Tea Party Organizers Educational Forum. Our Mission is to Educate & Organize.
For those subjects that just don't quite fit any of the other ones--haha
Welcome to all Visitors.--
Please note: If and when I use caps. or underscore any of my posts---
Please know that I am attempting to " emphasize " only, and am NOT HOLLERING--OK?
Please show all links or sourses of your info--Let 'er Rip. Thanks, Landel
Sigh: Notre Dame Students Whine that Pence Commencement Invitation Makes Them Feel 'Unsafe'.
As a follow-up our item yesterday regarding the triumph of the illiberal anti-speech mob at Berkeley, here's a dispatch from the plains of Indiana. Notre Dame broke from its long tradition of inviting newly-elected presidents to deliver the university's spring commencement commencement address, passing over President Trump and instead extending the offer to Vice President Mike Pence, a Hoosier.
Trump's presence would surely have caused controversy and sparked protests, but if barry obama's pro-abortion radicalism wasn't a deal-breaker for the famously Catholic institution in 2009, excluding Trump feels like a cop-out. But opting for the mild-mannered former Indiana Governor still hasn't spared the university from a dispiritingly predictable backlash from the intolerant Left:
University of Notre Dame students have begun a “NotMyCommencementSpeaker” white board campaign to protest the invitation of Vice President Mike Pence to speak at Commencement.
Last week, seniors Immane Mondane and Jourdyhn Williams invited students to take photos holding white boards with “direct quotes from Pence that are racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, offensive, or ostracizing to members of our community,” along with the hashtag “NotMyCommencementSpeaker.” Alternatively, students could also write about why they “feel unsafe with the presence of Mike Pence on our campus,” with daily opportunities to have photos taken with their whiteboards through the week. Once all the photos have been compiled, the organizers plan to share them on social media in hopes of starting a “discussion” about Pence’s invitation.
While Notre Dame usually invites the president to give its Commencement address during his first year in office, this year the administration opted to invite Pence instead after students launched a preemptive protest campaign objecting to Donald Trump.
The attempt to avoid controversy hasn’t panned out; in addition to the whiteboard campaign, a number of student groups have spoken out against the invitation of Pence, including the Diversity Council and the College Democrats.
University of Notre Dame students have begun a “#NotMyCommencementSpeaker” white board campaign to protest the invitation of Vice President Mike Pence to speak at Commencement. Last week, seniors Immane Mondane and Jourdyhn Williams invited students to take photos holding white boards with “direct quotes from Pence that are racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, offensive, or ostracizing to members of our community,” along with the hashtag “#NotMyCommencementSpeaker.” Alternatively, students could also write about why they “feel unsafe with the presence of Mike Pence on our campus,” with daily opportunities to have photos taken with their whiteboards through the week. Once all the photos have been compiled, the organizers plan to share them on social media in hopes of starting a “discussion” about Pence’s invitation...While Notre Dame usually invites the president to give its Commencement address during his first year in office, this year the administration opted to invite Pence instead after students launched a preemptive protest campaign objecting to Donald Trump. The attempt to avoid controversy hasn’t panned out; in addition to the whiteboard campaign, a number of student groups have spoken out against the invitation of Pence, including the Diversity Council and the College Democrats.
So far, it doesn't appear as though leftist student groups have demanded that the Pence invitation be rescinded, with several organizations merely putting out statements of "profound disappointment" and the like over the school's decision. This strikes me as hyper-sensitive snowflakery, but it's far preferable to outright demands to silence a controversial voice.
Then again, the administration preemptively caved to those who planned to object to hearing from the duly-elected President of the United States, so it's not as though Notre Dame ought to be held up as a paragon of open-minded tolerance on this front.
