Here We Go Again

We’ve come across this foul bitch before.  Fresh from her “triumph” of having a conservative guy ejected from a gym, Georgetown professor Christine “Anything But” Fair is back in the news, unfortunately:

A professor at Georgetown University known for making incendiary comments against supporters of President Donald Trump said white men deserve “miserable deaths” for supporting Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
C. Christine Fair, an associate professor at Georgetown in the School of Foreign Service, tweeted Saturday, saying white Republican men should die and an added bonus would be if women “castrate their corpses and feed them to swine.”

This folks, is what happens when you’re so ugly you can’t even get a pityfuck at a drunken frat kegger.





And her Ugly isn’t just on the surface;  it permeates her entire being.

Yet she’s still employed at Georgetown, which used to be a reasonably-prestigious university.  Now it seems that the place is as fucked-up, rancid and poxy as this example of its academia.  Maybe they’re proud of her, which makes a sick kind of sense, I guess.


  1. The idea That our universities are intellectual wastelands is no longer beyond doubt. I think we MAY have a bigger problem on our hands. Our women are going nuts. This rage head is just one of many. One of my favourite bloggers described them as ‘hormonal old cat ladies’ and ‘purple faced hysterics’. Female hysteria is A Thing now. That last pussy hat demonstration brought out thousands and none of ‘em could agree what they were protesting about. Look at how they handled the Kavanaugh business: “the mere accusation should be enough to ruin a man…!” (Except, of course, guys like Bill Clinton who they will support and vote for).

    I don’t like it either, but dissident conservatives are talking openly about repealing the 19th Amendment and they are making a plausible case for it. You can’t run a lemonade stand, much less a functioning state or country where women like this have a say in how it is run. They’ll pull the roof down on us. And castrate our corpses for letting them do it afterwards.

    Boys, we gotta admit it: we have a problem with our women.

    1. The franchise has been expanded and expanded again, over and over, ever since the Founding. Consequently it has become ever more dilute, and hence less and less valuable. People get the power of the franchise simply for existing, but as Colonel DuBois said: “To vote is to wield authority; it is the supreme authority from which all other authority derives—such as mine to make your lives miserable once a day. Force if you will!—the franchise is force, naked and raw, the Power of the Rods and the Ax. Whether it is exerted by ten men or by ten billion, political authority is force.”

      That which we gain too cheaply, we esteem too lightly.

      We’re not going to see restrictions put on the franchise unfortunately. I’d like to see the male franchise granted only to those who’ve served in the military and received an honorable or general discharge, and the female franchise granted only to those women who’ve entered into a legally binding, sexually exclusive relationship with a man and have borne that man at least two children (what used to be called “marriage”). Not perfect, but at least the voters would value it.

      nb: Under this proposed franchise system, I’d be ineligible. I’ve never served, and at 49 years of age, I doubt I would be accepted.

      1. I’d be satisfied if the vote was restricted to only those individuals who paid income and/or property taxes, starting at age 25 (unless in active military service or with honorable discharge, then and only then, age 18 ), with a requirement to first pass a rigorous American history and civics exam. I’d also like to see government employees lose their franchise so they can’t vote themselves raises and benefits.
        I’m #$%^*& sick of some billionaire in California buying an election in Virginia, e.g.; so I’d also like to see political contributions restricted to only the voters registered in the jurisdiction of the office up for election. (I hate ^&*$#*& PACs)

          1. Yes, afraid so. They could advertise, encourage members to write or vote or donate, but contributions could come ONLY from individuals directly to campaigns or candidates, and only from voters in the contested jurisdiction.

        1. I would say that organizations who receive tax dollars should be banned from political campaigning.

      2. The problem with limited franchise is the one that set the American Revolution into motion: no taxation without representation.
        So, a more reasonable idea would be to limit the franchise to those who are net taxpayers. But, this would never ever ever pass.

  2. Triple bagger.

    One to hide her face.
    One over your face in case hers comes off.
    One for the bottle of cheap gin you need to even think about this.

  3. Christina Fair: Most likely not the beginning of her continuing story. Her public behavior aside, consider the impact it going unpunished has on everyone living in it’s shadow.

    “Piece of work” doesn’t begin to scratch the crusty surface of this “woe-unto-man”. Her self-description does offer a hint though; “I am certainly known for confrontation, but I own my confrontations.”

    January last while traveling in Germany, Christine Fair’s luggage was set aside for extra inspection. A minor issue of loosely packed cosmetics and their quantity. Fair went off on German customs inspectors when they suggested a remedy; repack or discard the items. Fair became increasingly argumentative with customs officials while demanding to file a customer service complaint. She was overheard calling German customs officials “fucking German Nazi police” and describing nearby civilian men a “Hitler Youth” because of their short hairstyles.

    Before being allowed to continue her travel, Fair was issued a preliminary ticket. The $260.00 ticket covers the basic legal costs of investigating potential defamation charges against Fair.

    A Georgetown spokesman said; “the views of faculty members expressed in their private capacities are their own and not the views of the university. While Georgetown is committed to free speech and expression, we do not approve of or endorse every statement made by our faculty members. We are also deeply committed to the safety, security and well-being of each member of our community.”

Comments are closed.