Columbia University’s Knight First Amendment Institute has filed a suit against President Trump, alleging that Trump has breached the First Amendment rights of two people, Holly O’Reilly and Joe Papp, because he has blocked them on Twitter.
Who knew that the First Amendment also included the freedom to listen? Well, it doesn’t. And blocking anyone on Twitter for whatever reason, or no reason at all, does not prevent Holly O’Reilly, Joe Papp, you, or anyone else from speaking their mind.
The fact that Columbia is taking this suit is indicative of just how polluted higher education has become with their disdain for the Constitution. For taking this matter to court on 1st Amendment grounds earns Columbia University’s Knight First Amendment Institute the Lunch Counter’s Most Ridiculous Item Of The Day Award.
As an aside, and winning an honorable mention is PETA, for “representing” a monkey named Naruto. Naruto took selfies using British nature photographer David Slater’s camera. PETA claims that the monkey holds the copyright to the pictures. The case has risen to a three-judge panel in the 9th Circus Court of Appeals in San Francisco. Naruto could not be reached for comment.
That Sen. Chuck Schemer won the Most Ridiculous Item Of The Day Award was not even close. In fact, he won it in a landslide.
Promising to continue his party’s agenda to resist everything and anything the Trump administration wants to do, from non-controversial and necessary appointments to necessary things like repeal and replace of Obamacare, Schumer whines on about how Democrats have not been included in the bill drafting process.
Early Alzheimer’s onset? He doesn’t remember how Obamacare was crafted, introduced, and passed into law with zero input from Republicans and zero votes from Republicans.
Aside from the utter failure of Obamacare to deliver what was promised, Schumer and his comrades in the Democrat(ic) Party have excluded themselves from participating by the very nature of their new Resistance campaign.
For this reason, Sen. Schumer (D-NY) wins the MRIOTD Award.
The Democrats’ pushback to Trump’s budget proposal is nothing short of irresponsible and insane. They claim that the budget will actually kill people. They’ve been saying that since 1995. And since 1995, the budgets, and government itself, have done nothing but grow.
So you can see why the hysteria over a budget that comes to balance in 10 years. Something the Obama administration not only did not do, but stated that achieving a balanced budget was not even on their radar. Their plan was to grow government and expand government involvement in our lives way beyond the boundaries of the Constitution. The crown jewel to that end being Obamacare, eventually leading to single-payer.
When you compare where we were in 2007 to where we are in 2016, you can understand why Democrats are apoplectic and hysterical. Having done their best (with full cooperation from Republicans) to grow government, the notion of fiscal responsibility now comes as a shock1 they just can not accept. After all, they’re not paying the bill. Our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will if something is not done now to stop it.
How have budgets grown since 2007?
2007, $2.8 T
2016, $4 T
2007, $5.2 T
2016, $5.8 T
2007, $8.95 T
2016, $19.54 T
Not only has the spending and borrowing grown, but since Obama started spending in 2008, his administration managed to more than double the national debt.
This is how Obama said his budgets would grow the GDP.
Today, Trump’s budget is projecting 3% growth in GDP, and the NYT characterizes this as “improbable economic growth.” How quickly they forget. 3%, improbable. 6%, no problem. No, they didn’t forget. That’s just the bias of Fake News supporting their man.
Time to come back to reality. Obama’s budgets were scored by the CBO for GDP growth from 3.6% to 3.1%. But never came close, coming in around 1.5% growth in GDP.
Speaking of reality, look what the CBO has to say about unfunded mandates that already consume 56% of all federal spending. That’s up from 43% in 2006.
There is no evidence to suggest that the growth of health care costs, which have risen faster than GDP over the past four decades, is likely to slow significantly in the future. As a result, spending for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid will exert pressures on the budget that economic growth alone is unlikely to alleviate.
Just keep in mind that in 2007, people were not dying in the streets. What we are hearing now is the squealing that Jodi Ernst was talking about when describing her experience growing up on the farm.
The hoopla surrounding North Carolina’s HB2 (House Bill 2) legislation couldn’t be more confusing to decipher. And as usual, that is by design.
When you hear the way the mainstream media and opponents describe it, you would think that people are being denied ‘rights.’
North Carolina’s Republican-controlled legislature on Wednesday rejected a bid to repeal a state law restricting bathroom access for transgender people, which has drawn months of protests and boycotts by opponents decrying the measure as discriminatory.
The bill basically says that you use the bathroom based on what is between your legs, not what is between your ears. There are no “rights” of transgender people (less than 1% of society) to interfere with the rights of “normal” people to expect both privacy and security when using facilities like bathrooms, locker rooms, and common showers. When they were born, they had the same rights as everyone else. And still do.
What we have is a political movement to lower the bar of what is moral and right. There is nothing added for transgender or gender-confused people for them to deal with that they didn’t have 10, 50 or 100 years ago. And there’s no reason to change bathrooms for, or on, the 99% of the rest of society.
To that .3 % of society trying to bully the rest, get therapy or deal with it. And remember, diversity includes everyone.
Big in the national and local news as well as on the campaign trail is the plight of, among others, the Syrian refugees seeking asylum in this country. Only, they’re not seeking refuge in this country. This administration is hell-bent on bringing them to the United States instead of supporting/protecting them in and around Syria. Some are coming here to Northwest Florida.