As for the preposterous notion that the presence of a mainstream conservative politician on campus might make alleged adults feel "unsafe," HotAir's Ed Morrissey has a thought or two on that:
There’s nothing wrong with protests in general, of course, as long as they obey the law — and this one certainly appears to respect those boundaries. However, the constant refrain of protesting because opposing political views makes someone “feel unsafe” is laughable on its face, and (to borrow a phrase from protesters in my day) evidence of a crypto-fascist approach to political discourse. If a speech by Mike Pence truly makes you feel unsafe rather than just annoyed by hearing political opposition to your own positions, then you should really consider a lifetime of crayons rather than pencils, and padded rooms to boot. The obvious solution to that situation is.. don’t attend the speech. If one argues that the public square and political discourse should be limited to each individual’s perception of “safety,” then they’re arguing against all political discourse — and the very protests they are carrying out now. Apparently, Notre Dame has stopped teaching critical thought.
Fox & Friends covered this controversy earlier today:
As we wrote in End of Discussion, university administrators should not be pushed around by loud but relatively limited outrage mobs in these confrontations -- and just as importantly, right-leaning speakers should not be bullied into withdrawing out of "respect" for some anti-intellectual students' wishes.
I am so tired of the Snowflakes and not being taught correctly at the schools. I would be honored to have Pence. I wouldn't want Obama to speak either but I wouldn't have been a snowflake and would have listened and kept track of all the lies he was telling. At least that would have been interesting!!!LOL
Madness: More Campuses Gripped By 'Safe Space' Warriors' Anti-Freedom Hysteria.
There's a reason why Mary Katharine Ham and I devoted a full, lengthy chapter of End of Discussion to examining and decrying the toxic culture of weaponized political correctness that is strangling free expression and critical thinking on many of America's college campuses.
These 'supposed institutions of higher learning' are being reduced to petri-dishes of grievance-mongering over "microaggressions," "triggering," and "privilege," the point of which is to silence and punish dissenters; allegedly aggrieved bullies seek to destroy people's lives and enforce their radical orthodoxy while cynically claiming the mantle of victimhood.
Others have documented the recent stomach-turning spectacles at Yale and the University of Missouri, where professors and administrators' livelihoods are threatened and eliminated by the capricious whims of a wildly intolerant, anti-intellectual, freedom-disdaining mob.
Their termination-worthy infractions? Inadequate prostration before students' concerns about so-called institutional racism -- or "systematic oppression," as one uniquely reckless student leader at Mizzou referred to the problem.
That young, gay, black man has been so systematically oppressed, we should mention, that his peers elected him student body president.
Alarmingly, this mindless contagion is spreading, as students at other universities experience Outrage Envy and cast about for meaning in their lives via destructive agitation.
Christine covered the decision by the University of Minnesota's student congress to reject a 9/11 commemoration resolution because opponents argued that it might stoke "safe space"-puncturing "Islamophobia."
The thousands of innocents murdered by islamist terrorists that day could not be reached for comment on the value of safe spaces.
Prior to the protest’s start, CMC junior Taylor Lemmons ’17 announced in a post on Medium that in protest of the lack of support she believes DOS has shown towards students of color and of other marginalized identities, she is undergoing a hunger strike until Dean Spellman resigns from her post. Additionally, Resident Assistant Milly Fotso ’16, who works under Spellman in the Dean of Students office, wrote in a public Facebook post following the protest calling for her resignation...In an email from President Chodosh sent to students before the protest, Chodosh committed that the college will move forward with hiring two new positions, one under the umbrella of student affairs and one under the Dean of Faculty and academics, to support diversity and inclusion on campus. With the support of these two new positions, he added, the College has “authorized the creation of a new programming space to support campus climate (identity, diversity, and free speech)” which “will be dedicated to collaborative, educational work by students, professional staff, and other experts on diversity, identity, civil rights, and free speech issues on our campus.” ... One of the primary demands articulated in the open letter (released earlier today) from CMCers of Color, SAGA, APAM, BSA, and GenU was the creation of a resource center on campus for students of marginalized identities. At the demonstration, President Chodosh publicly committed to providing a temporary space for a resource center in the interim period while they work on establishing a permanent center.
