these freedom fighters become forced to use their children, who they love so dearly, to fight against oppression. If we would just pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan immediately, they will no longer be oppressed and we can save the children. SAVE THE CHILDREN!!”