Month: September 2018

Posted on

School principal faces backlash after condemning Nike Kaepernick campaign on private Facebook page

A Seal Beach, California, school principal is under fire after she shared a decidedly anti-Nike Facebook post.

What are the details?

The principal’s social media post expressed sentiments that she was displeased with the company’s decision to use former NFL quarterback and activist Colin Kaepernick as the face of their new “Just Do It” campaign.

Now she’s facing mounting criticism from parents and the community, and a petition was launched calling for the teacher to act more responsibly.

At the time of this writing, the petition has received over 2,000 signatures.

In a since-deleted Facebook post, J.H. McGaugh Elementary School principal Roni Burns-Ellis shared a photo of a torn up Nike T-shirt and captioned it, “My newest rag! When Nike signs an anti-American thug to represent their brand, I will not support, wear, purchase, or endorse their product.”

“Bye-bye, Nike,” she concluded.

Who apologized?

After receiving heavy criticism for her post, Burns-Ellis issued an apology, according to KABC-TV.

The school district also issued a statement in response to the backlash the principal received as a result of the posting.

Superintendent Sherry Kropp told KABC, “We need to always be conscientious about approaching differences in a respectful manner and about the use and impact of social media. I understand that what someone writes publicly does reflect on us and can damage the good work we are doing. We care deeply about all students and want them to thrive in a diverse society.”

What did the petition say?

The petition condemned Burns-Ellis’ posting, calling for the school’s leaders to “act responsibly” and “not engage in name-calling.”

This is a petition gathered by Los Alamitos, Rossmoor, and Seal Beach families and community members. We wanted to express our concern for a public statement that was made yesterday by Principal Roni Burns-Ellis. Los Alamitos Schools are known for their excellence in academics, sports, and character. As our country has become divided and name calling and hate has become normalized, we were particularly disheartened by her comment on Facebook yesterday in which she posted a photo of a cut-up Nike shirt and stated, “My newest rag! When Nike signs an anti-American thug to represent their brand, I will not support, wear, purchase, or endorse their product. Bye-bye Nike.” In the Webster’s dictionary, “thug” was the name given by the British in India in the 19th century to a member of a band of thieves and murderers. We may disagree but we hope our Los Alamitos School leaders will always act civilly, treat each other with respect, and not engage in name calling. Our children view the teachers and principals as a beacon of moral character. We hope our school leaders will act responsibly and will walk with kindness as they lead our children with their actions.

via TheBlaze.com – Stories

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.theblaze.com

Posted on

SOMEONE TELL OBAMA: Trump’s Approval Rating 6 POINTS HIGHER than Obama at Same Point in Presidency


SOMEONE TELL OBAMA: Trump’s Approval Rating 6 POINTS HIGHER than Obama at Same Point in Presidency

Jim Hoft
by Jim Hoft
September 10, 2018

Barack Obama was back in the spotlight this weekend taking jabs at President Trump and accusing his administration of racism in unprecedented attacks.

Former President Obama refused to call Donald Trump “president” in his Friday speech.

Obama is a legend in his own mind.
Only 750 people turned out to see him trash President Trump in Anaheim on Saturday.

Despite the continued anti-Trump media hysterics over the past several months — the US president’s approval rating continues to hold at 48%.

President Trump’s approval rating is currently at 48% according to Rasmussen.

Media darling Barack Obama had an approval rating of 42% on September 10, 2010.

President Trump is now 6 points ahead of Barack Obama at a similar point in his presidency.

And this is while 90% of network media coverage has been negative of President Trump.

If President Trump had just 50% positive coverage by the liberal media his approval numbers would be in the 60’s.

Comments

As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning. Guest posting is disabled for security reasons.

Announcement: We have disabled the ability to post graphics after experiencing an attack of inappropriate image spam over the last several days. Thanks for your understanding.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Posted on

Progressives warn Collins: Tube Kavanaugh or face our $900K death star


Susan Collins said she needed the weekend to process her thoughts on Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation, but progressives in Maine have one last pitch to make. A crowdfunding effort launched in August to oppose Collins’ re-election has raised close to $900,000, and they’re promising to deploy it if she votes to confirm Donald Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court:

In mid-August, liberal activists started a crowdfunding campaign that aimed to raise $500,000 for Collins’s Democratic challenger in 2020 — a sum that it pledged to return to donors if the incumbent Republican votes “no” on Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination.

As of this writing, that campaign has raised more than $878,000.

Watch the video that goes along with the crowdfunding, complete with “you’re voting to kill me” histrionics, and see if you can spot the flaw in the argument:

Actually, this argument has two basic flaws, apart from the nonsensical hyperbole used in support of it. First, these progressive groups will almost certainly fundraise and campaign against Collins even if she does vote against Kavanaugh. They’re going after Democrats in this cycle, including Dianne Feinstein in California, where a progressive challenger will face her in the general election thanks to the Golden State’s all-in primary system. (More on that later.)