The sniveling administrators pledged to hire two new facilitators of "diversity and inclusion," and to establish a resource center for "students of marginalized identities." Not good enough, the mob of blindly enraged special snowflakes cried, and the Dean of Students was sent packing. One commenter on the resignation story offered an alternative headline: "Snowflakes bag jellyfish." Indeed. Notice that there isn't even a specific allegation (click through for more details) of bona fide racism here, just a hunger strike and protest over a perceived "lack of support shown towards students of color and other marginalized identities." Meanwhile, at Ithaca College in New York, students are demanding the president's resignation over some deeply problematic "racially-tinged" incidents that apparently require his ouster -- once again for the unprovable thought crime of insufficient caring, or whatever:
The president of the school in Ithaca, N.Y., is in the hot seat thanks to what some students say are inadequate responses to several allegedly racist incidents on campus and an overall negative racial climate. The incidents range from reportedly offensive remarks made by Public Safety officers at RA training sessions as well as by two Ithaca alumni at a campus event, to a racially tinged party invite from a fraternity. Now, an email has been sent out by the Ithaca Student Government Association (SGA) asking for a vote of “confidence” or “no confidence” in Rochon, with votes due Nov. 30. “You should care about … creating an inclusive environment,” says senior and Student Government Administration (SGA) president Dom Recckio. Students “aren’t confident in President Rochon.”
And what were these "allegedly racist incidents on campus," pray tell? Steel yourself, dear reader:
The first alleged instances happened at two RA training sessions in August, according to RAs in attendance and an article in student publication The Ithacan. The two officers, ID’d in the article as Sergeant Terry O’Pray and Master Patrol Officer Jon Elmore, supposedly dismissed concerns about racial profiling, “saying that it does not happen at Ithaca College” and then showed a BB gun, according to RA Rita Bunatal, with one officer saying, “‘If I saw someone with this I would shoot them.’” ... Another controversial incident occurred at the college’s Blue Sky Reimagining event Oct. 8 that asked students to help “formulate ideas about the evolution of Ithaca College.” During the event, two Ithaca alumni carelessly and offensively referred to Tatiana Sy, a panelist and woman of color, as a “savage” after she said she had a “savage hunger” to succeed. The third instance occurred when an unaffiliated Jewish fraternity, Alpha Epsilon Pi, posted an invite on Facebook post for a “Preps & Crooks”-themed party in October. According to the post, “Prep” attire was described as a “Polo shirt, button-down, backwards baseball cap, khakis or boat shoes” whereas “Crooks” attire was described as a “bandanna, baggy sweats and a t-shirt, snapback, and any ‘bling.’
Incident one: Police officers denied that they racially profile and warned that wielding a BB gun could get someone shot. Incident two: Two alumni "carelessly and offensively"" referred to a black student as "savage," echoing the word she used at the forum to describe her own passion to succeed. The video shows two older white men flippantly using "savage" as shorthand for the woman, obviously based on her use of the word. This formulation was ill-advised and very awkward, but the context and tone of the conversation made clear that they were not employing the term in a malicious or derogatory way. It seemed as though they were totally oblivious to the potential racial subtext, even though the young woman was squirming. Incident three: A frat planned to throw a themed party in which "crooks" were encouraged to wear "baggy sweats and bling." When students objected to that description's racial overtones (which they inferred, mind you), the party was canceled. When the school's embattled president hosted a discussion to hash out students' worries, activists from 'People of Color at Ithaca College' interrupted the event and "took over the stage," before leading a mass walk-out. The administration also vowed to hire a 'Chief Diversity Officer,' which did exactly nothing to sate students' emotion-driven, scalp-claiming appetite. We'll see if the snowflakes bag another jellyfish. I'll leave you with three clips. The first is my appearance on Fox & Friends this week discussing the fracases at Yale and Mizzou. The second is South Park's brilliant skewering of "safe space" obsessives, who actively demand the abolishment of reality (content warning). Finally, please enjoy some sharp analysis from one of America's Future Thought Leaders, whose economic illiteracy and acute allergy to facts is well and truly beyond parody:
"It seems like we're churning out a generation of young people at the elite level who feel like their feelings are paramount...this comes back to this Orwellian term, the 'safe space'...of course we believe that college students have a right to be physically safe. They do not have a right to be protected and shielded from ideas, or thoughts, or images that might make them feel uncomfortable."
