“The Barbara Bush tweet, which is clearly protected political speech under the First Amendment, and for which Jarrar should not and cannot be fired, doesn’t really get at the problem she poses, which is how the university deals with racial hatred aimed at whites?“
The quote comes from one Craig Bernthal, described by Hanson as a colleague retiring in two weeks from the Fresno State English Department after 30 years of teaching.
Bernthal’s expertise is in English, not constitutional law, or he would know the First Amendment is not absolute; and there exists significant legal precedent allowing public institutions like police departments and schools to restrict employee’s free speech rights in order to ensure such speech doesn’t prohibit the employee from doing their job.
While some might disagree, it’s easy to see a demonstrably racist professor as incompatible with Fresno State’s mission, and wholly incapable of instructing caucasian students, if not because of her acknowledged racism than for her limited command of the subject she’s supposedly mastered.
Oh,…and she’s a fat, disgusting, tattooed bovine to boot!
Now, here’s The Gouge!
First up, writing at Esquire, one Charles P. Pierce penned this particularly revealing missive:
Jeff and Judy Reinking, parents of Waffle House shooter Travis Reinking
“There was another unfortunate exercise of Second Amendment rights over the weekend in a Waffle House outside of Nashville. Police say that a 29-year old named Travis Reinking showed up dressed only in an overcoat and an AR-15 and opened fire, killing four people, all of them African American. (At least at this point in time, inquiring minds want to know…
…Your son thinks pop singers are after him. He gets naked in public. He gets sent to the hospital for observation. He gets busted for breaching security at the president*’s house. The FBI drops by to chat. The local authorities take his guns away because, let’s face it, he’s been acting a little strange these days. How is your first thought not to suggest that your son might need a little supervised time-out from the pressures of daily living, or at least some counseling for his issues? How do you give him back his AR-15? My god, gun culture is weird. I confess. I don’t understand these people and I never will.“
Welcome to our world, Chuck; ‘cuz frankly, we’ll never understand Progressives’ affinity for the non-existent “rights” of illegal immigrants, “right” to take the life of the unborn or “right” to be offended.
That being said, if Jeff Reinking did in fact return his son’s weapons after promising the police to secure them, we share Pierce’s inability to comprehend what on earth he could possibly have been thinking. And as we observed in our last edition, did he in fact do so, we’re all for him serving an extended sentence in stir.
Still, we have to love the lumping together of disparate supporters of the 2nd Amendment into an homogenous “culture”. As is always the case when it suits their purpose, so much for The Left’s devotion to diversity.
Perhaps Charles P. Pierce would gain a better appreciation for the “gun culture” if he was actually appraised of the actual, irrefutable facts versus dogmatic Liberal fiction, as Guy Benson details at Townhall.com:
Imagine that: a unit of the federal governmentdeliberately concealing evidence contrary to the Liberal narrative. Whooda thunk it?!? Incidentally, PJ Media and The Daily Caller independently back up Benson’s report.
“A van driver plowed into a lunch-hour crowd of pedestrians on a busy Toronto sidewalk, killing nine and injuring 16 (make that 10 and 15) on Monday, authorities said.
The van fled the scene, but police said the driver was apprehended shortly after the incident. The casualties occurred on Toronto’s longest road, Yonge Street, in a busy North Toronto commercial district where a variety of businesses are located.
Law-enforcement officials haven’t declared it as a terror act. “We cannot come to any firm conclusions at this stage,” Canada’s Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale told reporters at a previously scheduled media event in Toronto linked to the coming Group of Seven leaders summit. He said no further detailed information—such as identifying “what precisely took place here and why”—could be released.
…Though it has not been declared as a terror act(yet!), it follows several attacks in Canada, New York and Europe in recent years. Last October, a man stabbed a police officer and struck four pedestrians while driving a small U Haul truck in Edmonton, Alberta. No one was killed in that attack. (Not for lack of trying!)