When asked if they would rather be home or here, they prefer to be home, or close enough to home so they can return after the civil war is over and ISIS is destroyed.
NGO’s are bringing the “refugees” and embedded terrorists here, financed with grants from the federal government. Attempts to speak to Catholic Charities CEO Christopher Root have fallen on deaf ears. Neither phone calls or in-person requests for a meeting on the subject of the refugees have been returned or acknowledged.
Mr. Root is hold up in a secure office building on Garden Street, just what you might expect for a non-profit Catholic charity. What?
In an attempt to get some transparency, and for Mr. Root to justify why, in spite of administration officials (and the terrorists themselves) saying that there will be terrorists among them, why he feels sacrificing our national security is necessary? I think the reason can be summed up in money. As in grant money. National security? Not the Catholic Charity’s problem.
Below is a letter-to-the editor submitted Dec 1, 2015. It has not been published yet. Meanwhile, there have been plenty of articles and other letters published that are sympathetic to bringing the refugees here. And, at the same time, disparaging those, like many in the country, who want no part of them coming here. Only the leading Republican candidates are talking about helping them in and around their own country in safe zones. People like President Obama are quick to say, “that’s not who we are.” Sorry, but importing terrorists to do us harm is not who we are. Democrats are all-in for bringing them here. After all, Muslims tend to vote 80% Democrat. What he means is, just like illegals flooding our borders on foot, building a permanent voting block is who he is. But that’s not who America is.
It is not just Christopher Root, but the talking heads at UWF who must justify why Syrians must come here, knowing of the high risk of terrorist embeds, and also how plucking them out of their country, continent, culture, and language will be more beneficial, for the refugees.
Letter to the editor follows.
For the U.S. to participate in helping refugees from anywhere when they come here is one thing. But to take them out of their country, continent, culture, and language, to bring them here is not only presumptuous of us to know what’s best for them, but is endangering ourselves in the process.
They need help there, in safe zones, so they can return home when their civil war is over and the dust settles. We had our civil war and no-one left the country. For the Syrians to leave their own country would be taking the opposition to ISIL away. Taking Syria’s future away. That’s not compassion.
What the media and academe won’t tell you is, it’s not the U.S. government bringing them here. It is NGO’s (Non-Governmental Organizations) who are getting government grants who are bringing them here. Money talks. And money tends to change focus and re-arrange priorities from more important factors like our homeland security from the terrorist hotbed, Syria.
How about someone from an NGO like Catholic Charities, or a university like UWF, make their case that Syrian refugees are better helped with a one-way ticket here, instead of in and around their homeland?
This law was written in 1952. It was passed by a Democrat-controlled Congress, House and Senate, and signed by a Democrat president… Everybody in the establishment in the political class, Republican, Democrat, media, you name it, is all claiming that what Trump said is dumb, stupid, reckless, dangerous, unconstitutional, while it is the law of the land. And it was utilized by Jimmy Carter, no less, in 1979 to keep Iranians out.
In November the 1979 United States attorney general had given all Iranian students one month to report to the local immigration office. Seven thousand were found in violation of their visas, 15,000 Iranians were forced to leave the United States, 1979.
A direct quote from the law:
(f)Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.
It ought to be patently obvious by now, that freedom and liberty are, and have been, under attack. It is under attack by a political class that no longer feels bound by the Constitution. In fact, they spend their time and energy to get around it.
Remember when we had he 1st Amendment? Where the government protected our right to free speech, not to mention specifically political speech.
Something nefarious is at work here. It’s liberalism’s social justice amendment. It isn’t there. It does not exist. But, you couldn’t tell from what’s been going on lately. PC has become the new reality.
Just look at the progress, and lack thereof, of the civil rights movement. How did the civil rights movement, which began with the Civil War and slavery, and reignited in the 1950’s and 60’s, go from segregation, to integration, only to go back to segregation?
Now we have kids being persecuted in school for standing up for their religious or political beliefs. Now we have students whining about someone hurting their feelings, and they want the administration to “protect” them. Protect them from reality. They are demanding a #SafeSpace. And some want it to be Black-only. Martin Luther King Jr. must be turning over in his grave on that one.
Left unchecked, Political Correctness is becoming the noose of the 21st century. What are you going to do about it? Slip it on, or demand your rights (not feelings) be protected.
There was supposed to be a ‘raise the minimum wage’ rally downtown last evening. Organized by a local labor union.
I couldn’t be there. Had to work. But I wanted to see a fat protester holding up a sign whining about having to work for a ‘starving wage.’ (found a pic on google)
So it was with eager anticipation to check the local newspaper this morning to see what happened. Nothing there. Zip, zero, nada. Nothing in the local alternative media either. Feeling a mild case of Schadenfreude here.
UPDATE: 11/11/2015 Thanks to one of the participant’s feedback, the “rally” wasn’t really a rally. I was mistaken. Instead of a rally, it was a “forum” held somewhere in town. Probably a union hall somewhere. Regardless, there was no rally. And no news coverage of the forum either. I mean really, who thinks labor unions would want the folks to know why they are supporting raising the minimum wage, for non-union workers?