Second, while $900K sounds like a lot of money, it’s not all that significant in modern Senate campaigns. Even some House races are spending several times that amount in this cycle, and Senate races always run costlier, even in smaller states like Maine. It’s not nothing either, but again, it’s likely to be money that would have been spent against Collins anyway. In watching the video and the rhetoric used in it, do any of these women sound as though they’d be likely to vote for Collins in any circumstance, or to refrain from contributing against her? Pfft.

At least as of today, though, Collins is still keeping her options open. The Roe argument didn’t appear to move her, but Collins did suggest that she’s concerned over Kavanaugh’s honesty in response to a question in his hearing:

When asked about a controversy regarding whether Kavanaugh lied under oath during his 2004 confirmation hearing to be a judge on the D.C. Circuit Court, Collins said she wasn’t aware of the issue. Democrats are charging that Kavanaugh lied about whether – while working for the Bush administration in 2003 – he handled the “vetting process” for another judge, appeals court Judge William Pryor. Kavanaugh said he wasn’t involved in the process during his 2004 confirmation hearing, but newly surfaced emails from that time suggest that he was.

Collins said she would examine the issue this weekend.

“If in fact (Kavanaugh) was not truthful, then obviously that would be a major problem for me,” Collins said.

That’s a nonsense charge too, however, as David French explained on Friday. The allegation of dishonesty is itself dishonestly based on stripping Kavanaugh’s response of both context and his broader testimony:

In an extended Twitter thread, the founder and former managing editor of Above the Law, David Lat, thoroughly dismantled Mystal’s claim. It turns out that Kavanaugh’s testimony was far more extensive than the single sentence Mystal cited. Given the full context, once can clearly see that Kavanaugh was telling the truth.

As Lat explains, different lawyers in the White House counsel’s office were assigned different circuits as their “portfolio.” Kavanaugh explained at his hearing that he was not assigned the Pryor nomination — so he wasn’t “handling” Pryor’s confirmation. But, even then, Kavanaugh said in his testimony that he participated in the process …

So, in context, the meaning is plain: The Pryor nomination wasn’t his to handle, but he did assist in some ways. It’s right there, in black and white.

The same is true about Kavanaugh’s understanding of the source of what turned out to be purloined memos between Senate Democrats on strategizing to block Miguel Estrada’s confirmation to the appellate circuit:

Writing in Slate, Lisa Graves also claimed that Kavanaugh should be “impeached, not elevated” for supposedly perjuring himself. She argued that the judge deliberately lied when he testified he did not see any information stolen from Democrats by former GOP Senate aide Manuel Miranda in the early 2000s. Here’s the relevant portion of Kavanaugh’s testimony:

“I don’t know what the universe of memos might be, but I do know that I never received any memos, was not aware of any such memos.”

Graves claimed that Kavanaugh actually did receive information she believes “plainly” came from stolen Democratic talking points. Perjury, right? Not so fast. Even a panel of experts convened by Vox threw cold water on Graves’s legal theory. There is a long distance between an inaccurate statement and the kind of willful, deliberate falsehood that constitutes a federal crime. Brooklyn law professor Miriam Baer said that “she didn’t see any lie” in Kavanaugh’s response. He simply testified that he didn’t realize the material was stolen.

Collins will likely milk this for all it’s worth, but there isn’t any angle for voting against Kavanaugh that didn’t exist before his confirmation hearing. If Collins felt comfortable voting for him before last week, and she claimed to be leaning in that direction, then she’ll be comfortable voting for him when the time comes after his performance last week, too. The same goes for Lisa Murkowski, who faces similar activist protests in Alaska. It’s just a question of finding the best time to make that clear.

via Hot Air

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://hotair.com

Posted on

John Bolton: U.S. to Desert ‘Outright Dangerous’ International Criminal Court

The United States will withdraw all support from the International Criminal Court, National Security Adviser John Bolton announced Monday, condemning the body as an "assault" on the U.S. Constitution and American sovereignty.

In his first public address since joining the Trump administration in April, Bolton called the court "antithetical to our nation’s ideals" and pledged to "use any means necessary" to protect the United States and its allies from "unjust prosecution by this illegitimate court."

"We will not cooperate with the ICC," Bolton said at an event Monday hosted by the conservative Federalist Society. "We will provide no assistance to the ICC. We will not join the ICC. We will let the ICC die on its own. After all, for all intents and purposes, the ICC is already dead to us."

Bolton’s remarks come nearly a year after the ICC prosecutor asked to investigate alleged war crimes committed by U.S. service members and intelligence officials who served in Afghanistan. Bolton rejected the claims as "utterly unfounded" and unjustified.