Finally: if foolish enough to think "All Lives Matter" or "Free Speech" are acceptable ideas, REPORT FOR REEDUCATION pic.twitter.com/3kEvghwKbi
The 6 Most Important Lessons Learned from College Activism on a Liberal Campus
If you're a conservative student on a college campus, don't worry. It is possible to survive the tedious liberal lectures and propaganda thrown in your face.
When I attended Northern Arizona University, I was part of a small minority of conservative college kids (who would have thought in Arizona, right?). We made it our mission to be politically active and conduct events across the campus. We wanted to expose our peers to the conservative principles of limited government, individual freedom and liberty. We faced one scary, but very real, scenario: the university attempting to suppress our First Amendment right to free speech.
On the 10th anniversary of 9/11, two friends and I decided to hand out flags with pins that read, "9/11. Never forget." We were outside in the designated "free speech zone" - which is ludicrous in itself - when it started to rain.
We moved inside the student union and were immediately faced with backlash from campus administration. They used every tactic in their book to shut us down. They told us we were a fire hazard, even though we were standing against a wall with flags in hand. They told us we weren't allowed to be there, even though we were tuition-paying students. They even resorted to calling the campus police on us, who said we weren't doing anything wrong. All she did was take down our names and give it to campus officials.
Fast forward 72 hours. The video we recorded of the entire incident went viral. One of the girls went on Glenn Beck's show, back when he was at FOX News, and people suddenly heard of our small mountain town and campus. Every class I had, even non-political science classes, were talking about the scenario. NAU President Haeger was forced to hold a "forum," which basically consisted of my peers bashing us. I stood in a roomful of hundreds of people and was told I was a disgrace and an embarrassment to the university and shouldn't be allowed to be a student any longer.
Eventually, NAU tried pressing misconduct charges against the three of us. We were charged with failing to follow university direction and disrupting university activities. If we were found guilty of the charges, we could - and probably would - be expelled from the university.
Student Life tried contacting me and getting me to sit down with them. Thankfully, I had the advice of the Freedom for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) and their constitutional lawyers on my side. They had our video, which showed what had taken place, and showed that we were well within our rights.
Even though they tried shutting me down, I stood my ground. And so can you. Here are the vital takeaways I gleaned from my experience:
1. Knowing state laws is beneficial.
Every state has different laws. In general, if you're on a public university or college campus, you're allowed to hold events without the need for administration approval. On my college campus, we frequently had churches and outside groups who would come to our campus to promote events or causes. They were well-within their rights, because the university is funded by the taxpayers.
Private colleges and universities have more stringent policies about what a student can or cannot do. They are allowed to do that, because they're not funded by the state.
2. Deliberately defying university rules is a losing battle.
Even though we fought and argued with NAU over the issues we had, we weren't deliberately defying orders given to us. We started out in our university's free speech zone, even though we disagreed with that designation. We weren't looking to cause a ruckus, so we followed the established rules. Purposely defying every rule and regulation the college has isn't worth the fight. I learned to pick and choose my battles.
3. Recorded conversations can both help and hurt.
During our fiasco with administration, what saved us from expulsion was our video. We were able to prove, without a doubt, what was said and what words were exchanged. There was no doubt in anyone's mind.
The video also went viral, meaning the issue couldn't be swept under the rug. All eyes were on the university's administration. How they handled the situation would set a precedent for generations to come.
However, a video can go both ways. It can bring light to a situation, but it can also bring skepticism. We had to be prepared for the possibility of both outcomes.
4. Social media CAN be an advantage.
Social media helped us spread the word about our campus shutting down our event. We shared our story far and wide. People on both sides shared our videos and story, either because they agreed or disagreed with us. They shared because they wanted others in their network to know how outraged they were, which was good for our message. We got our message out there, even by those who were wanting to work against us.
5. We were prepared to battle it out to the end.
None of us imagined we would be in a national fight with our university. It wasn't something I could have ever imagined, let alone planned. We were compelled enough to fight for what we believed in, so we saw it through to the very end.