Sayfullo Saipov, a 29-year-old Uzbek man, was charged with killing eight people and injuring 12 others last October after driving a rented truck down a crowded Manhattan bike path. Law-enforcement officials say the deadly drive had been planned for weeks and was done in the name of Islamic State. Mr. Saipov has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
Meanwhile, in Europe over the past two years, 86 people were killed after a truck drove through crowds watching Bastille Day fireworks in Nice, France; 12 people died after a rejected Tunisian asylum seeker rammed a stolen truck into a busy Christmas market in Berlin; and in Barcelona, 13 died and over 100 were injured after a van mowed down pedestrians on city’s most famous central thoroughfare, Las Ramblas.“
If this guy’s Canadian, our ancestors came from Atlantis!
…Canadian law enforcement still refuses to call this what it so obviously was.
Math was never our strong suit, but by our count, some 129 people have been slain in 5 mass-killings utilizing vans or trucks in the last two years. That makes, if you’ll forgive our bluntness, an average of 25.8 victims per occurrence.
Yet, by the WaPo’s tally, since August 1, 1966, when Charles Whitman initiated the concept of mass shootings from the observation deck of the University of Texas clock tower, some 1,081 American lives have been claimed by 151 mass shooters, an average of 7.16 victims per occurrence.
Granted, the former encompasses the entire globe while the latter deals only with the United States. But can anyone really not see, even were firearms totally banned tomorrow, the means would still exist for those intent on mass murder to ply their morbid trade?!?
As Bill Meisen so accurately observed after seeing this next report on the latest Baltimore shooting spree, “Take their weapons away and they’d still be killing each other with rocks and sticks”:
We can only assume from the headline, like countless other counterproductive Progressive policies and/or ineffective initiatives, the apology Baltimore’s police commissioner recently offered…
…hasn’t had the desired effect. Perhaps if Black Baltimorons were offered a guaranteed income and healthcare. Though how Bernie’s plan differs from the forms of public assistance (welfare, food stamps, Obamaphones and Medicaid just to name a few) already offered escapes us.
In a related item (and yes, the yellow highlight was intentional), a recently-completed report concludes…
“…On April 18 at around 11 a.m., in a brawl at his village, the teenager was assaulted by someone and a bike key got lodged deep into his skull,” Dr. Shailendra Uttamro Markad, who operated on the unidentified teen, said.
…He was discharged three days after the incident and is said to be making a good recovery.“
Sure, prohibiting motor vehicles would eliminate the need for car and motorcycle keys; but what follows: disposing of deadbolts?!?
Next up, writing at Townhall.com, Carl Jackson lists…
“In 2016, I walked into a Starbucks in Hollywood, California and asked for a code to use their restroom. I was initially denied access by a black male barista because I hadn’t purchased anything, so I bought a drink. Later, that barista explained to me they enforced the policy to prevent the homeless from taking “bird baths” in their restrooms. Was that barista racist or sexist?
Starbucks is finding out that leftism has no allies – just a collection of useful idiots. Starbucks has successfully created a culture and atmosphere for clientele willing to pay their high prices for coffee. Loiterers endanger that culture.
Have you ever stopped to consider (seriously consider) what racism at a Starbucks might look like? I imagine their baristas would refuse to serve minorities coffee – they certainly wouldn’t hire minorities. Perhaps, there’d be separate restrooms and seating areas for blacks and whites. Regardless of what we might see were this establishment institutionally racist, what we wouldn’t see is a white manager eager to serve her customers and follow policy, by asking two black men “may I get you a cup of coffee or kick rocks” – I’m paraphrasing.
By accepting the premise that Rashon Nelson and Donte Robinson were asked to leave a Philadelphia store and then subsequently detained by cops because of their skin color, Starbucks CEO Kevin Johnson did the black community and the nation a disservice by going on his apology tour.