Bolton threatened sanctions and a ban on travel to the United States against judges and prosecutors involved in attempted tribunals of Americans or Israelis. Countries that cooperate with ICC prosecutions against the United States and its allies risk losing foreign aid.

The United States may also negotiate more binding bilateral agreements to bar nations from surrendering American citizens to the international court.

Set up in 2002, the court was meant to prosecute war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. More than 120 countries are members, but the United States, China, and Russia never signed up.

"In theory, the ICC holds perpetrators of the most egregious atrocities accountable for their crimes, provides justice to the victims, and deters future abuses," Bolton said. "In practice, however, the court has been ineffective, unaccountable, and indeed, outright dangerous."

"Moreover, the largely outspoken, but always central aim of its most vigorous supporters was to constrain the United States. The objective was not limited to targeting U.S. service members, but rather America’s senior political leadership and its relentless determination to keep our country secure."

Bolton’s speech comes on the heels of a State Department announcement that the Trump administration will close the Palestine Liberation Organization office in Washington, D.C. The decision marks the latest in a pressure campaign to bring the Palestinians to the negotiating table as the Trump administration readies a much-anticipated peace proposal.

The Palestine Liberation Organization office served as an embassy in Washington, D.C., for Palestinians. The White House has not said when the office will officially shutter.

The post John Bolton: U.S. to Desert ‘Outright Dangerous’ International Criminal Court appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://freebeacon.com

Posted on

Judge weighing NRA’s free speech case against New York


There’s a hearing taking place today which may well impact the future of the NRA as a viable organization in the state of New York. As you may be aware, New York, under the direction of Governor Andrew Cuomo, recently took the remarkable step of sending ominous letters to banks, insurance companies and other providers of necessary corporate services, suggesting that they “carefully consider” any relationship they might have with the National Rifle Association and to “to weigh their reputational risk” from such associations. This led to many of these providers immediately refusing to do business with the organization, leaving the NRA strained to conduct normal banking operations or obtain required insurance policies.

The NRA sued the state in June, claiming that these bullying tactics were essentially shutting down their freedom of speech in the state. The state countered by claiming that they’re not stifling anyone’s speech and asked for the suit to be dismissed. That’s the issue being considered by the judge this week. (Courthouse News)

Fending off claims that it tried to bankrupt the National Rifle Association, attorneys for the state of New York will press a federal judge Monday to dismiss the gun lobby’s free-speech suit.

The NRA brought the suit four months ago in Albany, accusing the state agency that regulates New York’s banks and insurers of using selective enforcement to harm the NRA’s longstanding corporate relationships.

“Defendants’ abuses will imminently deprive the NRA of basic bank-depository services, corporate insurance coverage, and other financial services essential to the NRA’s corporate existence and its advocacy mission,” an amended complaint filed in July states.

Facing a claim for tens of millions of dollars in damages, New York shot back that its use of enforcement actions to punish violations “do not … implicate the NRA’s First Amendment rights.”

The state is further arguing that the poison pen letters they sent to the banks and insurers about “reputational risk” are also protected government speech, so the NRA’s case has no merit.

What’s most worrisome to me is that the NRA’s attorneys chose to go after this on a free speech basis. The underlying reality may indeed be that shutting down the group’s access to banking and insurance services undercuts their ability to function inside the state, but it’s not exactly stopping anyone from “speaking.” The real problem which the judge should be addressing is that we have one of the five largest state governments in the nation essentially acting like mafia bosses. (Nice bank you’ve got there. Be a real shame if anything happened to it.) This plan that Cuomo put in place is almost identical to Barack Obama’s Operation Chokepoint which was thankfully shut down last year.

What the government is doing is sending thinly veiled threats to companies doing completely legitimate, legal business with the NRA, knowing full well that those banks and insurance providers rely heavily on the good graces of the state government for their own successful operations. That’s a gross abuse of the regulatory power of the government to advance a political agenda. To show just how bad this policy is, both the ACLU and the Texas Public Policy Foundation (who are about as ideologically far apart as you could get) are blasting New York over this and urging the judge not to scrap the case.

If this is thrown out and Cuomo and the Albany Mafia are allowed to get away with it, the door is open for state governments around the nation to pick and choose who will be able to legally do business in their states based on nothing but personal preferences. Whether it’s through a free speech supression complaint or some other legal vehicle, New York needs to be thwarted in this effort.

via Hot Air

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://hotair.com

Posted on

Washington Post Uses Guilt-By-Association Tactic to Unfairly Smear Ron DeSantis for Participation in David Horowitz Conference

A classic guilt-by-association smear — that was the apparent effort undertaken by The Washington Post’s Beth Reinhard and Emma Brown in an article published Sunday casting aspersions on Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-FL), the Sunshine State’s GOP gubernatorial nominee, for his past association with David Horowitz.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com

Posted on

Detroit food truck owner refuses to serve cops, sparks controversy with Facebook post

A Michigan food truck owner has sparked controversy for refusing to serve police officers, The Detroit News reported.