6. Utilize available resources made all the difference.
When we took on NAU, we utilized every resource we could think of: the Leadership Institute (LI), FIRE and conservative media outlets. They were our greatest allies, and they did everything they could to fight for us.
At the end of the day, every college and university is different and the response from administration will differ as well. These are a few of the lessons I learned from my individual experience fighting for conservative values on a college campus.
If you're interested in learning about organizations who focus on student activism, here are a few really great resources:
Young America's Foundation
Young Americans for Liberty
Turning Point USA
Students for Liberty
Future Female Leaders
Network of Enlightened Women
Here We Go Again: Conservative's Speech Cancelled at Berkeley Over 'Security Concerns'
The university’s efforts to prevent an encore of the violent protests that forced them to cancel a talk by conservative activist Milo Yiannopoulos, have, according to campus Republicans, stifled free speech and made it increasingly difficult to bring conservative thinkers to Cal. Berkeley Campus Republicans spokesperson Troy Worden said, “There is such a thing as the heckler’s veto. Basically, if they’re loud enough and violent enough, then they succeed in shutting down your event.” Campus Republicans canceled an upcoming appearance by David Horowitz after university police told them that to insure they could provide adequate security…the event would have to be held in the middle of the day…and outside the center of campus. UC Berkeley spokesperson Dan Mogulof said, “We’re sorry they had to cancel it. It has nothing to do whatsoever with the speaker’s perspective and everything to do with what law enforcement professionals believed needed to be done to provide a safe and secure event.”
Worden is exactly right to invoke the term "heckler's veto" to describe this silencing dynamic, as the violent Left's appalling behavior is being rewarded by the school. The lesson here is a perverse one: The more violence you foment, the more likely you are to ensure that people with whom you disagree won't be able to voice their views on campus. And the university's spin doesn't fly; the cancellation has everything to do with the "speaker's perspective," even if the administration isn't explicitly making a value judgment on his ideology. Conservatives are not technically banned from addressing on-campus audiences, but the conduct of the torch-and-pitchfork-wielding mob means that anyone wishing to organize such a gathering must fork over large sums of money, and jump through ridiculous logistical hoops, in order for the speech to be considered "secure." It goes without saying that such outrageous limitations do not apply to voices on the other end of the political spectrum, which amounts to de facto viewpoint discrimination. And I do mean outrageous. Via Horowitz's press release:
Horowitz’s hosts, the UC-Berkeley College Republicans, originally invited Horowitz to speak in the late afternoon when most classes are over and students would be available to hear him. But UC administrators insisted Horowitz could speak only at 1PM when afternoon classes are starting and most students would have difficulty attending. The UC police department also instructed Horowitz and the CRs not to advertise the location of the event but to keep it secret until just before the event itself. “In other words,” Horowitz commented, “the Berkeley administration has taken a page out of Orwell. Berkeley promotes itself as the ‘home of the free speech movement,’ but conservatives are free to speak only as long as they remain hidden.” The Berkeley College Republicans agreed to these onerous restrictions under duress, but they were still blindsided by the University’s last-minute bill for security amounting to $5788—which the university claimed was the “bare minimum”—and an estimated $2000+ for rental of the room the University insisted on which was a half-mile away.
Conservatives are welcome to speak at UC Berkeley. Unless they trigger too many people, that is, in which case they must gather off campus, at a secret location, at an inconvenient time, at exorbitant expense to the sponsoring student group. Free speech! If Berkeley were serious about free expression and pluralistic values, they would use university resources to ensure the safety of the invited speaker and those who wish to hear his remarks. They would insist that authorities crack down on criminal behavior like vandalism, destruction of property, and physical assault (only one arrest was made during the Milo riot). And they would aggressively pursue severe academic sanctions against any students who disrupt the event. Hiding behind these demands and pawning off the cancellation decision on the College Republicans or the campus police is an act of unprincipled cowardice. The school's administration should follow the lead of Middlebury College's president, who has responded appropriately to the disgraceful incident that occurred there last month -- and Berkeley's faculty should embrace the excellent and morally-clear statement of values endorsed by dozens of Middlebury professors. I'll leave you with additional examples of this madness playing out at other campuses just this week, one of which Christine highlighted:
Students 'fear' Chick-fil-A will jeopardize 'safe place' http://www.campusreform.org/?