For one, he gave blacks permission to scream “racism” based upon feelings, not facts.Additionally, young blacks who are living in an era in American history where true racism is the exception and not the rule, he’s given them an excuse to blame life’s setbacks on their race rather than their effort.There’s no boogie man holding you back in America today. What Kevin Johnson doesn’t realize is that it’s impossible to police feelings. Thanks to our Constitution and civil rights leaders like Martin Luther King Jr., we can correct wrongful behavior through law and societal pressure. Race relations have been stunted for a decade because of Johnson’s actions…”
Not to mention the eight entirely, deliberately divisive years of Barack Hussein Obama’s…
…Reparations Tour!
Frankly, were we the Bush family, we’d have quietly suggested the recent, race-hustling occupants of the White House skip Barb’s funeral.
Though, as this photo from the Miami airport reveals, at least one person appreciates…
…Obama’s message.
Moving on, courtesy of the WSJ, Kevin Williamson recalls…
“In early March, I met up with Jeffrey Goldberg, the editor in chief of the Atlantic, at an event sponsored by the magazine at the South by Southwest conference in Austin. He had just hired me away from National Review, the venerable conservative magazine where I’d been a writer and editor for 10 years.
“You know, the campaign to have me fired will begin 11 seconds after you announce that you’ve hired me,” I told him. He scoffed. “It won’t be that bad,” he said. “The Atlantic isn’t the New York Times. It isn’t high church for liberals.”
My first piece appeared in the Atlantic on April 2. I was fired on April 5.
The purported reason for our “parting ways,” as Mr. Goldberg put it in his announcement, had nothing to do with what I’d written in my inaugural piece.The problem was a six-word, four-year-old tweet on abortion and capital punishment and a discussion of that tweet in a subsequent podcast.I had responded to a familiar pro-abortion argument: that pro-lifers should not be taken seriously in our claim that abortion is the willful taking of an innocent human life unless we are ready to punish women who get abortions with long prison sentences.It’s a silly argument, so I responded with these words: “I have hanging more in mind.”
Trollish and hostile?I’ll cop to that, though as the subsequent conversation online and on the podcast indicated—to say nothing of the few million words of my published writing available to the reading public—I am generally opposed to capital punishment.I was making a point about the sloppy rhetoric of the abortion debate, not a public-policy recommendation.Such provocations can sometimes clarify the terms of a debate, but in this case, I obscured the more meaningful questions about abortion and sparked the sort of hysteria I’d meant to point out and mock.
Let’s not equivocate: Abortion isn’t littering or securities fraud or driving 57 in a 55-mph zone. If it isn’t homicide, then it’s no more morally significant than getting a tooth pulled. If it isn’t homicide, then there’s no real argument for prohibiting it. If it is homicide, then we need to discuss more seriously what should be done to put an end to it. For all the chatter today about diversity of viewpoint and the need for open discourse, there aren’t very many people on the pro-choice side, in my experience, who are ready to talk candidly about the reality of abortion.
Which brings us back to that event at South by Southwest, where the Atlantic was sponsoring a panel about marginalized points of view and diversity in journalism.The panelists, all Atlantic writers and editors, argued that the cultural and economic decks are stacked against feminists and advocates of minority interests. They made this argument under the prestigious, high-profile auspices of South by Southwest and their own magazine, hosted by a feminist group called the Female Quotient, which enjoys the patronage of Google, PepsiCo, AT&T, NBCUniversal, Facebook, UBS, JPMorgan Chase and Deloitte.We should all be so marginalized. If you want to know who actually has the power in our society and who is actually marginalized, ask which ideas get you sponsorships from Google and Pepsi and which get you fired…”
We’ve said it before, we’ll say it again: if there are levels to Hell, those who’ve advocated the unrestricted slaughter of the unborn will be occupying the warmest floor.
Speaking of trolls, in the Foreign Policy segment, as the Los Angeles Times reports, yet another test confronts The Donald’s commitment to his campaign pledges:
“Mon dieu, Le Donald; I believe we’re being trolled!
Seeing that the Iran nuclear “deal” is the worst arrangement ever negotiated since the Munich Agreement, here’s wishing Trump sticks to his guns and tells France and Germany they can stuff their trade with one of the world’s most rogue regimes.
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.