Rocky Coronado, who owns Rocky’s Road Brew food truck in Detroit, posted a message on Facebook that she would not serve police because she didn’t feel safe around them. Within hours, the post, which has since been deleted, drew more than 1,000 likes and angry emojis.

Coronado attached a photo to the post that read, “We reserve the right to refuse service to cops.”

Detroit Police Chief James Craig told The Detroit News that Coronado is known to treat police officers disrespectfully.

“Generally speaking, we have good relations in that neighborhood, but my officers tell me whenever they’ve been in that area investigating criminal matters, she’s been uncooperative and rude,” Craig said.

Craig said it’s unclear what caused the contention between her and the officers.

“She has clearly shown disdain for police; the million-dollar question is: Why? We’d like to know what the issue is, and would like to sit down and talk to her about her concerns,” he continued. “I don’t agree with what she’s putting on Facebook, but if she ever needs help we’ll give her the same service we’d give anyone else.”

Mark Diaz of the Detroit Police Officers Association agreed that Coronado has the right to not serve police, but called her post “childish and immature,” according to The Detroit News.

“But it’s their right if they choose not to serve police officers,” Diaz said. “It just shows that person’s mentality — but under no circumstances would we refuse service to them. I hope they never have to call 911, but if they do we’ll show up and do our jobs.”

TheBlaze was not able to reach Coronado for comment.

What did Coronado say?

Coronado deleted the original Facebook post but claimed in a follow-up that she has been slandered, threatened and harassed for her stance on refusing to serve law enforcement officers of any kind.

In the follow-up, she said that a woman in an “unmarked, black suburban” and wearing “a bulletproof vest” became “belligerent” with her when she told the woman she would not serve her. She wrote in a post:

“Yesterday, two people came by in a unmarked, black suburban with tinted windows both with bulletproof vests and badges. I do not serve law enforcement (ICE, Homeland Security, DPD, etc) so I told em I was closed to not make a tense situation more so. They then circled back around with a lady (still with bulletproof vest and badge) getting out of her vehicle asking why I didn’t serve them. Not feeling confrontational, I meekly told her that I don’t serve law enforcement.

“She told me she was w the humane society and that we probably have the same political ideas. That’s when I was ready to rectify the situation but she quickly became belligerent. She took her phone out and stated taking pictures (wish I woulda done the same). The customers already at the truck were harassed by her and photographed despite NOT having their consent. THATS WHEN I REFUSED HER SERVICE and asked her to leave.

“She posted or her male passenger posted some pics with their false account of what happened.

“The posts went viral and I decided to post why I do not serve law enforcement agents. Since then All Lives Matter, “Patriots,” MAGA, & “Christians” have been slandering, threatening, and harassing the business via Facebook. These people, their code switching, their hate, their ignorance shows me I’m on the right path. These people are the threat to freedom, equality, & peace in America.

“As a brown queer person in America, I am well aware that my very being is a threat to Amerikkka and its lineage of genocide, fragility, and hate. My very existence is my resistance and just like my ancestors, I am resilient. So despite the hate and slander, I am well.

“I wanted to thank everyone for the emotional labor (these creeps cannot be reasoned with) and support. It’s super comforting and I love y’all for it. I had planned to take the day off to attend RISE in Flint (a nationwide day of environmental action) but because of the madness I’ll be doing some self care near home. So, I’ll be closed but will keep you posted on when I’ll be opened back up. With resistance and love in mind, Rocky Coronado #blacklivesmatter #refugeeswelcome #chingalamigra #nomamesguey”

What did Facebook commenters say?

More than 210 people have commented on Saturday’s post and it’s been shared nearly 150 times. Some supported Coronado’s stance:

“I wish I was in Detroit so I could come support you and eat your food! I 100% support your decision. If cops want the respect they and everyone else feels is deserved and want to be treated better, then they need to treat the people they serve better and with respect. That is sadly, not the case these days. For the most part, it’s not the cops (people) I have a problem with. It’s the training and culture that needs to go,” one commenter wrote.

Others did not appreciate her remarks.

“Way to lump all cops together. Not all of them abuse their authority. But why doesnt anyone refuse service to the thugs out there robbing and killing people? Oh yeah, because then there wouldn’t be anyone to serve (in Detroit),” another one wrote.

“Have fun going out of business. Hey, McDonalds is always hiring,” someone else wrote.

via TheBlaze.com – Stories

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.theblaze.com