Student senators at Duquesne University say they “fear” that opening a Chick-fil-A on campus will threaten students' "safe place." campusreform.org
Friend at Indiana U reports there are officers with flak jackets and sniper rifles on roofs of buildings ahead of @charlesmurray talk there.
An unsolicited word of advice to the insufferable toddlers at Duquesne: If you truly cannot tolerate the mainstream political views of a restaurant's owner, don't eat there.
That's a sad life to live, but that's your choice. But if that restaurant's mere existence makes you feel "unsafe," it's time to re-evaluate your life.
And as for the depressingly necessary show of force in Indiana ahead of a Charles Murray lecture, it's extraordinary how the "safe space" brigade seeks to enforce its dissent-squelching agenda by deliberately undermining the community's actual safety.
I'll say it as often as is necessary: These hecklers must not be afforded the power to veto ideas they don't like. The jackals must not be permitted to prevail. Adults need to be adults, and laws and policies must be enforced.
The illiberal trend on campuses is a national disgrace, and bad precedents cannot be allowed to take root.
Whatever it is, it's too much!
black Liberal Nutjobs Side With ISIS Over Trump
The organization behind the “March for Science” tweeted the Trump administration’s bombing islamic State fighters in Afghanistan is “an example of how science is weaponized against marginalized people.”
The march’s Twitter account sent out the tweet lamenting the bombing in reply to a post by activist Zellie Imani with the Black Liberation Collective — a group of students dedicated to “bringing about freedom and liberation for all Black people.”
The “March for Science” is being organized by activist scientists and environmentalists opposed to the Trump administration’s policies and proposed cuts to federal agencies. The march is planned for D.C. on Earth Day April 22.
March organizers eventually deleted the tweet, but not before meteorologist Ryan Maue captured screenshots.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/13/march-for-science-group-laments-t...
Source: Daily Caller
The TRUMP MACHINE Just Accomplished this Feat & No One Thought They Could Do It. 4/15/17
President Trump’s reelection campaign has already raised $13.2 million this year, according to federal records filed Friday night and obtained by Politico.
The amount was collected by three committees -- Donald J. Trump for President, Trump Victory and Trump Make America Great Again Committee. And roughly 80 percent of the money was raised through small, online donations.
The Republican National Committee confirmed earlier this month that it had raised $41.3 million over the same period. But as of early Saturday, the group had yet to file a report with the Federal Elections Committee.
The group also says much of the money came from the same small-amount, online donors who helped Trump become president and that the effort brought in tens of thousands of new donors.
Well then get working together. The RNC needs to work with Trump and also get other candidates winning in some of the elections coming up. We need tax reform, new health care bill, the wall, and get control over who comes into the Country. I would also like to make English the language of America!!!
Border Patrol Agent Has This To Say To Paul Ryan
Border Patrol Agent Brandon Judd, speaking in his capacity as president of the National Border Patrol Council, pushed back against House Speaker Paul Ryan’s contention that funding for the border wall can be delayed.
Judd’s comments came during an interview with Fox Business Channel’s Stuart Varney where he addressed the dramatic impact the Trump Administration has already had on reducing illegal border crossings.
“Speaker Paul Ryan is suggesting that Congress delay border wall funding until next year,” Varney stated. “What do you say about that?”
“I disagree,” Judd said flatly. “President Trump promised that he was going to secure the border, and part of securing the border is putting in place, the proper technology and resources that allows us to be successful and a border wall in strategic locations is one of those things that we must get done!”
Ryan’s comments that he may delay funding the border wall came during a March interview with Norah O’Donnell on “CBS This Morning”.
It needs to be built this year and Ryan can be replaced and in most cases I think he should be replaced. If you can't stand by your President then you shouldn't be in the position he is in.